Timeline for Which set of books could I read to become an advanced conductor?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
16 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 17, 2011 at 15:44 | comment | added | user28 | I'm OK with this in its current form. That said, it is quite specific. Very few of the world's advanced conductors have signed up for this site, I assume, and no one else can answer it well. | |
| S May 14, 2011 at 19:15 | history | suggested | Tamara Wijsman | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Fixed typos, made the title into an actual question title instead of a summary of the answers.
|
| May 14, 2011 at 18:13 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S May 14, 2011 at 19:15 | |||||
| May 14, 2011 at 9:01 | answer | added | ogerard | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 14, 2011 at 8:14 | comment | added | ogerard | @Allan : I have heavily edited your question in a form that seem to me more answerable, more humble and not looking like a scarecrow to all potential partial answerers. If you do not like it, just roll it back or do something else. | |
| May 14, 2011 at 8:10 | history | edited | ogerard | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Complete rewrite
|
| May 14, 2011 at 4:39 | comment | added | ogerard | @Allan : I have answered you on meta. Like Rein and Matthew, I believe it is worth you rewrite your questions. | |
| May 14, 2011 at 3:28 | comment | added | Allan K. | No point trying to reword it until someone makes things clear on the meta discussion. From where I stand now it seems it's impossible to ask anything. | |
| May 13, 2011 at 22:55 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | Before we close, I'd like to give Allan a chance to reword the question to meet our (still evolving) guidelines. He's obviously acting in good faith and I think that should be rewarded, especially in a beta SE community. | |
| May 13, 2011 at 20:33 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | @Allan by the way, I think your english is excellent. | |
| May 13, 2011 at 20:27 | comment | added | Allan K. | (Thanks commenters. It's apparent I'll have to reformulate my question. Unfortunately I have to go offline now. I'll address the issues you pointed out as soon as I can.) | |
| May 13, 2011 at 20:24 | comment | added | ogerard | a) You are asking for complete immediate, all-purpose and multi-stage answers, but very good answers are progressive and grow out of comments and confrontation. b) If you do not rephrase your question to narrow it and make it answerable, it will likely be closed without any answers at all. c) If your way of asking this community for help is to tell it in advance that most things they are likely to do will be "bad", you are perhaps not very keen on having answers. d) You have not enough reputation to downvote any incorrect answer. :-) | |
| May 13, 2011 at 20:13 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | Related meta discussion: meta.music.stackexchange.com/questions/125/… | |
| May 13, 2011 at 20:13 | comment | added | Rein Henrichs | Calling a question "very straight-forward" does not make it so, especially when the question then lists four paragraphs of restrictions and provisos. | |
| May 13, 2011 at 19:53 | comment | added | NReilingh | You're making a number of assumptions here, and I'm not convinced the question is answerable as a result. 1) You're assuming that there is a "right way" to conduct. There are more schools of conducting than you can count, and while I certainly have an opinion of what the "right way" is, the book for that method actually hasn't been published yet, and many people would disagree with me. 2) You're insisting that no one book is "complete," but in less than 10 it's possible to know all there is to know. | |
| May 13, 2011 at 19:08 | history | asked | Allan K. | CC BY-SA 3.0 |