How to better hear the flaws in your own playing?

[christianm77]

Thanks Christian,

I know you're an educator.

One of the things that's curious to me is how you don't just naturally pick up the time from years and years of jamming to Jimi Hendrix, Oasis, Sheryl Crow, Guns and Roses, whatever. Spending hours jamming to blues backing tracks.

Obviously, timing out rock solos with all of the chicken scratch tabs etc... is kind of impossible, you just have to feel it.

Is that part of the problem? Are the subdivisions different in rock?

No, I think it’s more that rock is forgiving of a floating time feel when it comes to soloing. Even a great rhythm guitarist like EVH can be quite loose and floating when soloing. It’s kind of his style... also rock players might not be terribly interested in using rhythm as a resource for soloing. Their phrasing might be regular on the beat and so on, and the interest comes from other aspects.

That said there are some great rock players who do use subdivisions and groove in their soloing. Jimi of course would be an example.

i just don’t think budding rock musicians notice it as much?

In jazz when you play everything you play is a rhythm that has to swing and communicate to the other band members. There is a place for sheets of sound etc but that’s advanced stuff... at a basic level you need to be able to lock in eighth note lines.

OTOH picking up anything by just jamming ... doesn’t always happen. You need to sensitise yourself sometimes to certain rhythmic things that you might be getting subtly wrong. That music isn’t really dance music so it’s a little more forgiving.

You have to learn what drummers learn... and of course if you choose to go back into rock with this knowledge it will give you a different vibe even you just play the pentatonic scale... a big part of what makes Larry Carlton or Robben Ford sound jazzy and hip compared to other blues and rock players is the way they phrase, for instance. The way they use 16th syncopations and so on.

playing with funk and R&B records would be better training perhaps. Jimi is getting into that, especially band of gypsies. But Jimi learned by getting his butt kicked in James Browns band. There’s no replacement for that sort of thing!

[CarlD]

......

playing with funk and R&B records would be better training perhaps. Jimi is getting into that, especially band of gypsies. But Jimi learned by getting his butt kicked in James Browns band. There’s no replacement for that sort of thing!

I'm pretty sure Jimi didn't play in James Brown's band. He did play with Little Richard, but I don't think he played with JB.

[christianm77]

I'm pretty sure Jimi didn't play in James Brown's band. He did play with Little Richard, but I don't think he played with JB.

Aha - interesting. I think you are right.

I have such a strong memory of reading about this that I had to check it out, I can't find a reliable source for this... I think this must be:

M A N D E L A E F F E C T

Because obviously it is UNPOSSIBLE I could be mistaken. They changed something in the Matrix! (The ME is just about my favourite example of internet stupidness BTW)

So I think this might be an example of a myth that gets reported as fact, similar to the belief quite common in the 60s that JH. It seems that James Brown saw Jimi peform with Little Richard, and that gets conflated with the idea that he performed with Brown.

Which of course doesn't mean that it doesn't get written up by credulous or under researched biographers as fact...

Jazz is also full of stories like this of course.

Anyway what is not in doubt is that Hendrix had an apprenticeship playing professional gigs with R&B acts like the Isley Brothers, as well as RIchard.

[CarlD]

.....

Anyway what is not in doubt is that Hendrix had an apprenticeship playing professional gigs with R&B acts like the Isley Brothers, as well as RIchard.

LOL indeed .. also that Jimi had immaculate time.

This is a great thread. I spent all morning working with The Clicking Monster. I played for years just playing along with it, not really focusing intently enough playing WITH it.

I think one of the biggest differences with rock and jazz, from a "time" perspective is simply how much more explicitly rock rhythm sections play time. It's kinda easy to "wander" as a (lead) guitar player in a rock setting because the meter underneath it all is so pronounced, all the time (unless a drummer plays a fill, LOL). In jazz the time can be a little more implied and abstract ... so as a player in that setting you really have to have a much stronger feel for the time yourself.

[emanresu]

Some time ago I figured out a neat way to practice with the help of Reaper DAW.
I put Cockos's own delay on the track. Set it so it would have a long delay - 8 bars. So when I play some comping first 8 bars, then the comping would play back and I play a solo. Then the solo gets played by the delay and I comp again.
Now, this is not possible without using the local metronome - there is no human person alive that could keep the exact time for 8 bars.
So far, I've had the illusion of my timing being alright when freshening it up and getting back to shape. But with this exercise - hell no!
When I was drifting even slightly, the next 8 bars would get worse.. and the next even worse.

