-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
You have through the years it seems, tried to find ways of getting around the issue of hard time earned practice. That's fine. And you've been asked this question about learning songs over and over again and has been met with no answer, repeatedly. That's fine. It's just what it is.
-
05-31-2015 04:33 PM
-
I will also say this: you seem pretty intent on explaining how many here have a flawed way of thinking about learning, yet you don't give us a leak to see how effective your way actually is. You seem to be an expert.
-
Mr. B.--
Here you are saying that there is no "foolproof method" (which is a straw man), but on every other thread you preach "learn tunes".
You do have opinions about best practices, but you are complacent.
-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
goals of player
current skill/experience level of player.
context is important in music as much as any other field of study. Medicine, law, accounting, mixed martial arts.
make sense?
-
Henry--
There are people who have practiced much less than you, and achieved equal or better results. There is no need for regrets if you enjoyed the process and got the results you wanted. But your equals and superiors who practiced less have evidence of using a better method than you. It is not perfect evidence, but evidence nonetheless.
I don't see where answering the OP requires guesses or surmises, if you happen to know what some high efficiency learners did, or were a high efficiency learner yourself. I don't see how it could possibly be considered a silly question. It doesn't give us a perfect answer about how to practice, but it is more supportable than everyone just saying "Here is what I did". I have laid out my reasoning for looking at the methods that high efficiency learners have used. Perhaps you could lay out your argument for complacency.
The topic of this thread is specifically not about how I practice. It lays out a line of reasoning, and asks for input. If someone responds with a flawed argument, should it not be addressed? I mean, what does "some people like to practice a lot" have to do with "what is the most effective way to practice"? How many tunes I know, how I practice, my attitude, etc. have nothing to do with the OP. Next someone will ask me the color of my guitar.
It really is a straight forward question. Answer it or don't.
Really, I am kind of shocked by the contortions people go through to avoid actually engaging with the OP.Last edited by Jonzo; 05-31-2015 at 05:21 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
I preach learn tunes, because that's the point, isn't it?
Tunes aren't a method in and of themselves. But they ARE the point of playing--to make music.
-
Originally Posted by fumblefingers
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Learn tunes to learn tunes is pretty circular.
-
I think there's some really good stuff hidden in the OP. The brief statement you made about practicing a line 100 times being less effective than practicing it 10 then 10 then 10 then 10 ... etc ... Times is very interesting and something I've looked into a lot. As for a specific answer to a point in your OP, I would say that the "repetitions" method of practicing is misguided. I agree there. I've read various thing that seem to settle on 4 as a pretty good number for establishing muscle memory. I'll often practice something until it's perfect 4 times before changing it (something other than tempo). Transpose or play in a different position or something like that. Then go back and repeat the whole process with the tempo a bit higher. Sometimes I try it on a more macro level too. Like working on bop heads until I can feel auto pilot kick in before switching to something else, then again, then back to bop heads, etc. I'll also say that with that idea it's important for me to find the sweet spot where I'm not working on the exact same thing for hours but I have picked a small enough number of things to work on that at the end of the day they all got real attention. That's a fine line.
as for the broader answer to your question - I think maybe you've gotten it already. Id guess that maybe some really good people to check out would be prodigies. Not random hot young players or YouTube talents but someone like Julian Lage who was both a genuine prodigy at a very very young age and also has staying power to keep improving and evolving. I think the difference youd find is in Princeplanet's "focused listening." Musical families, constant subconscious exposure to music, the willingness and passion to move beyond that into real critical listening, early attempts to assimilate what they hear on recordings and live into their own playing in a direct way. Listening. Constant exposure to sounds.Last edited by pamosmusic; 05-31-2015 at 05:21 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
my advice is never just to learn tunes. I've posted my advice for beginners here a hundred times...chord building, 12 essential chords, arpeggios, ear training, etc, all learned in the context of tunes.
-
Suggest you research Chet Baker. OK not a guitarist, but by all accounts he hardly practised at all. I'm not sure what his methods were though. Just having a phenomenal ear and copying everything he heard, probably.
