-
I've had that happen too. And also this: I'll want to play a tune I haven't played in awhile and forget how it starts, or pause before going to the bridge because I don't know what comes next, but then, it all comes back and I play through the rest without thinking about it.
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I think there's a point in learning where we have to think about what we're doing (-it took me a long time to play the "ATTYA" changes in time from memory) and then a time when we can play without thinking and a time where if we start thinking, we're actually screwed rather than helped!
It's almost like not knowing how a song starts lyrically but when it comes on the radio, you sing it from the beginning without thought because you just know it. But when the music wasn't playing, you couldn't think of it.
The brain is a funny animal.
-
09-23-2014 10:21 AM
-
My old jazz "mentor" had a thing he was adamant about...drove me crazy, but it worked...He'd start a tune from anywhere and make sure he could get through the whole form...it's a great exercise, but it's HARD. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
I need to go back and do it more often...i find that's one of the sure signs I really know a tune.
-
I'm 77...ere what was the question?.....L... Originally Posted by docbop
-
Wow, that does sound hard. but it also sounds like it would be a great exercise. I'd never heard of that one. Thanks for mentioning it. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Jonzo has spoken we can all go home now. Originally Posted by Jonzo
-
I am surprised you say this. Cramming is a pretty universally discredited technique. Originally Posted by Reg
Can you elaborate?
-
I can try...
The basic concept is... after 30 min. of sight reading... or whatever, you reach or achieve a level of proficiency. So that's your new standard... the best you can realistically count on when performing or playing. So the next day you do the same routine, you get a little further... maybe. usually something else gets in the way or comes along. So a week later, maybe you get in four or five hours of working on whatever you choose. Generally what I've seen over the years... not that much improvement unless it's something that the student or whom ever... really digs or is very enthusiastic about. And generally to keep this up for six month to a year, just doesn't happen.
Where as... when someone puts in six straight concentrated hours working on something, they reach levels of proficiency that most just don't ever achieve. Light bulbs go on, your ears and vision become clear. Your able to comprehend much higher levels of performance or understanding that you just don't achieve with the long slow approach.
Granted generally teachers don't like this approach, less teacher time is required and you may skip some details. But again personally I've found filling details is much easier to do than reach higher levels with respect to guitar skills and understanding.
I don't believe many are ever going to get the chance to gig enough to be performing three to eight hours a day for months on end... put in enough time to raise the level of your performance to the point where it's very easy to read or play tunes, or music you don't know, and get it right the first time... and do this easily. These skills come from having performed or practiced at the levels required to cover the music. The slow approach generally just doesn't get you there.
Cramming gets shit done...
Sorry Jonzo.. this is not the point, I just really dig saying that...Cramming gets shit done.
Reg
-
I don't know anyone who performs at a high level that didn't go through a period of time where they were "cramming" at an extreme pace, either to learn songs, or solos, or whatever.
I work full-time, so the cramming thing doesn't really work that well for me just because I can't figure out where to put a 4+ hour block. I have a pretty methodical practice schedule.
To me, I think there is practicing to learn skills, and practicing to be able to perform. I think the former really benefits from the 15-30 min block kind of system. Learning to hear a particular chord progression, or executing a lick, or singing a particular harmony. That stuff works great.
It's when I get to the part where someone says, "Learn these 10 tunes for next week," that I have to just forget all the "science of learning" stuff and just sit down and devour the tunes.
-
There is no muse like a deadline.
Reg--I will say what I think you are saying. Long sessions force you to go deeper. Short sessions allow you to skim along on the surface.
I have never done the kind of lengthy sessions you are talking about, so I can't compare. But I do try to structure my short sessions to take me deeper and deeper.
-
Hey Jonzo, that's close enough for me. Deeper??? I guess deeper in respect to becoming comfortable with more proficient levels of technical abilities for whatever your working on.
(***I'm skipping the basic technical aspects, I'm talking from the understanding that the player already has a mechanical system of playing the guitar... you already have fingering systems in place, and other technical skill required to perform.)
Using sight reading as an example... after a few hours, you actually begin to start recognizing rhythmic and melodic patterns. You somewhat relax and begin to be able to look ahead, you get ahead of the moment.
This is easy with say a head, because you begin to memorize the melody and the technical aspects of performing the melody. You become able to look ahead, from recognizing shorter phrases. Personally this is the same with sight reading in general... you become comfortable because you recognize rhythmic and melodic aspects of whatever your sight reading and are able to get ahead, the first time.
With long periods of practice your able to comprehend and recognize longer and more complicated rhythmic and melodic patterns. You reach much higher or more proficient levels of performance.
You can generally only play at performance levels... that you've already reached before. Longer sessions let you achieve higher levels of performance. Even if those levels aren't perfect, at least you'll have a reference to draw from.
The same concept basically applies with any technical aspect of playing... scales, arpeggios, comping etc...
Personally there is a big difference between having to warmup or modify existing skills and knowledge as compared to actually acquiring those skills and knowledge. (guitar performance).
These are just personal views, I'm sure any system works. I'm just from the understanding as compared to beat it into the ground memorization system or approach.
-
That makes sense to me. I had to learn it the hard way----expecting to go from a tortoise pace of getting something down to the rabbit pace of flying without covering the ground in between. The results can be embarrassing. Originally Posted by Reg
-
I don't have those kind of blocks either. There's just no getting around it at this point in my life. I've never been about practicing a little bit of everything, every time I practice. I'm sort of a crammer, but in a different sense. I really just work one or two things at a time and nearly always based around a tune. I sort of just pick up where I left off the last time as if I never left it. That's just the way my mind works. If you've got limited time, limit the scope. Of course, in terms of jazz, I'm really a hobbyist and only play for myself. Originally Posted by ecj
Too stinkin' busy at this point. I think that if you're really busy, it's probably really important to think about "what to practice" a lot while away from the instrument, so that when you actually have a minute to pick it up, you can make it count.
