Am I ready for jazz lessons?

[Tal_175]

The operative word here is "believe." You can believe whatever you want, and you can try to twist my words to try to support your belief. But what I'm TELLING you (AGAIN) is that you don't get it. You have NO IDEA what sort of dramatic difference that studies with these teachers made for me, despite the fact that I PMed you with more detail before I even posted the reply that you seem bent on arguing with. I can't invest more effort in trying to get you to hear what's being said here, because you don't want to hear it.

No, I can't read your mind. I quoted (like quite literally) what you said, that's what my response is based on. Your PM was pretty much identical to your post. Please stop saying you won't invest more time on this. It's not working.

[Tal_175]

You said you are PM'ing because you didn't want to drop names of your teachers on the forum but you put them on the post anyway. So not sure what the point of PM'ing was.

[AllanAllen]

Op said they want to learn to play in the jazz style. Presumably that means, "I want to learn to play like the music in the jazz records."

Then he said:

Then he listed a bunch of areas he might work on before taking lessons.

That was the context of my post.


Hope that clarifies it.

What's any of that got to do with "all music teachers suck"?

[Tal_175]

What's any of that got to do with "all music teachers suck"?

Did you only read the second sentence of my post? I think I expanded it a bit, no?

[Tal_175]

Let me give another crack at it. The OP said their jazz lessons didn't go anywhere because of their lack of theory knowledge.

That to me indicates an unrealistic expectation about the benefits of taking private lessons. It is probable that there is a mismatch between the OP's assessment of private lessons and the reality. I am not gonna go over everything I said on that point but by "music teachers suck" I meant that the process is very slow and it takes a lot of ownership from student to go anywhere with or without lessons. It's meant to be a edgy/tongue-in-cheek way of describing this. Hope I didn't offend anyone. Will we stay stuck on the word "suck"?

[AllanAllen]

Let me give another crack at it. The OP said their jazz lessons didn't go anywhere because of their lack of theory knowledge.

That to me indicates an unrealistic expectation about the benefits of taking private lessons. It is probable that there is a mismatch between the OP's assessment of private lessons and the reality. I am not gonna go over everything I said on that point but by "music teachers suck" I meant that the process is very slow and it takes a lot of ownership from student to go anywhere with or without lessons. It's meant to be a edgy/tongue-in-cheek way of describing this. Hope I didn't offend anyone. Will we stay stuck on the word "suck"?

I would say OP's music teacher sucks.

[pamosmusic]

Cooking classes suck.

By which, of course, I mean that you can absolutely get something out of lessons with a good chef and teacher, and of course cooking classes can help and have value, but the vegetables and stuff don’t cook themselves. And I know people expect the vegetables to cook themselves, but at the end of the day, you’ll need to do much of the preparation and cooking yourself when you’re in your own kitchen.

I think I’ve been clear here.

[Tal_175]

Cooking classes suck.

By which, of course, I mean that you can absolutely get something out of lessons with a good chef and teacher, and of course cooking classes can help and have value, but the vegetables and stuff don’t cook themselves. And I know people expect the vegetables to cook themselves, but at the end of the day, you’ll need to do much of the preparation and cooking yourself when you’re in your own kitchen.

I think I’ve been clear here.

Actually based on the same metrics of progress, cooking classes suck a lot less than teaching music.

[Tal_175]

Also I think beginners and advanced players get more out of lessons than intermediate players.

[pamosmusic]

Also I think beginners and advanced players get more out of lessons than intermediate players.

Now THAT is an actual interesting claim.

Obviously depends on what you mean by that. Don’t think I agree, but I’m not sure I disagree either.

say more things so I can decide

[Tal_175]

Now THAT is an actual interesting claim.

Obviously depends on what you mean by that. Don’t think I agree, but I’m not sure I disagree either.

say more things so I can decide

A small insight or a concept can go a long way for an advanced player. They'll either reject it or instantly get what it is useful for and know how to work on it. If they reject it that's because they know what they want.The more progress I make, the more I move in this direction w.r.t. my relationship with "new" things.

By advanced player, I mean someone who has a working "toolset" that they can use in a relatively high level in that style. They also have a more mature and contextualized understanding of their style (and music).
For example, an intermediate player would live by external rules such as "don't play the bass notes when you're comping if there is a bass player."
An advanced player would have a more nuanced understanding of music and such rules may not mean much. An orchestral arrangement would have doubled root notes in all kinds of registers in their voicings. There is no such rule in music. A small combo doesn't have a big wall of sound, there is no harm in doubling some notes (and guitars bass note are in a higher register than what bass usually plays). But if the bass player is going for something, you don't want to clash with that either. So it's not a simple rule, you have to get good at judging it musically.

