How fast is fast enough?

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo

It's hard to dispute the technical mastery of Coltrane or Parker, and it's safe to say that very few jazz musicians have ever reached the level that they operated at. Comparing anyone to them is almost always going to be a lost cause. I've accepted long ago that most jazz is not played at their level, they were freaks.

If they were freaks, why did they have to work so hard? It's worth remembering that when Charlie Parker, as a teen, went to his first jam session, he was laughed off the stage and sent home becaue he was playing *two* different songs, neither of which the band was playing. *That* is where Parker started. It is only after practicing twelve hours a day, six days a week, for years that he became a 'natural'!

I grant that some people may have an easier time than others developing technical skills because their fingers are more nimble, but this doesn't make technical facility a lesser quality in a musician.

[fep]

Originally Posted by markerhodes

If they were freaks, why did they have to work so hard? It's worth remembering that when Charlie Parker, as a teen, went to his first jam session, he was laughed off the stage and sent home becaue he was playing *two* different songs, neither of which the band was playing. *That* is where Parker started. It is only after practicing twelve hours a day, six days a week, for years that he became a 'natural'!

I grant that some people may have an easier time than others developing technical skills because their fingers are more nimble, but this doesn't make technical facility a lesser quality in a musician.

12 hours a day, six days a week, for years... That is a truly a freak. Freakish talent with freakish hard work.

If we define a freak as a one in a million (or more) ... Parker and Coltrane where freaks.

(Beethoven and Mozart... super freaks.)

[markerhodes]

>>>>If we define a freak as a one in a million (or more) ... Parker and Coltrane where freaks.<<<<

But why would we do that? Most people who get good at anything--hitting a baseball, skiing, playing chess, writing novels---spend a lot of time at it. Anyone who picks up a guitar is one in a million in the sense that a lot more people DON'T play than do. Anyone who gets really good works really hard. It seems to me that calling great musicians freaks minimizes their work and encourages sloth among lesser players. And it also doesn't explain why the 'freaks' have to work so hard!

[cosmic gumbo]

Sorry I ever said freaks. The point I was making is that they were in a league of their own, and yes, they worked hard at it. However, it was their superior minds that allowed them to make use of all that technique. Most players who rely on speed don't say much more than than those that don't. I'm looking for my own voice, and I will play as fast as I need to say what I need to say. We all play for different reasons. My goals have more to do with being a musician, not just a guitarist.

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo

Most players who rely on speed don't say much more than than those that don't. .

It strikes me as odd that one rarely hears the same thing said about those who rely on knowing lots of chords saying no more than those who just know a few, or those who know lots of tunes saying no more than those who just know a few....

[cosmic gumbo]

Originally Posted by markerhodes

It strikes me as odd that one rarely hears the same thing said about those who rely on knowing lots of chords saying no more than those who just know a few, or those who know lots of tunes saying no more than those who just know a few....

Why would someone say the same thing about something totally different? I guess I have to accept that I must be from another planet, the odd one where chord knowledge and speed are two different things. I always love speed if someone has something to say! I tend to think less is more, and leaving space is as important as filling it. Best of all is to sound like yourself and not someone else. Fast in not bad. Fast as Charlie Parker? I'll choose to focus on something else.

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo

Why would someone say the same thing about something totally different?

Well, as all these things fall under the heading of Jazz Guitar Skills, I don't see them as totally different. They all (-speed, chordal chops, tune learning) take a lot of work. But among many guitarists there is a defensiveness about the subject of speed that isn't heard when the subject turns to chord vocabulary and tune mastery. Maybe it is just me, but I don't think so.

[franco6719]

Speed for the sake of speed is just mechanical masturbation. Take it from someone who started out many, many years ago, as a teenager, just learning to play scales as fast as possible. What the **** was that? Technical accuracy and good technique can be useful in some context, but not the ability to play C Mixolydian as fast as god or whatever.

Further, it was an extraordinary waste of time. Someone should have obviously slapped me across the head and said "Hey, learn to play MUSIC and improvise melodies and harmonies.." That's what eventually happened. Well, I had to slap myself across the head, as it were. And I'm still working on learning to play music. Chord vocabulary, tune mastery are parts of learning MUSIC. Well, tune mastery anyway. Chord vocabulary can probably degenerate into technical nonsense too without the context of tunes and musical development in general.

[musicjohnny]

Originally Posted by markerhodes

If they were freaks, why did they have to work so hard? It's worth remembering that when Charlie Parker, as a teen, went to his first jam session, he was laughed off the stage and sent home becaue he was playing *two* different songs, neither of which the band was playing. *That* is where Parker started. It is only after practicing twelve hours a day, six days a week, for years that he became a 'natural'!

I grant that some people may have an easier time than others developing technical skills because their fingers are more nimble, but this doesn't make technical facility a lesser quality in a musician.