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
We can all float around in the sea of "everyone is different", and make no judgments on methods, or we can make our best efforts to identify best methods, both general and specific. Or we can be complacent.
-
Who are some examples of pros that practiced the least?
-
You have to practice a lot to learn jazz well, but yes, I do feel you can become competent at it in a timely manner if your approach is an organized one. This I've come to realize in the last 3 years since I've started practicing with more structure. To help with structure I advocate you write everything down in an organized binder.
There is certain things that you have to do whether you like it or not - things like ear training, music theory, and knowing your fretboard the same way you know how to walk or ride a bike. Tackle everything step by step - no skipping. As someone mention it's better to find a good teacher you enjoy listening to, when you want to generate ideas on how to do things more efficiently. Good luck.Last edited by smokinguit; 05-31-2015 at 05:38 PM.
-
Originally Posted by henryrobinett
Why do you assume there are no commonalities? On your website you say that you don't just teach jazz guitar; you teach people how to learn anything. So you must believe that certain practices and principles will apply to everyone. Or have I misunderstood you?
Do you really think there is no value to learning how the most high-efficiency learners have approached learning?Last edited by Jonzo; 05-31-2015 at 05:41 PM.
-
My experience has been regarding those who never appear to need to practice and yet play at a high level of ability two things seem to have occurred:
1) they started out very young. I mean like by the age of 6.
2) they "practiced" long hours in their youth.
When your language skills, including music develop at such a young age, as your body is also growing into your hands, arms it becomes a lethal combination. Everyone I personally know or knew who were great players and yet never practiced fell into those categories.
-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
Efficiency isn't so important.
-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
-
neuro plasticity
-
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Last edited by Jonzo; 05-31-2015 at 06:48 PM.
-
Originally Posted by JonzoOriginally Posted by Jonzo
In the end, if I get your OP right (I'm not entirely sure I'm on the right track on that), we all accumulate a complex toolkit that we need in order to become improvising musicians. I agree that there is no standard procedure to getting there, and the time it takes to get there is widely varied.
But Jonzo, I think the idea of "professional mastery" is a myth. If you ask some people, it's a distinction that anyone with airplay has. To others, it's the ability to play over a form without stumbling. To others, it's having your own sound. Still, for others, it's a personal moving target and only occasionally achieved in themselves though the majority of the music world considers them masters.
When you think of it, only you can know where the bar is set, and what that space beneath it consists of. You're going to run into ideological conflicts here until you define your own standards clearly. Personally, I don't see a smaller ratio of "practice" time to playing as being bad, if your time not playing drills is spent on the path to the development you have a clear picture of.
If you have a clear picture of where you need to be, see what needs to be done, commit to your constant growth, and keep an open mind to changing possibilites, then yes, your practice regimen MAY look erratic but only to outsiders. A better question may be: If your musical training deviates from the norm, has it served you well and why did you make the choices you did? It may be very revealing.
David
-
Originally Posted by Jonzo
so far, the more i play and practice the better i get. I'll be at it the rest of my life. To me, that's progress and the promise of future progress. I guess I don't think i can reasonably expect anything more than that.
-
Originally Posted by paulkogut
Jonzo - If if you're keen on posing this as a logic problem then I'll challenge the logic of one assumption you're making throughout this thread. You seem keen on equating "best" practices with "efficient" or "effective" practices. How do you know that those practices are the same? Is "best" way always the most efficient way? Id wager that it's not.
-
Emulating the players who practised the least could be a mistake. It could be that they had incredible gifts for rapid development that most of us do not possess. In which case you might be better off emulating the ones who practised the most. Their skill set may have initially been closer to yours and therefore their methods might be more appropriate. Just a thought.
I would tend to assume that I need to practise more like the 'heavy practisers' if I wanted to make a huge amount of progress.
Actually I doubt I have practised much more than an hour a day on average, if that. But then it took me probably 15 years to get anywhere good with it.
-
Id also wager that something that makes people learn more quickly is to have the ability to turn anything they do into a learning experience. It's not what they do but rather their ability to make it a part of them and to see it as a progression rather than a diversion.
Question about All of Me / Ella Fitzgerald version
Today, 01:31 PM in The Songs