Tuesday, 17 June 2014

Grade 1 piano exam result

Well I just failed got 94 out of 150

When it came to the exam I just freaked out

Whilst I don't want to make excuses the fact that the piano was an actual piano as opposed to a digital one meant it was a totally different experience to my normal clavinova. And even in the warm up room there was only a digital piano. So despite having gone through the routine 2 or 3 times in the warm up room I was totally unprepared and it was a downward spiral I fluffed a note on the first scale that made me tense and nervous then I fluffed the first piece and the second and so on. It was about the most ghastly ten minutes I've spent in a long time

Ok so I became dis-orientated but at least I know what it is to expect and I would hope next time around I'll do much better

In the mean time I'm plowing my own furrow with the help of stuff on the internet

https://www.webpianoteacher.com/

His approach is amazing he writes out the notes on a white board and copying them onto  a bit of paper definitely helps in the initial stages of learning a pieve. Going to try and learn the first movement of the moonlight sonataover the next few weeks,  following his approach here is the first lesson (which is free)

http://uk.video.search.yahoo.com/video/play?p=shawn+cheek+youtube+moonlight+sonata&vid=51f62e45493d1fc223078ad9b9be4f24&l=7%3A00&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DVN.608016431266268857%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DY_I1bXFEU8s&tit=Piano+Lesson+Moonlight+Sonata+Beethoven+Shawn+Cheek+Tutorial&c=3&sigr=11an3drma&sigt=11sclra59&ct=p&age=0&hsimp=yhs-001&hspart=avast&tt=b

For budding pianists his site is definitely the best

Monday, 2 June 2014

Grade 1 Piano Exam

Well the culmination of almost two years since I started getting an interest in learning the piano has arrived I have my grade 1 piano exam tomorrow. I feel reasonably confident I'll pass but I'm not sure I will get to either merit 130/150 or distinction 140/150

It's kind of weird really, to get an idea of what I'll be doing here is a link to the ABRSM site which shows the sort of thing I'll be asked to do

http://uk.video.search.yahoo.com/video/play;_ylt=A2KLqIuC7IxTrwgACyB2BQx.;_ylu=X3oDMTByZWc0dGJtBHNlYwNzcgRzbGsDdmlkBHZ0aWQDBGdwb3MDMQ--?p=abrsm+grade+1+piano&vid=80d20eda6cd46bbfd1f82f536ac755d5&l=8%3A45&turl=http%3A%2F%2Fts2.mm.bing.net%2Fth%3Fid%3DVN.608034641905910897%26pid%3D15.1&rurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.youtube.com%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DD4FBBFsLNek&tit=ABRSM+-+Grade+1+Piano+exam+%28complete%29&c=0&sigr=11avd4ano&sigt=1153jk45d&age=0&&tt=b


I hope the examiner is as kind as the examiner in the video

Anyway I'll let you know how I get on

For interest the pieces I've chosen are

 Fugue No 4 Alec Rowley

Sailor's Song Felix Swinstead

Thursday R R Bennett

and if you do a serch for grade 1 piano pieces on you tube you should be able to hear what they sound like

Good luck to anyone taking ABRSM exams tomorrow whatever your instrument.

Thursday, 22 May 2014

dangers of OU fora

Hi this is more of  a warning to myself and others about the dangers of the OU fora. I have effectively  wasted  a large amount of mine and other peoples time getting involved in a long running dispute which has been continuing for about 2 years with my bete noir.  Those who read the fora especially the philosophy ones will have been the victim of this dispute. It's not important what the actual details are but safe to say my sparring partner is one of those people who evades the issue, keeps twisting and turning and so makes it difficult to answer his points.

Anyway as I say I have wasted so much time getting sucked in to the so called debate. that I really don't want to discuss it further. I will do my best to ignore this person and I want to apologise to any one who got sucked into the debate

Monday, 28 April 2014

Do Virtual particles exist

Well been having a ding dong with my bete noir on the physics forums about whether or not virtual particles exist. In my opinion they don't but unfortunately the popular physics literature abounds with such ideas and so the myth is generated that they actually do exist.