I agree with you one hundred percent buddy.

My personal philosophy in life is that there is no limit to what man can do. We've been taught to idolize great as one in a million, as though not everyone can achieve it themselves. If we strive for something with full dedication and realize that you yourself are great, then you will be great.

[abracadabra]

Speed vs theory knowledge vs chord knowledge etc., is all similar in that each must be used properly. Spending 95% of your time bringing up your chops and then blazing all over the fretboard will be seen by most as boring, but in the same vein, knowing 10,000 different chords will tire people out if they are played simply for looking flash and clever. Being the greatest ever theorist will also bore people if its obvious you´re trying so hard to evaluate a new theoretical device in every bar.

All these things require some degree of investigation and a large degree of taste in their use, but I think you can overdo the fancy chords just as easily as you can overfill the measure with blistering speed.

[franco6719]

Originally Posted by abracadabra

Speed vs theory knowledge vs chord knowledge etc., is all similar in that each must be used properly. Spending 95% of your time bringing up your chops and then blazing all over the fretboard will be seen by most as boring, but in the same vein, knowing 10,000 different chords will tire people out if they are played simply for looking flash and clever. Being the greatest ever theorist will also bore people if its obvious you´re trying so hard to evaluate a new theoretical device in every bar.

All these things require some degree of investigation and a large degree of taste in their use, but I think you can overdo the fancy chords just as easily as you can overfill the measure with blistering speed.

Well-put. I would agree with all of that actually, more that I think about. And there are always trade-offs though: it's alright to work on one aspect for certain time and isolate technique,for example, if that is a big weakness. But you have to eventually incorporate that into playing actual music. The same with theory, etc.. The most important skill though has nothing to do with your instrument. Music is all about the brain. That's what I have been learning and what all guitarists need to realize eventually.

[franco6719]

Wait, that was badly expressed, I think. I don't that music is about "the brain" in the sense of theory and planned-out calculations or something like that. I mean that it's about the mind/brain in the sense of what getting out what's inside your head, your "soul" or whatever you want to call it.

[Reg]

Speed is just one of many skills required to be a musician...if your weak in the technical dept., work on it. Weakness or lack of technical abilities usually stem from bad technique. It's pretty simple, good position, less hand and finger movement usually translates to better technique, which translates to the ability to play fast, if you chose to do so. As far as picking, less moving parts translates into cleaner technique. Some players can burn with less than perfect technique etc...but not many and usually it requires to much effort. You don't realize how fast a good guitarist is playing with good technique until you try and copy their licks. It sounds effortless etc... Again speed is just one of the many skills required to be a musician. Reg

[cosmic gumbo]

Slow music is so lame. Whenever me and the guys play "Catfish Strut", it's so fast that the dancers start falling down, and the tuba player has to look on the floor to find his lips.

[markerhodes]

Originally Posted by franco6719

Technical accuracy and good technique can be useful in some context, but not the ability to play C Mixolydian as fast as god or whatever.
Further, it was an extraordinary waste of time. .

But who ever said that is what we are talking about here? When I think about speed, I mean, among other things, playing bebop heads at tempo and soloing over those changes---being comfy at tempi above 250. That isn't masturbation, that's learning to play a lot of jazz tunes that I like. And it ain't been easy for me! I wish that it were.

As for playing scales fast, that is not the goal in itself, but it seems to me that being able to play them fast is how you get your fingers to go fast at all. It's kinda like saying tongue twisters before speaking in public--you do it so that what you're about to do flows.

[bako]

Originally Posted by markerhodes

When I think about speed, I mean, among other things, playing bebop heads at tempo and soloing over those changes---being comfy at tempi above 250.

Good point. Fast tempos are in the repertoire and if you are the bandleader you can of course count it in at moderately fast. If you are a composer you can write to your tempo preference. If you play in other peoples bands then you have to play what is asked. Some music is meant to be played fast. There is an elastic limit to how much you can slow down a given tune before it no longer works. Marion McPartland made a beautiful ballad interpretation of Giant Steps but bebop might not translate as well.

I am nerdy enough about guitar to enjoy the idea of notes per second but something not raised in this discussion so far are some of the subtle sounds that come with speed. Long and gentle arpeggio lines in ballads and swirling lines that sound like the wind. Tremelo techniques and notes with lots of ornamentation are examples of speed in use to bring out a slower line.

[bako]

Seeking comment from the fast among us.

1. using fingerings and articulations of maximum efficiency and avoidance of awkward things
2. good general technique and versatility to navigate literally anything that might occur

How did/do these 2 approaches to playing/practicing factor into achieving your present skill?

[cosmic gumbo]

Like they say, if you have to think about it, you can't do it. It has to flow out of you.

[Baltar Hornbeek]

Originally Posted by fep

From about 1:00 to 2:00, speed and feeling

he's tuned down to D ?