Mel Bay VS W. Leavitt method

**rcaballero** · 10-08-2012, 02:49 PM

Hi Everyone!

Just wanted to find out what you guys thought? I've studied out of both books and personally I find Mel's method better. I actually enjoy playing the pieces, while I work on my reading and technique.

I don't necessarily think Leavitt's books are bad, again I did shed it and from time to time I pick stuff out of it to work on, but simply enjoy Mel's pieces.

What do you cats think?

By the way Berklee has kind of moved passed using his books, which I thought was a bit of shame because his books offered so much.

**monk** · 10-08-2012, 05:44 PM

I've studied from both methods and haved used both for teaching. I also favor the Mel Bay Method.

When Mel Bay began writing his Modern Guitar Method in 1947, there were no clearly graded, progressive mehods for guitar that were comparable to the materials available for pianists, horn players, classical guitarists and string players. While there had been earlier books for plectrum guitar playing none were as ambitious or displayed the scope of Bay's method. It reminds me very much of a comprehensive piano method in that it covers reading, technique, theory and uses predominately classical music for etudes and repertoire.

Many years ago in my travels, I stumbled upon a mom and pop music store that had been in business for a long time. I found all seven of the original volumes in a dusty bin of old books. I feel that these originals are much superior to the current versions which have been periodically revised since the late 60s. In my opinion, the revisions have diluted Mel's original inention which was to provide a method that taught guitar as a musical instrument on the level as piano, violin, et al.

It should be kept in mind that the MB Method was not designed as a self tutor but as a method to be studied with the guidance of a good teacher. As such, there are some things that are not mentioned in the text of the book that were intended for the teacher to discuss, such as playing successive lines of eighth notes with all downstrokes.

This is in no way a detraction of the Leavitt books. There is some good information there also. But Mel Bay remains my overall favorite.

**Kojo27** · 10-09-2012, 06:19 AM

Originally Posted by monk

I've studied from both methods and haved used both for teaching. I also favor the Mel Bay Method.

When Mel Bay began writing his Modern Guitar Method in 1947, there were no clearly graded, progressive mehods for guitar that were comparable to the materials available for pianists, horn players, classical guitarists and string players. While there had been earlier books for plectrum guitar playing none were as ambitious or displayed the scope of Bay's method. It reminds me very much of a comprehensive piano method in that it covers reading, technique, theory and uses predominately classical music for etudes and repertoire.

Many years ago in my travels, I stumbled upon a mom and pop music store that had been in business for a long time. I found all seven of the original volumes in a dusty bin of old books. I feel that these originals are much superior to the current versions which have been periodically revised since the late 60s. In my opinion, the revisions have diluted Mel's original inention which was to provide a method that taught guitar as a musical instrument on the level as piano, violin, et al.

It should be kept in mind that the MB Method was not designed as a self tutor but as a method to be studied with the guidance of a good teacher. As such, there are some things that are not mentioned in the text of the book that were intended for the teacher to discuss, such as playing successive lines of eighth notes with all downstrokes.

This is in no way a detraction of the Leavitt books. There is some good information there also. But Mel Bay remains my overall favorite.

Damned informative, Monk - thank you. How do you mean they've diluted Mel's intention? Changed the music? Does it contain more popular music now, rather than the original mostly-classical?

EDIT: Never mind, Monk - I think I see; you mean that Mel didn't design it to be used without a teacher, and he intended it as a method on par with piano methods, etc. I think this is what you meant.

A friend of mine, a piano teacher and fair guitarist, is debating these two methods for her son, who's already a pretty good rocker.

kj

**jazzuki** · 10-09-2012, 06:31 AM

The Leavitt Method is no longer used at Berklee.See Aug issue Just Jazz Guitar Mag.

**Kojo27** · 10-09-2012, 07:24 AM

Originally Posted by jazzuki

The Leavitt Method is no longer used at Berklee.See Aug issue Just Jazz Guitar Mag.

At all? If Larry Baione is still teaching there, I bet a buck he still uses it.

This guitar method is *inspired*. I don't see what they could replace it with that would do better. A whole truck-load of hand-out sheets might do better, *if* the students complete the sheets - but they have a gold mine in Leavitt's method, with their name already on it. I'd really like to see what they've replaced it with.

**JohnRoss** · 10-09-2012, 08:30 AM

Originally Posted by Kojo27

I'd really like to see what they've replaced it with.

I'd really like to own what they've replaced it with.

**rcaballero** · 10-09-2012, 08:32 AM

I guess some folks still use it, but I remember just blazing through book one in a lab. There was no mention of doing two or three.