A really good overview of why they can't really be said to exist is given here

http://www.mat.univie.ac.at/~neum/physfaq/topics/virtual

I'll just summarise the salient points

What do we mean by a virtual particle ? Let's start by describing what they are not they are not tempory resonances detected at places like CERN those are real particles.

A virtual particle is one which is said to be exchanged during a particle interaction, the story goes because of the Uncertainty principle applied to energy and time.

                                             $$ dE dT >= \frac{h}{2\pi}$$

In a particle interaction there is the possibility of a temporal violation of the conservation of energy and so a particle can be formed which then gets immediately absorbed by the other particle.

The classic example is QED where electrons are said to exchange a virtual photon between them when they scatter off each other. And because of the uncertainty principle a positron can be seen equivalent to an electron moving backwards in time. Those phrases should be enough to raise the suspicions of any one who seeks a rational basis for physics. It's all a bit of fudge really.

The whole idea of virtual particle exchange particles is an artefact of the use of Feynman diagrams. A Feynman diagram is a term in a perturbation series expansion because we have no other tool to calculate
with. Essentially in quantum field theory one has a set of propagaters (Green Functions) representing the free particles and  a set of vertices to represent the interaction between them..  A Feynaman diagram is essentially a graphical representation of a complicated mathematical expression representing the interaction.

The simplest are the Tree diagrams essentially an H combined by putting two vertices together. This gives a second order contribution to the scattering process the external legs of the H represent the electron or other particle and the internal line represents the 'exchanged photon' But the internal line can also split to give more complicated diagrams involving loops such as ----O--- or even ----O-----O---- that would be the virtual photon dissociating into an electron and a positron and recombining to form a photon and so forth. 

The total contribution to a Feynman diagram expansion is a sum over all possible diagrams the contribution to which decreases as the number of loops increases. Whilst the Feynman diagram expansion is intuitive it should be stressed we are not talking about actual processes. If we were then the infinite series would have to be summed up. As a literal interpretation that would mean that in each particle interaction there would be an infinite number of processes that occur and so the interaction could just not happen.

So a virtual particle is simply an internal line in a Feynman diagram nothing more, it is an artefact of the need to use perturbation theory and so cannot be real. Yes electrons and photons interact with each other and yes the use of Feynman diagrams gives rise to some of the most accurate results in physics for at least QED anyway. But I do find it worrying that what is essentially a metaphor is taken literally, a bit like fundamentalist religion I guess. Hopefully sooner rather than later someone will find a way to solve Quantum Field theory non-perturbatively and the Feynman picture will vanish until that day however we are stuck with it.

Wednesday, 2 April 2014

ABRSM Grade 5 Theory result

Well just got my result for  the ABRSM grade 5 theory exam equates to 82% which is a merit, feeling reasonably chuffed, put myself forward for grade 1 piano in June doubt whether I'll get such a good result still 2 months to focus.

More later

Sunday, 30 March 2014

Saylor ECON 101 Microeconomics

As my followers will know I have embarked on the excellent (and free !!) courses from Saylor.

http://www.saylor.org/

I'm currently studying Microeconomics. 101

 http://www.saylor.org/courses/econ101/

as I want to expand my limited knowledge about this subject. I've just finished the first three units

The Saylor course\provides a free pdf course book specially commisioned from the course which you can download and also links to various on line videos such as those provided by the Kahn academy  and a few others. The aim of Saylor courses is to utilise  on line resources to provide the equivalent of a college or university education in the subject area at the appropriate level and also to provide some form of assessment usually a two hour final exam. These are slowly being recognised by outside institutions and this trend can only grow.

