-
Cheeky, Graham....
Good God, now I have to defend using Sibelius?? Hard to find musicians to play with at four in the morning in my house. I like to rehearse and transcriptions help me keep the lyrics straight.
In relation to the question posed by the original thread, I actually do believe that learning to use notation software technology is one of the most efficient and effective ways to improve your playing. Now remember this is coming from a guy that can barely croak his way through lyrics and has a hard time finding the notes on the guitar neck.....
Actually, raises an interesting question. How important are artistic standards to you? Do you mind presenting your performance in a very informal way or does your "perfectionist" streak influence your choice of media and conditions?
Perhaps one criteria of effectiveness and improvement efficiency as displayed on this thread would be proficiency with modern media like iPhones and having the money to buy a good camcorder, which sadly I lack. Probably why I can barely scrape through a few chords of Louis, Louis with a face sheet....
Good thing I'm humble, like Henry.
Last edited by targuit; 06-10-2015 at 09:56 AM.
-
06-10-2015 09:54 AM
-
True.
Originally Posted by pamosmusic
During the years that I worked in Los Angeles and Nashville, I knew some monster players who had a hard time keeping work because of reputations for being difficult.
I was once hired to replace a guitarist on a three month tour who was fired during the first week out and I drove from Nashville to Baltimore to rendezvous with the band to complete the tour. Another time with a different outfit on a tour of the East Coast, the bandleader put one of the guys on a bus back to Nashville because he "couldn't play well with others". On a month long trek through the Midwest, I worked with a female bassist who griped and complained for 30 days straight.
After awhile, I learned to ask who else was going on the tour. If someone was already hired that I knew was hard to work with, I'd pass on the job. If there was one or more openings yet to be filled I'd recommend players that I knew were good who were easy to get along with.
That's how it works.Last edited by monk; 06-10-2015 at 10:05 AM.
-
That is a good question. I (and most of the musicians I know) are pretty unhappy if something goes out that they didn't get veto on. Originally Posted by targuit
As far as it is in my power I try to keep up a limited number of good quality videos of gigs.
I think if you are higher profile plyer than I am, it can be hard. I mean every gig of Metheny seems to be out there, and a lot of the videos of local legends like Jim Mullen are surprisingly bad quality (video and audio wise, his playing always kills.)
For Metheny, it must be a pain to be know there's a video of a bad gig somewhere (not that we'd ever hear it like that haha) - I think he said so in an interview.
On the other hand, there are some videos of some players that I would be unhappy with being in the public sphere if I were them.
A whole new thing to worry about! ;-)Last edited by christianm77; 06-10-2015 at 10:08 AM.
-
No worries, Jay, I was just pulling your leg a bit there (as we say in the UK, probably means something dreadful in the USA!). I like doing things in Finale too, e.g. I recently learned (by ear) a tune by Peter Bernstein called 'Simple as That'. So I might type it up in Finale to have a good (and backed-up) copy of the lead sheet (I have not written it down so far). Otherwise I know I'll eventually forget it (or lose it if it's only on paper). Originally Posted by targuit
Cheeky, Graham....
Good God, now I have to defend using Sibelius?? Hard to find musicians to play with at four in the morning in my house. I like to rehearse and transcriptions help me keep the lyrics straight.
In relation to the question posed by the original thread, I actually do believe that learning to use notation software technology is one of the most efficient and effective ways to improve your playing. Now remember this is coming from a guy that can barely croak his way through lyrics and has a hard time finding the notes on the guitar neck.....
Actually, raises an interesting question. How important are artistic standards to you? Do you mind presenting your performance in a very informal way or does your "perfectionist" streak influence your choice of media and conditions?
Perhaps one criteria of effectiveness and improvement efficiency as displayed on this thread would be proficiency with modern media like iPhones and having the money to buy a good camcorder, which sadly I lack. Probably why I can barely scrape through a few chords of Louis, Louis with a face sheet....
Good thing I'm humble, like Henry.
I guess I was making the point that it's also cool to just knock out a video 'on the fly' like Jeff and Reg do - I like the spontaneity of that.
As far as presentation goes, I do like the sound to be clear and the picture quality to be good, but that's about it. I try to keep annoying junk and clutter out of the frame, but that's not really possible in the small spare room which I use.