By the way thank you Monk for your input! I am currently working my way through two and find the pieces very enjoyable and necessary for developing chops!

**fumblefingers** · 10-09-2012, 08:58 AM

Originally Posted by jazzuki

The Leavitt Method is no longer used at Berklee.See Aug issue Just Jazz Guitar Mag.

do they say any more about this topic?

**MarkRhodes** · 10-09-2012, 09:14 AM

Originally Posted by jazzuki

The Leavitt Method is no longer used at Berklee.See Aug issue Just Jazz Guitar Mag.

Like several others, I would like to hear more about this, and esp 'what are they using in its stead?'

**Kojo27** · 10-09-2012, 09:55 AM

Originally Posted by JohnRoss

I'd really like to own what they've replaced it with.

John Ross, are you implying that they've replaced it with technological stuff? I wouldn't be surprised to find that we go to "paperless classrooms" within ten years, as paperless offices are the thing now, even paperless hospitals.

What exactly would you like to own? I don't follow exactly here.

Didn't you go to Berklee, John?

**Patrick2** · 10-09-2012, 10:16 AM

I'm currently studying with a guy named Bob Ferry, who studied at Berklee under Leavitt. Bob has incorporated his own methods and those of Leavitt. I like it a lot.

**jazzuki** · 10-09-2012, 10:27 AM

Kojo27. Just Jazz Guitar Nov issue 2011.Jerry Sims talks to Larry Baione Chairman of the Guitar Dept.at Berklee College of Music.In the interview the 3rd questioned asked by JS is quote"Do you still use the outlines from Bill Leavitt's Modern Method for Guitar?"To which LB replies "Actually,we dont use them anymore as the instructors are catering their instructions around their individual students;about one half of the students are still focusing on jazz" Hope this clarifies this for you.I had the wrong date for the JJG issue.

**Kojo27** · 10-09-2012, 10:59 AM

Originally Posted by jazzuki

Kojo27. Just Jazz Guitar Nov issue 2011.Jerry Sims talks to Larry Baione Chairman of the Guitar Dept.at Berklee College of Music.In the interview the 3rd questioned asked by JS is quote"Do you still use the outlines from Bill Leavitt's Modern Method for Guitar?"To which LB replies "Actually,we dont use them anymore as the instructors are catering their instructions around their individual students;about one half of the students are still focusing on jazz" Hope this clarifies this for you.I had the wrong date for the JJG issue.

Thanks, jazzuki. I think it's indicative of a damned shame. I mean, look at what Berklee has become: a money grubbing institution that is a travesty compared to itself 30 years ago.

In a YouTube interview, the Pres. of the place is talking about what they look for in a Berklee student, and hand to God, he essentially says, "Well, talent and ability aren't the things with us; we look more for people with ideas, with a certain attitude." Paraphrase, there; not a quote. But it's darn close. "If a student can't read music - that's okay. Maybe a student doesn't play an instrument at all - well, that's okay, too!" (They offer a degree in songwriting, for example.) $20,000 per semester.

**JohnRoss** · 10-09-2012, 11:14 AM

Originally Posted by Kojo27

John Ross, are you implying that they've replaced it with technological stuff?... Didn't you go to Berklee, John?

No, my music school was a toy one, a joke, not that I was (or am) good enough for anything better. And I just mean that if they now have a method that's better than, as good as, or even half as good as the Leavitt books, I'd like to own it, I don't much care what medium it comes in/on.

**Kojo27** · 10-09-2012, 11:17 AM

Originally Posted by JohnRoss

No, my music school was a toy one, a joke, not that I was (or am) good enough for anything better. And I just mean that if they now have a method that's better than, as good as, or even half as good as the Leavitt books, I'd like to own it, I don't much care what medium it comes in/on.

Hah - I get you now. Yep, if they have something better than Leavitt, I'd like to have it, too. Heck, I'm still struggling to learn Leavitt's stuff (again.)

**rcaballero** · 10-09-2012, 12:30 PM

Perhaps they are now using Mel Bay's method? hahah

Perhaps Berklee should consider creating a lab for Leavitt's book?

**MarkRhodes** · 10-09-2012, 12:52 PM

Originally Posted by Kojo27

T

In a YouTube interview, the Pres. of the place is talking about what they look for in a Berklee student, and hand to God, he essentially says, "Well, talent and ability aren't the things with us; we look more for people with ideas, with a certain attitude." Paraphrase, there; not a quote. But it's darn close. "If a student can't read music - that's okay. Maybe a student doesn't play an instrument at all - well, that's okay, too!" (They offer a degree in songwriting, for example.) $20,000 per semester.