Here is a review of the first three units 

1) On production possibility curves and their implication for trade. A production possibility curve represents the total amount of goods or time one can spend on a given activity. Suppose for example I can spend 20 hours a week studying and I'm studying either music or maths. I can spend all the time studying maths or all the time studying music. However if I do so I wont progress on maths if I focus solely on music and vice-versa. Suppose I have an exam in both subjects coming up and I decide that an hour studying music will get me 2% extra marks whilst an hour studying maths (as I'm quite good at that already) will only get me 1% extra marks and suppose I can at present average 50% for music and 60% for a maths exam then I have to do a trade off. Clearly I have to spend more time on music than maths. to bump up the marks. There is a greater opportunity cost in maths  as for each hour I spend studying maths I give up 2 marks in the music exam whilst for each hour I spend studying maths I give up only 1% maths.
The study of this leads to some quite interesting results in terms of trade (due to Ricardo) namely that although one country may have an absolute advantage over another in producing two or more goods both countries can expand the amount of goods by specialisation in one form of good. . 

2)  This covered the subject of Supply and Demand and what causes it's shift. Also more contentiously the arguments for abandoning rent controls, or a  minimum wage or taxation are given. On the neo-classical model, (Adam Smith's free hand) the market is generated by each person selfishly pursuing his or own self interests eventually an equilibrium price will emerge where the amount demanded by consumers is equal to the amount suppliers are willing to produce.  In the usual and fairly simplistic way  as prices rise demand falls and as prices rise supply increases and the equilibrium price is at the intersection of the two curves normally represented by two straight lines. 


Setting a floor allegedly interferes with this equilibrium  and causes a shortage in the supply or at least so the argument goes. However this is based on a number of dubious assertions. Namely that there is a stable equilibrium price something impossible when more than one good is considered. It ignores the time delay inherent in a change in price and it would seem to justify a fairly obnoxious right wing agenda.
It's a bit worrying that right wing institutions such as the institute for fiscal studies, have based what is a totally unfair set of policies on a fairly naive view of markets. Fortunately there is an antidote to all this given in this wonderful book  by Stephen Keen

http://www.amazon.com/Debunking-Economics-Revised-Expanded-Dethroned/dp/1848139926

and for a detailed critique of the current state of economic theory it can't be bettered. Although I would prefer a more mathematical account. Stephen Keen was one of the few people to predict the current recession by modelling the economy using ideas from chaos theory . I hope to understand his models a lot better in the coming years watch this space.

Unit 3 continues the effects of supply and demand by studyiong what is called consumer and producer surplus. This is essentially the total area made between the supply and demand curves  and the equilibrium point and the price axis (the y axis). If government taxes goods then the supply curve shifts upwards and the area decreases. Also so it is claimed a band is taken out of the area which is government revenue. But this leads to another area called 'dead weight loss'. The terminology is really quite perjorative first of all we are not just consumers and producers. Secondly all this argument ignores the benefits of taxation in terms of provision of public services, health, public transport etc. It is claimed that as these are 'free' and do not respect private rights these will necessarily be inferior to anything the private sector can produce. Nothing is mentioned of the fact that the private sector rips off people as their concern is profit. But in more general terms the picture of humanity depicted by neo-classical economists  is really quite depressing. Yes we all like a good bargain, but do we have the time to seek out the bargain. Even if you do get a bargain you might not get the quality of goods offered is not likely to be optimum or it might cause you inconvenience. For example I regularly buy books at bargain price from Amazon but about 1 times in 10 I never receive the goods as the company does not use regular mail service but some fly by night courier company who seem incapable of putting their depots in a reasonable place accessible to people after work. I also note that for a government which is allegedly based on free-market principles they have not failed to increase taxes on goods, Perhaps George Osborne should do a course similar to economics 101.

I may have given the impression that I'm not enjoying this course that is wrong. I'm actually enjoying finding out where the arguments that are regularly given in the press and right wing media come from and I always have Stephen Keen to help me take the wilder claims of neo-classical economics with  a pinch of salt. It is worrying that what is essentially an ideology is being presented as scientific fact. The coursre as it stands isn't that mathematical but more meatier courses await.