So, to the OP. Try this, then you get the idea how much your timing needs to be improved to be ideal. Dunno if this is the best way to practice but at least you get the idea about how long you can keep a good steady time. 2 bars? 4? What happens with your timing when you do something.. "interesting"? Its easy to test yourself like that.

[rpjazzguitar]

Some time ago I figured out a neat way to practice with the help of Reaper DAW.
I put Cockos's own delay on the track. Set it so it would have a long delay - 8 bars. So when I play some comping first 8 bars, then the comping would play back and I play a solo. Then the solo gets played by the delay and I comp again.
Now, this is not possible without using the local metronome - there is no human person alive that could keep the exact time for 8 bars.
So far, I've had the illusion of my timing being alright when freshening it up and getting back to shape. But with this exercise - hell no!
When I was drifting even slightly, the next 8 bars would get worse.. and the next even worse.

So, to the OP. Try this, then you get the idea how much your timing needs to be improved to be ideal. Dunno if this is the best way to practice but at least you get the idea about how long you can keep a good steady time. 2 bars? 4? What happens with your timing when you do something.. "interesting"? Its easy to test yourself like that.

A kb playing friend uses his DAW this way. In addition, he slows down playback to make the errors really obvious. And, he is a working pro player.

[fep]

I've never done the following, but I've done some things that are similar.

Load an Aebersold track into Reaper.

Then, record yourself comping with it. Listen back and critique your groove.

I think there may be some with guitar comping, in which case you can compare yourself to the recording, if there's a way to drop the recorded guitar out.

This made me think of a book I have on my shelf... Maiden Voyage Guitar Voicings by Jamey Aebersold. It has the comping for 15 jazz standards with the guitar isolated on one side so it's easy to turn off the guitar comping on the track.

You could load the tracks from the CD into Reaper, then explode the stereo track to two mono tracks (just a couple clicks in Reaper). Put both tracks down the center, toggle mute/unmute the guitar track... At that point it would be a great setup to compare your own comping/rhythm to that of the pro guitarist. You could do it first by ear and if you wanted you could actually see it also, see how you are lining up with the pro guitarist.

[Marinero]

There is a distinct advantage to study music formally. You learn the foundations of Music and good practice habits which helps you progress more quickly. One of the first purchases for a beginning student is a metronome. My Mini Taktell(German made mechanical movement--tick tock tick tock) is over 50 years old. I do own a digital that I bought over 25 years ago. They are indispensable to serious growth however, in my opinion, they should not be considered as anything other than a valuable practice tool--you don't get inherent rhythm //timing from a metronome . . . it is instinctive in some and is developed over a lifetime of playing for others.
How to hear the flaws in your playing?: record it. Good playing . . . Marinero

[rpjazzguitar]

There is a distinct advantage to study music formally. You learn the foundations of Music and good practice habits which helps you progress more quickly. One of the first purchases for a beginning student is a metronome. My Mini Taktell(German made mechanical movement--tick tock tick tock) is over 50 years old. I do own a digital that I bought over 25 years ago. They are indispensable to serious growth however, in my opinion, they should not be considered as anything other than a valuable practice tool--you don't get inherent rhythm //timing from a metronome . . . it is instinctive in some and is developed over a lifetime of playing for others.
How to hear the flaws in your playing?: record it. Good playing . . . Marinero

Formal study and recording are both excellent ideas.

One gift a teacher can give is to point out exactly what you need to improve. Even some teachers don't do that. It can be hard to accept the feedback, but if you can handle it, you can improve.

Recording jam sessions and gigs is also a great idea. The idea is to listen critically to your time. When I listen back, I often find cringeworthy material in my playing that I was blissfully unaware of when I played it. This seems to be long slow work to improve, but I can't see how to do it at all without the benefit of the recordings.

[mr. beaumont]

For time, simply count a solo off, record, then play back and tap your foot.

For any other issues, play a tele on the bridge pickup clean with no reverb. You'll hear EVERYTHING.

[Marinero]

For time, simply count a solo off, record, then play back and tap your foot.

For any other issues, play a tele on the bridge pickup clean with no reverb. You'll hear EVERYTHING.