[pamosmusic]

A small insight or a concept can go a long way for an advanced player. They'll either reject it or instantly get what it is useful for and know how to work on it. If they reject it that's because they know what they want.The more progress I make, the more I move in this direction w.r.t. my relationship with "new" things.

By advanced player, I mean someone who has a working "toolset" that they can use in a relatively high level in that style. They also have a more mature and contextualized understanding of their style (and music).
For example, an intermediate player would live by external rules such as "don't play the bass notes when you're comping if there is a bass player."
An advanced player would have a more nuanced understanding of music and such rules may not mean much. An orchestral arrangement would have doubled root notes in all kinds of registers in their voicings. There is no such rule in music. A small combo doesn't have a big wall of sound, there is no harm in doubling some notes (and guitars bass note are in a higher register than what bass usually plays). But if the bass player is going for something, you don't want to clash with that either. So it's not a simple rule, you have to get good at judging it musically.

Yeah that tracks.

what about beginner? Beginner beginner or jazz beginner?

[Tal_175]

Yeah that tracks.

what about beginner? Beginner beginner or jazz beginner?

I guess what I mean is, for beginner and advanced players the path is more concrete and applied. Intermediates' path is less linear. They do a lot if things because it's supposed to be good for them and move on to other things. Like an intermediate rock player learning all the modes because they want to get to the next level but they don't quite know how it all fits together.

I don't know, what do you think?

[AllanAllen]

Well, since nobody asked.

I don’t think anyone should learn modes in isolation. Or really study modes at all. It’s much better to learn major scale fingerings and apply them to other roots.

Guitar is a pattern based instrument and we should use that as an advantage over piano and horns where every note comes from one unique fingering.

An intermediate is just an advanced player who’s stuck in the weeds of theory, learn tunes, learn what you need to navigate them. You don’t need to know super locrian to play gigs.

[pamosmusic]

I guess what I mean is, for beginner and advanced players the path is more concrete and applied. Intermediates' path is less linear. They do a lot if things because it's supposed to be good for them and move on to other things. Like an intermediate rock player learning all the modes because they want to get to the next level but they don't quite know how it all fits together.

I don't know, what do you think?

That seems probably right.

That’s the kind of level I really like teaching though. Folks who have a dozen tunes kind of down and know a couple scale fingerings maybe transcribed something or got the omnibook but don’t know where to go. I have a lot of students like that, I think.

[pamosmusic]

Well, since nobody asked.

I don’t think anyone should learn modes in isolation. Or really study modes at all. It’s much better to learn major scale fingerings and apply them to other roots.

Guitar is a pattern based instrument and we should use that as an advantage over piano and horns where every note comes from one unique fingering.

An intermediate is just an advanced player who’s stuck in the weeds of theory, learn tunes, learn what you need to navigate them. You don’t need to know super locrian to play gigs.

get em

[jameslovestal]

I would say OP's music teacher sucks.

I would say it like this: the synergy between student and teacher sucks. (Assuming what is being said by the student is accurate since we only have their side).

[rpjazzguitar]

I'm not sure how relevant this is, but maybe.

Last night at big band I got a solo on Groovin' High. Went okay. I know a lot of theory relevant to playing a tune like that.

Next solo was trumpet. His solo sounded a lot more like jazz - even though it was no more harmonically adventurous. It was a matter of phrasing and vocabulary. Great sounding solo.

The point I'm trying to make is that the trumpet player didn't need much theoretical knowledge to do what he did. Rather, he relied on having a great feel for the style. Phrasing, vocabulary, time-feel.

If you can get around on the instrument, you can start working on phrasing, vocabulary and time-feel and that effort won't be wasted.

[Cunamara]

IMHO the single most important ingredient is missing from the OP's list of stuff to learn: songs!

Music is about playing songs. It is not about knowing scales, chord voicings, arpeggios, etc. it's about playing songs. I say this as somebody who spent a couple of decades frittering away time learning all the stuff that was in your list, but none of it added up to music. Learn the chord progressions; learn the melodies; learn the lyrics.