As far as assessment goes this isn't quite ideal you are referred to tests on a micro-economics book published by Pearson and sometimes this covers topics not covered yet. There will be a final exam which you can take when you feel you are ready. You have to get 70% or over and then you get a certificate,but you can resit as many times as you like with a two week gap. As the course is free (in contradiction to the principles that would seem to underly the ideology of neo-classical economics )  then one can hardly complain and I thank Saylor for saving me £750 and rising in OU fees. I really would recommend people to take up Saylor courses

Next post I'll review the other Saylor course I'm doing namely calculus of a single variable.

Bye for now. 

Wednesday, 5 March 2014

ABRSM grade 5 theory exam post match analysis

Grade 5 Theory Post match analysis

Well today I sat my first ABRSM theory exam. This was grade 5 theory the questions tend to form a fairly set pattern of questions with a few minor variations

Question 1 first part is usually a question on rhythm either as in the case today putting bar lines in various tricky combinations of quavers, semiquavers and hemisemiquavers or alternatively (slightly harder) deducing the time signature as it varies across the melody. Think I got this correct

Question 1 second part gives a passsage and you have to ask various questions about identifying chords quite often they throw a wobbly in that they will sneak a treble clef in the bass line or vice versa. This question seeemed relatively straightforward so again think I got most of this correct.

Question 2 can either be a question identifying 5 intervals or rewriting a piece in open score in short form or vice versa. The latter although straightforward provided you ensure that the tenor part in open score is usually wrtten an octave higher that it would sound is really tedious fortunately the question was
of the former type and provided you are careful making sure that you take into account the key signature can be reduced to modulo 12 arithmetic something I'll expand on in another post.




Question 3 is usually a series of questions on a piece of music identifying various terms such as Adagio or more obscure one's such as Zart (German for play it tenderly yeah right sounds more like fart :) ) still . Fortunately the terms weren't that difficult but I interpreted sforzando as play the note suddenly loud as opposed to forced. So probably lost two easy marks there.

Question 4 is usually a transpositon which can be quite tricky still following my fail safe method outlined a few posts ago I feel I got this one correct . We had to transpose a piece in F major up a major second. Once you realise that the new key is G major and that Eb transposes to F natural whilst E transposes up to F# but the key signature of G major takes this into account so you don't need to put the acccidental in then this is straightforward but tedious as they say in the books. I tend to leave this question till second last

Question 5 is a question on various scales so you are given a starting note and you had to write the ascending harmonic or melodic minor on that note. This time the note was the lower F on a bass clef it's relative major is Ab and it was the ascending harmonic minor that you had to write. This is the same as the notes of Ab major but the leading note in this case Gb is raised a semitone to G natural. The second part asked us to identify a key with 5 sharps (B major) and write a descending scale starting from B easy once you have identified the correct key. So again I think I got most of this out

Question 6 you had to complete a melody given a few starting notes. Normally you have to make sure you reach the dominant note at the end of the first phrase and find a way back to the tonic note in this case D. In between I tend to use a logical chord progession either IV or VI chords unfortunately my melodies tend on the whole to be a bit boring essentially ascending or descending scales with an occasional leap. Still if the melody is logical harmonically then I can't see the problem. Also you have to add dynamics and tempo directions. Who knows how much I got say 10 out of 15

Question 7 the one I find the easiest and the one I normally do first namely identify appropriate chords to fit a melody. You only have 4 to choose from namely 1, II, IV and V and usually this is quite straightforward once you have identified the key of the piece.

So overall take off a few marks for untidyness, and the melody I feel I'm reasonably confident of getting a merit ie > 80 % maybe distinction but one can never realise if you have made a silly mistake fingers crossed I haven't but this is very much a subjective view point so who knows.

Do I feel that doing grade 5 theory is worth it after having studied music at allegedly degree level via the open university. You betcha the grade 5 exams are good at checking you know the basics and I feel a lot more confident about how scales are constructed and how to identify intervals. Yes  the OU is conceptually more advanced than grade 5 but it didn't really reinforce the basics. So they are complementary and I feel the better for it.

Bring on grade 6 (by the end of the year hopefully)