-
I, probably more than anybody here, treat YouTube as a simple way of communicating via video. I put almost no thought into these vids--plug in, grab my phone, and illustrate a point instead of just typing about it. I'm not concerned with professional quality because I don't consider YouTube a professional medium.
If I ever made any good videos, (which I probably should, as well as record more audio only stuff with good quality) with a backdrop, pro sound, etc, I'd put them on YouTube--but also on my website.
I probably need to get with the times, but I still think handing somebody a business card with a youtube channel on it is unprofessional.
But you guys know how I work anyway, I'm small time/part time, mostly word of mouth, gig once or twice a month at most, I still have demo CD's! I'm not pretending this is my career...but I'll also give you a 100% professional performance if you hire me, in look and sound (and I show up early and don't drink on the job
)
-
And now you sing too! What's not to like? Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
But you guys know how I work anyway, I'm small time/part time, mostly word of mouth, gig once or twice a month at most, I still have demo CD's! I'm not pretending this is my career...but I'll also give you a 100% professional performance if you hire me, in look and sound (and I show up early and don't drink on the job)
-
I once read a biog. of Jaco (I think it's by Bill Milkowski?) Originally Posted by christianm77
It was depressing to read how such a talented guy ended up (literally) in the gutter.
A friend of mine met him once (he was taking photos for an interview, I think it was probably with Weather Report). He said Jaco appeared to be a complete nutcase.
-
I've always sang. I don't love my voice, but sometimes the ability to sing gets you the tip...or the gig in the first place Originally Posted by grahambop
-
Immediate family members are never forthcoming with compliments in my experience - as you say it's probably a healthy check to the ego. My wife once thought I had a CD playing, when it was me. Recently my daughter grudgingly said 'actually you are quite good at playing the guitar'. I think that's about it as far as compliments go. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
Originally Posted by christianm77
Pretty much the truth. I mean, if you're young and work on the simple things, time, fundamentals, etc, you'll gig with people your age and will get better at these things. But at the same time, that's kind of why I don't like a lot of young virtuosos or prodigies. They get good at the same thing they're doing, and the more they gig they have little time to practice new things, so they kind of keep the same sound/vibe, etc. I like it when someone isn't so busy that they can have time to chill out and focus on learning or exploring new things. I think I gig too little just because I like practicing so much, haha.
-
I haven't been keeping up with the thread in a while...so I'm totally not in touch with the latest as to what's been talked about these last few days.
But I just randomly saw this book on Amazon and couldn't help but think about the OP for this thread. Jonzo, and anyone else interested...you may want to check it out. I haven't read it, so I have no idea of its value. But Dave Liebman ain't no slouch. I think it's safe to assume he's a pro AND he can play his f'n @$$ off! Whether you like his aesthetic style or not...nobody can argue that he's lazy and does just enough to get by.
But he took the time to write a book that seems like it might answer some of your questions Jonzo. If you get it...I hope you'll post a little bit about what you took away from reading it.
http://www.amazon.com/David-Liebman-...4SJ9R3DBY2Q0ZG
-
Liebman is one of my favorites. I played with him once doing music of Coltrane. His recording on Elvin Jones Live at the Lighthouse with Steve Grossman provided a real map for me on modern, post Coltrane playing. I ear transcribed all the solos in that double album three or four times. ANYTHING he has to say about playing is worth stopping anything and listening.
-
That's an interesting phrase. What is post Coltrane playing? In other words, what are its characteristics?
generally speaking of course, not in deep dive terms.Last edited by fumblefingers; 06-11-2015 at 07:53 PM.
-
I wish I could tell you. I can only see and hear the patterns. Those guys applied pattern playing, best I can figure. Modal, chromatic.
-
The thing is, everybody has an answer about how to maximize your practice. That's why this thread is so long. Everyone is enamored of their own answer. Originally Posted by jordanklemons
That's why what I am actually asking is: who are the examples that accomplished a lot in a little time.Last edited by Jonzo; 06-12-2015 at 09:12 AM.
-
I wouldn't put it like that. I would say people have tried to be helpful and say what worked for them. Since that's all we know. Originally Posted by Jonzo
The thread runs forever because no-one knows the universal answer.