Hi, MB,
Reverb can hide/disguise many flaws in a musician's sound. When one plays an acoustic, unamplified guitar, he/she learns quickly not only the "nature" of the specific instrument but, also, how it readily exposes inherent problems in technique, attack, dynamics, etc. that are not as apparent in an electric guitar. And, that is why I am not a big fan of excessive reverb. On a personal note, I've recently returned to my '66 Gibson ES125 after playing Classical guitars for the last 28 years and I'm re-discovering that there is a fine line between allowing the instrument to speak naturally with amplification versus total electronic manipulation. And, there is also a major difference in technique required for these two very different instruments(acoustic/electric) where exploring the various colors of an acoustic instrument are created by developing ,organically, the tonal possibilities created by sound technique whereas, an electric instrument's sound can be created by as little effort as volume/tone controls on the guitar and the assortment of adjustments on the amplifier. Good playing . . . Marinero

[rpjazzguitar]

A related issue which I don't recall seeing discussed directly is this ...

I have repeatedly had the experience of playing something which I thought was fine and then, later, when I listen to the recording, it might be cringe-worthy.

So, the issue would seem to be improving my awareness of how I'm fitting into the ensemble.

I have heard some very high level players talk about the same experience -- when they were trying to play in a style they weren't accustomed to.

I have heard one band leader talk about trying to get a certain sound out of his sidemen when "they don't know what they don't know".

The best strategy I've been able to come up with is 1) playing with the best players I can get to play with me and 2) recording everything and critiqueing it.

This strategy has probably produced some improvement, but the pace feels glacial.

Thoughts?

[Litterick]

Maybe they are not flaws; maybe they are idiosyncrasies.

[christianm77]

Here's another point - live performance is not like recording. What the audience needs from you is vastly different in both cases.

I actually think, in the end, it's not actually that great an idea to record too many live performances. Here's the case against:

These days, its an occupational hazard for well known performers due to smartphones and YouTube. Some, such as Metheny, have been outspoken against it.

The reason? Realising you are being recorded changes the way you approach music. You will be more careful, more exact. You will start to play live as if you were laying down tracks.

Ask any pro musican. The two things are COMPLETELY different.

Also there's a risk you may start taking over mindsets and attitudes that are appropriate in the practice room onto the stage. Practicing on stage is the biggest sin as far as I'm concerned.

So, as a sometime inveterate recorder of myself, I seldom do this any more. I don't actually think it helps. If you want to make a recording or record your practice to critique it, great. In performance, be a performer. Try to exercise control where it is appropriate, and let the bandstand be the bandstand.

I'm recording a lot a the moment, obviously, it's great for detail work. But sometimes you can forget the bigger picture.

[christianm77]

Maybe they are not flaws; maybe they are idiosyncrasies.

Sco said he stopped listening to recordings of his gigs when he realised he couldn't tell if they were any good or not.

[fep]

I'm recording a lot a the moment, obviously, it's great for detail work. But sometimes you can forget the bigger picture.

But for me, recording is the bigger picture.

[christianm77]

But for me, recording is the bigger picture.

Well, it can be... Obviously - 'Physical Graffiti' or 'Bitches Brew' is a big picture. But the recording and so on here is towards an artistic goal.

Recording in practice session is often looking to carefully examine specific parameters of your playing. This could be 'big picture' stuff, but in terms, of, for instance, getting a single part or piece right, you are often critiquing details, and the more you do it, the more exacting you become.

At least that's been my experience.

[Marinero]

"I have repeatedly had the experience of playing something which I thought was fine and then, later, when I listen to the recording, it might be cringe-worthy.' RP


Hi, RP,
This, for me, is a trademark of a good/great musician. And, for me, it is simply that we become so focused in our playing and, perhaps, lost in the feeling/emotion of the moment that we hear things differently than, perhaps, they really are in reality. However, we can never really play at our best if we are always concentrating on the black dots and the wood in our hands. We must become one with the music, our instrument and our unique voice--only then, will we make music. Everything else is just good Math. Good playing . . . Marinero

[rpjazzguitar]

Here's another point - live performance is not like recording. What the audience needs from you is vastly different in both cases.

I actually think, in the end, it's not actually that great an idea to record too many live performances. Here's the case against:

These days, its an occupational hazard for well known performers due to smartphones and YouTube. Some, such as Metheny, have been outspoken against it.

The reason? Realising you are being recorded changes the way you approach music. You will be more careful, more exact. You will start to play live as if you were laying down tracks.

