Wave (Jobim) - Solo guitar on an acoustic archtop.

[bratistofeles]

My solo arrangement of Wave (Jobim) played on my Waterloo WL-AT. I hope you enjoy it!

[garybaldy]

My solo arrangement of Wave (Jobim) played on my Waterloo WL-AT. I hope you enjoy it!

Very nice and great guitar. I shall be checking out Waterloo!

[JazzPadd]

Wonderful, love the use of harmonics and seconds, gives it a lot of character.

[bratistofeles]

Wonderful, love the use of harmonics and seconds, gives it a lot of character.

Thank you!

[2bornot2bop]

More Bossa Nova please!

[AdroitMage]

My solo arrangement of Wave (Jobim) played on my Waterloo WL-AT. I hope you enjoy it!

Beautiful arrangement, maestro, bravo.

One little suggestion, please come up with a better ending to the tune, that one was a bit anti-climactic. Bravo

[Cunamara]

Nice sound. Smooth, warm and round but not at the expense of articulation. Ribbon mic to capture the guitar?

[pilotony]

Excellent!

Thanks for posting.

Tony D.

[garybaldy]

Beautiful arrangement, maestro, bravo.

One little suggestion, please come up with a better ending to the tune, that one was a bit anti-climactic. Bravo

I like the end. In fact, I like it all!

[Ingo Lee]

Beautifully done bratistofeles , your technique and arranging chops are exceptional. Can you talk about your approach to arranging ie do you use a score or transcribe from a known recording? Have you studied formal theory? Have you published any of your works other than YouTube?

[bratistofeles]

Nice sound. Smooth, warm and round but not at the expense of articulation. Ribbon mic to capture the guitar?

Thank you! Indeed, on that video I'm using a ribbon and a small condenser mic to capture the sound.

[RJVB]

I'm more used to hearing this kind of music on nylon strings but this guitar has a surprisingly nice sound. I'm sure it'd sound even nicer fingerstyle than with a pick, though.

[bratistofeles]

Beautifully done bratistofeles , your technique and arranging chops are exceptional. Can you talk about your approach to arranging ie do you use a score or transcribe from a known recording? Have you studied formal theory? Have you published any of your works other than YouTube?

Thanks for your comment Ingo Lee I really appreciate it.
As for my arranging approach I always start with the lead sheet. I then try to find a key that feels right to me. Often times my arrangements are not in the usual keys. I try to avoid copying what I hear in recordings and avoid watching other guitar arrangements of the same tune on youtube so nothing is ingrained in my subconscious mind when approaching an arrangement. Of course there are exceptions; my arrangement of Cry Me A River has Barney Kessel's intro because well, it's the best intro for that song and IMO an integral part.
Yes, I have studied formal theory and my background is in classical guitar, although I haven't played a classical guitar in years. Quite a few people have asked me about sheet music/tabs for my arrangements, so I contacted Mel Bay and a few other publishers but none expressed interest in my arrangements. I happen to make my living in a field completely unrelated to music (I'm a scientist) so I was like well, I'm gonna put my transcriptions for free on the web but then I found out that even that breaks copyright laws lol.

[bratistofeles]

I'm more used to hearing this kind of music on nylon strings but this guitar has a surprisingly nice sound. I'm sure it'd sound even nicer fingerstyle than with a pick, though.

Possibly, I can play fingerstyle but choose to play with a plectrum. It's an aesthetic and stylistic choice.

[Ingo Lee]

Just curious Kacper if you had considered doing contrafact versions of your arrangements, ie writing an original melody over the same chord structure/arrangement? Lots of jazz musicians have done this to share the music they love and be able to publish and sell it without copyright/licensing hassles. This would create an original work which you probably would want to copyright yourself to more easily establish ownership of the pieces if it became an issue later on.

[Mick-7]

I was like well, I'm gonna put my transcriptions for free on the web but then I found out that even that breaks copyright laws lol.

There are a lot of people posting transcriptions on YouTube, are they all breaking copyright laws?

[Christian Miller]

There are a lot of people posting transcriptions on YouTube, are they all breaking copyright laws?

You get a copyright issue if you monetise a video with too much copyrightable material. There is a 'fair use argument' that you can make, but as far as I know this can be a frustrating progress. Enforcement of this is extremely variable.