-
I try to do a routine that is about 1:30 hours chopped up into 15 min blocks, then another 45 mins to an hour of what you're talking about where I'm working on/rehearsing tunes. I feel like the blocks are mostly about muscle maintenance (voice and hands) and then small expansions of hearing ability and new licks. It's hard to figure out. Wish I had hours like I did in college, but what're you gonna do. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
-
I think this is a very wise and profound post -- and troubling for those of us who work a full-time, "regular" job. For me music is a hobby. I've thought about this a lot -- to get really good at anything ... Originally Posted by Reg
computer work, carpentry, engineering, accounting, athletics (at pro level) -- you have to treat it as a profession and do it full-time for awhile. And this is certainly true of jazz music. All the greats went through a period where they were practicing 6-8 hours a day, or being paid to play for that long.
The best I can do in that direction is the occasional weekend day where I really dig into something. Havent done it yet ... just sayin'.
BTW there's cramming and then there's cramming. The bad cramming is, "I didn't study all semester, and the midterm is tomorrow, so time for an all-nighter". And the good cramming is when you just get consumed by what you're practicing and keep going.
-
It depends on the length of the material. If it's a short lick, under 10 times. If it's a song, anywhere from a dozen times to hundreds of times. When working out solo pieces I've found that no matter how many times I practice some of them I still hit clams. And if I haven't played the pieces in a while I have to "relearn" parts of them. Long term memory can be so fickle!
-
I re-read a Joe Pass interview the other day in which he said when he was a kid, he would play for two hours before school every day, two hours after, and then four hours in the evening. That's eight hours a day. And he was (I think) 11 at the time. That's a phenomenal amount of playing on a daily basis. Originally Posted by JazzinNY
Last edited by MarkRhodes; 09-27-2014 at 09:13 AM. Reason: grammar
-
IMO, if we look at it as a constant process of learning, there are 4 sets of elements to combine:
1. menthal and physical
2. Concepts and particulars
3. dicovering, memorizing, reharsing
4. Practicing (on varios levels of performance)
I can pick 1 element from from any number of above groups in any order and see where it takes me.
-
I think it's worth mentioning that one answer to this is, "It depends."
Frustrating answer, I know, but think about it.
Some lines are easier to learn than others. Some are easier in themselves---say, the melody of "Summertime" as compared with the melody of "Donna Lee"---and some are easier for a particular player because they're like other lines he already knows.
Some lines are hard because they require a bit of technique (-say, pinky slides, consecutive upstrokes on arpeggios that cross 3 or 4 strings, or consecutive downstrokes when you're not used to that), so until you get the technique down, those lines will frustrate you. (<<<I know this from bitter experience.)
Any new line you learn will call upon some previous learning (-which should make it easier) or challenge you to learn / do something that is new to you. That will take longer. But the next time you tackle a line that calls for the same knowledge / technique, it should come a little easier.
-
When he was a kid Metheny's parents were apparently worried about his practice schedule. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
And Jim Hall referred to Metheny's work ethic as "ferocious".
-
The frustrating thing I have found from my own experience with the guitar is that your skills develop in a very specific way. By this I mean you seem to get better at what you practice and ONLY what you practice. If you practice a particular lick/song you get better at that lick or song but this does not usually translate to a different lick, phrase or song. Frustrating!
You also must continuously practice those specific skills or you will forget them.
This being the case, you must carefully choose what you are going to remember or develop skill at. Learning 10,000 phrases/songs will not be efficient. You will not be able to practice them often enough to remember them.
This leads to "repertoire". Choose your limited repertoire of skills, songs, etc. and practice them often.
Those with limited time to practice must be even more careful to limit their repertoire.
My opinion of course.Last edited by Drumbler; 10-04-2014 at 08:55 AM.
-
Interesting post. I hadn't thought about it this way before. It seems to me I can play some things well that I haven't played in a long time, but I might be kidding myself.... Originally Posted by Drumbler
-
Not really the case, generally; playing and practicing are accumulative; every scale session improves your arpeggios, every arpeggio session your chords, etc. Songs are easier to learn if the lyrics are learned as well, and easier to remember. If you look at 20 songs, you will see a dozen or so chord patterns that are common to most standards, and once you begin to "hear" them, you will recognize them in other songs you are listening to. Pick out your weak spots and work ferociously on them, your strong spots will only improve, even if you don't focus on them. Originally Posted by Drumbler
-
Unfortunately I suffer from CRS disease: "Can't Remember S**t". Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
I first heard that term when I was a seminarian doing a pastoral year in a parish. Every Monday morning I went to a local hospital to visit the sick. I go in one room and a guy is sitting on the edge of his bed. I didn't know what his situation was but he was in the mood to chat. He told me he had "CRS" and my mental Rolodex started running through medical acronyms---DNR, MVC, EKG, MRI---and I couldn't place the term, so I said, "I don't know what that is." He said, "Stands for 'Can't Remember S**t." Cracked me up, though I didn't laugh (much) in front of him. Never will forget that. Originally Posted by Drumbler
Unfortunately I suffer from CRS disease: "Can't Remember S**t".
Reply With Quote
Autumn Leaves (Fingerstyle Chord Melody)
Yesterday, 11:56 PM in Improvisation