Ask any pro musican. The two things are COMPLETELY different.

Also there's a risk you may start taking over mindsets and attitudes that are appropriate in the practice room onto the stage. Practicing on stage is the biggest sin as far as I'm concerned.

So, as a sometime inveterate recorder of myself, I seldom do this any more. I don't actually think it helps. If you want to make a recording or record your practice to critique it, great. In performance, be a performer. Try to exercise control where it is appropriate, and let the bandstand be the bandstand.

I'm recording a lot a the moment, obviously, it's great for detail work. But sometimes you can forget the bigger picture.

I'm not sure if you're describing a situation in which the recording is made public vs one for your own private assessment/critique.

I've recorded a lot for my own review. I turn the recorder on before the group starts playing and I turn it off when we're done for the evening. I know people who turn the recorder off between tunes, but I find that makes it hard to simply forget about the recorder and play. I find it irritating. Also, it's easy enough to trim or divide the recording later anyway. I can't recall ever changing what I play because I'm worried about the recording, although I'm sure there are times when it would have been better if I had done so.

I'm convinced that recording has been a help, not a hindrance, but it's music, so there are a lot of different paths up the mountain.

[DB's Jazz Guitar Blog]

For beginners and student level players it is probably best to seek a good player/educator to assess one's own playing. Personally even alone "educator" won't do it for me. I would want a guy that can actually play well and has credentials.

From a low skill set perspective, the real understanding of what to work on requires an outside source judging from a higher knowledge or skill level. Why? Because you cannot miss in your own playing what you do not know. You cannot find flaws that you are not aware of yourself.

A student of the jazz language may not speak that language yet. You need feedback and feed forward from somebody that does.

Later, once you have advanced, your self assessment becomes much more reliable. Ironically the self doubt will set in more too.

People of low skill typically think they perform better than they really do. And people of a more advanced skill set tend to doubt themselves more than those of a low skill set. That is the Dunning Kruger effect. Check it out. Click here.

In the field of psychology, the Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which people with low ability at a task overestimate their ability. It is related to the cognitive bias of illusory superiority and comes from the inability of people to recognize their lack of ability. Without the self-awareness of metacognition, people cannot objectively evaluate their competence or incompetence.[1]
As described by social psychologists David Dunning and Justin Kruger, the bias results from an internal illusion in people of low ability and from an external misperception in people of high ability; that is, "the miscalibration of the incompetent stems from an error about the self, whereas the miscalibration of the highly competent stems from an error about others."[1]

Science is pretty clear about the issue.

Just my 2 cents.

DB

[Marinero]

"People of low skill typically think they perform better than they really do. And people of a more advanced skill set tend to doubt themselves more than those of a low skill set. That is the Dunning Kruger effect. Check it out. Click here." DB



Hi, D,
You are receiving Marinero's "Brilliant Quote of the Day" award. However, don't expect any remuneration. Good playing . . . Marinero

[christianm77]

I'm not sure if you're describing a situation in which the recording is made public vs one for your own private assessment/critique.

I've recorded a lot for my own review. I turn the recorder on before the group starts playing and I turn it off when we're done for the evening. I know people who turn the recorder off between tunes, but I find that makes it hard to simply forget about the recorder and play. I find it irritating. Also, it's easy enough to trim or divide the recording later anyway. I can't recall ever changing what I play because I'm worried about the recording, although I'm sure there are times when it would have been better if I had done so.

I'm convinced that recording has been a help, not a hindrance, but it's music, so there are a lot of different paths up the mountain.

Try switching it on for some gigs and off for others and see if it affects the way you play the gig subjectively.

[christianm77]

For beginners and student level players it is probably best to seek a good player/educator to assess one's own playing. Personally even alone "educator" won't do it for me. I would want a guy that can actually play well and has credentials.

From a low skill set perspective, the real understanding of what to work on requires an outside source judging from a higher knowledge or skill level. Why? Because you cannot miss in your own playing what you do not know. You cannot find flaws that you are not aware of yourself.

A student of the jazz language may not speak that language yet. You need feedback and feed forward from somebody that does.

Later, once you have advanced, your self assessment becomes much more reliable. Ironically the self doubt will set in more too.

People of low skill typically think they perform better than they really do. And people of a more advanced skill set tend to doubt themselves more than those of a low skill set. That is the Dunning Kruger effect. