Timeline for Tag Cleanup For Graduation
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
14 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 23, 2014 at 21:02 | comment | added | B. Szonye |
Questions about piano pedal usage are helpful for newbies. I’d recommend keeping that usage but renaming it to something like keyboard-pedals. As for guitar-effects and effects-pedal, while I can see a difference between the two, there is also a vast overlap, and in practice I always end up tagging with both, or choosing one arbitrarily, when I want to ask a question about effects.
|
|
| Nov 26, 2014 at 13:26 | comment | added | Chris | I think my point is: piano's come with pedals as standard. Guitar-pedals are an added extra the player may or may not use | |
| Nov 26, 2014 at 13:09 | comment | added | Chris |
@Matt: I stand by my original post on pedals. Piano pedals work in a simple way and make a limited number of changes to the sound - I don't believe there's enough questions to justify a separate piano-pedals tag. guitar attracts way more questions, and there are way more possibilities under the 'guitar-effects' banner, and thus more questions which could be asked. I would also imagine that guitar-effects questions are a subset some guitarists may wish to only follow, and others may wish to filter out (classical players?) - whereas piano pedals are a more staple part of playing piano.
|
|
| Nov 26, 2014 at 13:03 | comment | added | Chris |
@Matthew - Effects-pedals (loopers) can be used for many instruments, not just guitars - I wouldn't agree with that merge.
|
|
| Nov 25, 2014 at 22:39 | comment | added | user28 |
@VarLogRant I'd propose merging effects-pedal into guitar-effects since the latter more general, I don't see an advantage to going the other way. Chris, I think your argument about piano pedalling being a subset of piano is not a good reason to remove pedals, since the same logic could be applied to removing effects-pedal/guitar-effects. A rename would be better.
|
|
| Oct 18, 2014 at 19:29 | comment | added | Chris | @VarLogRant hmm, ok, not my area of expertise at all, I'll admit! | |
| Oct 18, 2014 at 19:25 | comment | added | Dave Jacoby | It is true that there's also onboard effects and rackmount effects, but I don't think breaking that out of effects-pedal is worth it. | |
| Oct 18, 2014 at 19:21 | comment | added | Dave Jacoby | @Chris - Sorry about the confusion. I think that everything I see in the guitar-effects tag should be tagged with effects-pedal instead. I gave examples of things that could be "guitar effects", and think they should have another tag instead. Maybe "guitar", "electric guitar" or "acoustic guitar". | |
| Oct 18, 2014 at 16:08 | comment | added | Chris | @VarLogRant - I'm confused, are you suggesting that guitar-effects should also be merged into something? There doesn't currently seem to be a guitar-technique tag - are you suggesting there's a better current tag these should be merged into? | |
| Oct 18, 2014 at 15:11 | comment | added | Dave Jacoby | For guitar-effects, I'm not seeing many in guitar-specific non-electronic effects, such as harp harmonics, above-the-nut bends, pinch harmonics and the like. If I asked about dive-bombing with a Floyd Rose or string bending to emulate a pedal steel, those would be guitar effects, but any instrument with an electronic output can be plugged into a delay or overdrive pedal. The other world fit under guitar-technique or something | |
| Oct 18, 2014 at 15:07 | comment | added | Chris | Hmm...can you be an expert in pedal notes? (Which according to google is another name for 'pedal point'!) | |
| Oct 18, 2014 at 15:05 | comment | added | Dave Jacoby | There is another concept with pedal in the name: pedal point. Don't think there's many questions about that, and agree on "effects-pedal". | |
| Oct 17, 2014 at 12:08 | comment | added | charlie | Sounds good to me. Also there are guitar effects that aren't pedals, so your solution makes sense. | |
| Oct 17, 2014 at 12:06 | history | answered | Chris | CC BY-SA 3.0 |