-
I think the question is flawed. It should have been "What are the exercices/practice habits that helped you the most". I was planning to make that thread, but the answers to my question are more or less here. There's simply no other way to put it. What are you waiting for, some jazz authority or god that will give the definite answer ? The only thing people can do is talk about their experiences and approaches.
-
WHO are the examples. Doesn't even make sense. As if anyone would know. I tried to say the question was flawed from the start. There IS no answer. What is the least? How is anyone even going to measure that? What great player even wanted to practice the least? Every great player fell in love with playing and PRACTICING the guitar. Originally Posted by Jonzo
Last edited by henryrobinett; 06-12-2015 at 10:49 AM. Reason: typhoon Betty
-
It's one thing for you to cite results from research into learning music but instead, you are asking us to DO the research for you. Originally Posted by Jonzo
And how might one?
Consider a different case of learning, a classroom of students learning fractions. Same teacher, same book, same problems to solve and the same explanation of how to solve them. Yet some students will learn this lesson faster than most, while most will learn it in a timely manner (-anywhere from a few minutes to a few days, but they will "get it" and be ready to move on), some may struggle for a week or more but finally get it, and some may never get it. But it is not clear that any different method is being used by the fast, average, and slow learners.
Your assumption is that the main determinant of time needed to learn something is the method used. You may assume this, of course, but many would find this assumption unwarranted. Think of children learning to crawl. The time taken to learn it varies but this does not mean different methods are being used to learn it. Or to stick with guitar: some students learn to make barre chords---or even an open C chord---faster than others but this doesn't mean they're using a different method.
-
Henry, you may be right that there are no examples. The one who came to mind for me was Wes, but then someone said that was a myth. There have been a few other names mentioned, but not elaborated on very much. I would like to hear more about them. Just because we haven't identified many people yet doesn't mean they don't exist. In most endeavors you find people distributed on a bell curve. We can assume that very efficient and very inefficient learners exist, and that most people fall in between. Exceptional people are by definition rare.
I realize the flaws with case study analysis as a scientific method that you state, Mark. It is difficult to tell if we are looking at efficiency or talent. But the perfect is the enemy of the good. It would be good to know who learned fast and how they did it, regardless of the flaws you point out. If all of those efficient players learned in very similar ways, it would be especially informative, though not conclusive.
The biggest problem is that efficient people probably don't spend time posting to forums. So no one is likely to come out of the woodwork here.Last edited by Jonzo; 06-12-2015 at 10:51 AM.
-
Good post. It's an impossible question. There are simply too many variables in an admittedly complex subject. Too many things to learn, too many styles, too many ways to articulate things. Then, there are the differences in students, themselves. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
Most clinical studies involve breaking things down into the most minute aspects of tasks, skills; into something which is actually measurable. Solving simple math problems under specific stress conditions involving 100's of subjects or some such. Economists are always looking for data that involves a group who is as consistent and equal-footed as possible. The narrower the focus and number of variables the better.
Now if you discount the Liebman's of the world while looking for something more efficient??? The idea of efficiency is to save time by not just thoughtlessly reinventing the wheel, and finding everything out on your own, mindlessly. Seems inefficient to discount great players' and teachers' advice. Again, for something as soft and unquantifiable as this question, that would seem to be your best bet.
Teachers and writers of books have a vested professional and financial interest in getting people playing better in the shortest amount of time. We teachers tend to geek out on this stuff at a level most people will never understand. Why not look at what the best teachers/players actually have to offer?Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 06-12-2015 at 10:51 AM.
-
No universal answer... not sure, might be more related to not really knowing the question.
I think its not that complicated... if you define the question with a few details.
The skills of playing the guitar are very physical... the detail is your hands. The fretboard is the same for any music, any style. You need to be able to play anything anywhere on the fretboard. (know all fingerings, and be able to create new ones as needed). At least that's where you start, as Christian said, eventually you'll find you niche and adjust as needed.
What to be able to play... becomes complicated because you don't know what your after.
When your able to read and understand music... those choices of what to play aren't that complicated.
At least when you create solid fundamentals... it's just music. The fundamentals aren't that complicated.
All the details about being in the groove, pocked... having the feel.... don't happen because of time on the instrument, they happen because you develop the skills to be able to have those qualities in your playing.