A musician who knows 100 jazz standards, can play the chords and melody and knows the lyrics (maybe even can sing them) and does not know everything on your list will be more successful than someone who doesn't know any standards and knows all of that stuff on your list. As you learn all that stuff, you can add it into playing the songs; if you don't know the songs, you have nothing to add it into and make use of it.

[wolflen]

I was very fortunate that I had time in my life to devote to study and practice..and a driving force-hunger..to understand and play the lessons I was given.

I realize how long it takes to really understand and internalize "theory and harmony concepts" and put them into practice.

I also knew when to to stop taking lessons..as my teacher gave me enough material to study for the rest of my life. He agreed.

If I teach someone I am aware that they are not going to put in daily 4 hour practice sessions and play the lesson in all 12 keys.

I make the lessons very economical and fairly easy to digest..even for experienced players.

Why give a student subject matter that they won't fully understand even with months of intense practice and further study.

It may be easy to say..OK today we study triad inversions..well how about first ask the student if they even know what they are..and why they should
learn them. More important..do they want to learn this type of stuff.

Having someone that WANTS to learn something makes teaching much easier.

Then just teach one TRIAD and its inversions on ONE set of strings..see how the student understands the logic and possible benefits of using this in their playing..ask if they want to learn more..perhaps same triads on the next set of strings.

Now use that type of method when teaching advanced concepts..Yep it is a very slow process..both..to teach and learn this stuff.

Things like that...Remember learning your first chord?

Playing music is a skill..Teaching music is a separate skill..few can do both well.

Teachers suck?..hoping that it is a small percent..music is a gift..make it one that lasts a lifetime

[Jazz4Four]

IMHO the single most important ingredient is missing from the OP's list of stuff to learn: songs!

Music is about playing songs. It is not about knowing scales, chord voicings, arpeggios, etc. it's about playing songs. I say this as somebody who spent a couple of decades frittering away time learning all the stuff that was in your list, but none of it added up to music. Learn the chord progressions; learn the melodies; learn the lyrics.

I hear ya. Learning tunes and being musical was implied. With my previous lessons years ago, the teacher might say "play a m7 chord", and I knew a couple of shapes for that. Now, I know about 25 ways to play a m7 chord. My thinking is that the more of the "basics" I know, the faster and better I'll be able to learn and play tunes. You said that you "frittered" away time with that stuff, but I'm sure it helped you. I hear people say that they don't "think" about the technical aspects when they play, but that's because they've internalized their knowledge.

[pamosmusic]

I hear ya. Learning tunes and being musical was implied. With my previous lessons years ago, the teacher might say "play a m7 chord", and I knew a couple of shapes for that. Now, I know about 25 ways to play a m7 chord. My thinking is that the more of the "basics" I know, the faster and better I'll be able to learn and play tunes. You said that you "frittered" away time with that stuff, but I'm sure it helped you. I hear people say that they don't "think" about the technical aspects when they play, but that's because they've internalized their knowledge.

The last 20 of those m7 chord fingerings might not help you play tunes faster and better

[2bornot2bop]

There’s lots of teachers, but not everyone knows how to teach.

[Cunamara]

I hear ya. Learning tunes and being musical was implied. With my previous lessons years ago, the teacher might say "play a m7 chord", and I knew a couple of shapes for that. Now, I know about 25 ways to play a m7 chord. My thinking is that the more of the "basics" I know, the faster and better I'll be able to learn and play tunes. You said that you "frittered" away time with that stuff, but I'm sure it helped you. I hear people say that they don't "think" about the technical aspects when they play, but that's because they've internalized their knowledge.

"Frittered" in terms of being able to sit down with other musicians and play a set of songs with them. I knew a lot of theory about music and jazz, lots of different chord grips and scales and what have you, but I didn't know anywhere near enough actual music to be a functioning musician.

And if I am brutally honest with myself, I still don't. I've learned a lot of vocabulary and grammar, but I haven't really learned how to write a good story. I seem to be able to comp well for others, but I have a difficult time playing a solo that's worth listening to (and I'm not that interested in playing solos, so my motivation to that is a little weak anyway; I love comping, however- I really do think it's where my voice is as a musician. But jazz is about the solos and there is often an aggressiveness to push people to solo, even if they've got nothing to say).

[pauln]

If I teach someone I am aware that they are not going to put in daily 4 hour practice sessions and play the lesson in all 12 keys.

Practice in all keys?