For example, I put in a few seconds of a Pink Floyd live video to illustrate a point in a video and instantly got dinged. Miles Davis? Generally fine. Louis Armstrong's West End Blues? Got dinged by what I think was not the legitimate rights holder of those records, but a modern trad band that had covered WEB.

Obviously in the year 2025 the legitimate rights holder is often some cryptically named tax haven registered third party that has nothing obviously to do with the artist or the record label it was recorded by, but even so I say it's really inconsistent and often inaccurate. I think a lot of it is done by AI.

I think they aren't monetising them. My understanding here is murky, but I think sometimes the right owner gets the ad revenue. There's been a push by YouTube to have ads even on non monetised videos, perhaps in part of the this reason. As I have premium I haven't seen if they've implemented this. That said, I've got dinged for non monetised videos where I've been playing along with a recording.

[Christian Miller]

I'm more used to hearing this kind of music on nylon strings but this guitar has a surprisingly nice sound. I'm sure it'd sound even nicer fingerstyle than with a pick, though.

I disagree. Acoustic archtops often respond better with a pick.

[bratistofeles]

I disagree. Acoustic archtops often respond better with a pick.

I agree. Much easier to drive the top with a plectrum when you don't have an amp to do the heavy lifting.

[Mick-7]

You get a copyright issue if you monetise a video with too much copyrightable material. There is a 'fair use argument' that you can make, but as far as I know this can be a frustrating progress. Enforcement of this is extremely variable.

For example, I put in a few seconds of a Pink Floyd live video to illustrate a point in a video and instantly got dinged. Miles Davis? Generally fine. Louis Armstrong's West End Blues? Got dinged by what I think was not the legitimate rights holder of those records, but a modern trad band that had covered WEB.

Obviously in the year 2025 the legitimate rights holder is often some cryptically named tax haven registered third party that has nothing obviously to do with the artist or the record label it was recorded by, but even so I say it's really inconsistent and often inaccurate. I think a lot of it is done by AI.

I think they aren't monetising them. My understanding here is murky, but I think sometimes the right owner gets the ad revenue. There's been a push by YouTube to have ads even on non monetised videos, perhaps in part of the this reason. As I have premium I haven't seen if they've implemented this. That said, I've got dinged for non monetised videos where I've been playing along with a recording.

"That said, I've got dinged for non monetised videos where I've been playing along with a recording."

Please define "dinged," a warning from YouTube or what?

"Enforcement of this is extremely variable."

Sure sounds like it, what a headache!

[RJVB]

I agree. Much easier to drive the top with a plectrum when you don't have an amp to do the heavy lifting.

That argument goes for any steel string guitar and probably even classicals but is moot on recordings, esp. with good microphones. We're not talking about hocking out a percussive part that has to cut through the mix of some big band, here.

[bratistofeles]

That argument goes for any steel string guitar and probably even classicals but is moot on recordings, esp. with good microphones. We're not talking about hocking out a percussive part that has to cut through the mix of some big band, here.

There is more to sound than volume. Can this be played and recorded fingerstyle? Sure. But the sound isn't nearly as rich and full. I know because I have tried.

[bratistofeles]

There are a lot of people posting transcriptions on YouTube, are they all breaking copyright laws?

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong since I literally have no idea about copyright law. But my from what I read, my understanding is that in the USA if you do an arrangement of a copyrighted tune you need permission from the copyright holder (i.e. pay them) to distribute the arrangement regardless of wether you are selling it or distributing it for free.

[Christian Miller]

"That said, I've got dinged for non monetised videos where I've been playing along with a recording."

Please define "dinged," a warning from YouTube or what?

"Enforcement of this is extremely variable."

Sure sounds like it, what a headache!

Yeah a copyright claim, rather than a strike. (Strike is more serious.)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cunamara]

Somebody please correct me if I'm wrong since I literally have no idea about copyright law. But my from what I read, my understanding is that in the USA if you do an arrangement of a copyrighted tune you need permission from the copyright holder (i.e. pay them) to distribute the arrangement regardless of wether you are selling it or distributing it for free.

What you have to pay as a licensing fee in the US is set by law for recordings (movies, TV and ringtones are different). The fee is different if the listener gets to keep a copy (purchasing a CD or a download, for example) or if they don't (streaming, YouTube, etc.). It's called a mechanical license. Most licenses are purchased via the Harry Fox Agency.

The Harry Fox Agency

Licensing for written sheet music is a different kettle of fish and I don't know anything about it.