I know ton's of musicians who have lifetimes into their playing.... and they still don't have it together. Many have magical moments... but it's almost by chance. It's not repeatable on call.... like when you need it.
Jonzo... maybe your just not aware of what the answer could be and more enamored with the question.
-
Have you read my example about Mike Moreno on the first page? I have given you exactly what you wanted 17 pages and 2 weeks ago. What do you have to say about that? Everybody is enamoured of their own answer, but the one answer that was exactly what you asked, you disregard? Originally Posted by Jonzo
Also read jtizzle's response a couple of pages ago for the flip side.
Listen man that is about the best answer you are going to get and it was on the first page itself. This kind of information is not available/doesn't exist. What jtizzle said, will apply to any pro. You won't get some super "magic pill" routine. If you are looking for efficient, you are going to get something like : Pro X got his sound together in 15k hours, and pro Y in 20k. Pro X is clearly more efficient...but it still took him 15k hours.
To distill what most people have said :
1) Find your own way
2) Everything is useful
3) Transcribe and listen
4) Learn tunes preferably by ear
5) Play in jams
This is the answer man. This is what you need to do. I am nobody, but this is obviously the correct answer if every single pro and experienced amateur concurs on this. Go see any interview on youtube, go read practically any thread here. Do with it what you will, take it with as many grains of salt as you wish, but this is it. It shouldn't take 500 posts to figure this out. All the best.
Edit : To be honest, I have realised that I needed to read this post as much as I think you do.Last edited by pushkar000; 06-12-2015 at 01:10 PM.
-
Anything after Coltrane haha:-) Originally Posted by fumblefingers
I suppose the question is what did Trane bring in? I would say an important aspect is actually his sound. If you listen to Dexter or Sonny Rollins and compare to Trane, I can hear where people like Brecker come in right away. Trane sound to my ears is more urgent, more cutting (without being harsh or thin.)
The vocabulary Trane brought it is the main thing to most people. Really we are all post Coltrane players, because much of what gets discussed here comes from him - improvising on modes, using tetrachords to spell out changes, use of major third (Giant Steps) relations for chord substitutes and composition, use of non functional harmony, heavy use of unusual scales such as the half-whole on dominant chords, extended sounds on the sax such as multiphonics and so on.
Coltrane was a highly intellectually curious man. Bio's talk about him practicing from harp and piano manuals, exploring 12 tone technique and many other classical influences as well as the music of India and of course Africa. As a result, his playing has tremendous 'quantifiable content' - which makes it a popular model (like Bird's) for students. As such, he is a godsend to jazz syllabuses everywhere.
This is I guess middle period Coltrane - late Coltrane is less influential to the mainstream contemporary jazz (perhaps because aside from playing less accessible, more free music, he abandoned things that were easy to quantify and teach.)
While Trane doesn't have a monopoly on any of these things, his playing brought all of this together in a way that made a serious artistic statement. The post Coltrane players generally take the vocabulary of his middle period (Love Supreme etc) and use it as the basis of their approach. In fact Trane has become so much the dominant model for tenor players that it is notable when a tenor player chooses to do something else - at least on this side of the pond.
So - Wayne Shorter, Joe Henderson, Mike Brecker, Dave Leibman, Joe Lovano, Chris Potter even later Dexter Gordon - all have the unmistakeable imprint of Trane's playing. Oh and Kenny Garrett, of course.
I would say he is a massive influence on Kurt Rosenwinkel. Kurt sounds to me like a Coltrane influenced Tenor player on guitar...Last edited by christianm77; 06-12-2015 at 11:36 AM.
-
If the vibe is good what's the problem if it doesn't change? I think it's good to have the same vibe, it gives you character. Originally Posted by jtizzle
When I listen to my old playing it is recognisably me. It's my sound.
In a way I am disappointed in this - I'd like to sound different. But then I think, well that's my sound that's how I hear it. If I can apply this consistently and creatively to everything I play (a very big if, by the way) then I have a style.
Even though I don't play all the same licks as I did 10 years ago (I've learned loads of new material) the basic sound of my playing is as it has always been. It's everything else - the real world skills and the consistency in the quality of my playing - that have improved (or at least I hope haha!)
Reply With Quote
Roman Dodecahedron (12 sided) die discovered,...
Today, 11:16 AM in Everything Else