I think songwriting is a worthy pursuit but I can't imagine paying 20 grand a semester to learn it. I learned the old fashioned way, 'making sh*t up'! It's good to know some theory, and especially some common chord progressions, but really, 20 grand for a semester? Maybe if a few of my songs sell, I can get a cushy gig as a songwriting instructor!

**Kojo27** · 10-09-2012, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by MarkRhodes

I think songwriting is a worthy pursuit but I can't imagine paying 20 grand a semester to learn it. I learned the old fashioned way, 'making sh*t up'! It's good to know some theory, and especially some common chord progressions, but really, 20 grand for a semester? Maybe if a few of my songs sell, I can get a cushy gig as a songwriting instructor!

This is just my guess, but I betcha they extract formulas from history's "great" songs (spell that "h.i.t."); I betcha they teach BIAB; melody-creating software (warms the heart, doesn't it?) - and "freewriting." <the one good thing of my suspicions. I do believe in lots of freewriting.

And that'll be $80,000 please... - and good luck getting a job!"

**monk** · 10-09-2012, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by Kojo27

Damned informative, Monk - thank you. How do you mean they've diluted Mel's intention? Changed the music? Does it contain more popular music now, rather than the original mostly-classical?
kj

What I meant was that in recent years original content has been replaced, re-ordered or edited out of some of the books. In some cases, easier material has been substituted for more challenging material.

**MarkRhodes** · 10-09-2012, 02:41 PM

Originally Posted by Kojo27

This is just my guess, but I betcha they extract formulas from history's "great" songs (spell that "h.i.t.")

Those formulae are worth knowing! Not all but the most used. But there's no need to go to school to learn this. What's that Ronnie Scott book, 'The Money Chords"? Around 20 bucks and it'll keep you busy for a lifetime.

**fumblefingers** · 10-09-2012, 09:50 PM

Berklee is not a "Jazz" school anymore. It is a "contemporary music" school.

a number of Leavitt's arrangements sound quite dated to say the least. Like many others I still enjoy their challenge, but then i'm not 18 years old.

regardless, i'm confident that if a young person wishes to be a jazzer Berklee will help him with his quest.

**Jonzo** · 10-09-2012, 11:04 PM

I'll put my money on Leavitt by knockout in the third round.

In most colleges, each professor chooses their own curriculum. Everyone likes to stake out their own territory to show that they are "original thinkers".

**JohnRoss** · 10-10-2012, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by fumblefingers

Berklee is not a "Jazz" school anymore. It is a "contemporary music" school...
a number of Leavitt's arrangements sound quite dated to say the least.

All credit to Berklee. Jazz is all very well, but not much of it deserves to be called 'contemporary.' And I'm going to point out (yet again, sorry for being a repetitive old bore) that the MM on its own is not a jazz method, and never was. Practically the only time the word 'jazz' is used in all three books is to put a name to the jazz melodic minor scale, and even then Leavitt prefers the term 'real' melodic minor. But the MM is nearly perfect for honing skills up to or close to a pro level, though it would probably benefit from losing most of those antiquated rhythms, mambos and whatnot, in favour of, precisely, more contemporary sounds.

(But considering the original theme of this thread, I really can't see Mel Bay as any more up to date.)

**sjl** · 10-23-2012, 06:13 AM

Leavitt method is superb but if you're not a teenager and you're into jazz I consider a waste of time to learn the songs in the book. For me the answer is to substitute these songs with standards using the fingerings sugested in the book.
Just do all the others exercises as writed.
Other solution is to make your own book.
Sight reading. Leavitt has good books on it or just take a song you like without tablature.
Picking etudes. The Modern method (Leavitt's) is great on this but any song is in fact a picking etude.
Chords.
- Freddie Green rhythm. Carlton Johnson book is great on this.
- Comping. Use Brett Willmott book and expand from there. Barry Harris method from Alan Kingstone's is superb as well.

Lines.
- Garrison Fewell jazz improvisation melodic approach.
- Ted Greene solo lines 1&2.

In order to complete a plan you have to be comitted to it but the plan has to keep your ilusion.

**Kojo27** · 10-23-2012, 06:51 AM

Originally Posted by sjl

Leavitt method is superb but if you're not a teenager and you're into jazz I consider a waste of time to learn the songs in the book.

I'm not a teenager, and I'm interested in improvisation if not jazz, and I think there are few better uses of one's time than to learn Leavitt's material, in order, with much review. The fruits of the man's vision won't be yours if you barge forth in a bustle of whims. The point is design. Spending your time substituting standards and trying to impose Leavitt's fingerings upon those -- this won't yield Leavitt's envisioned effect. Use the books as intended. My two cents.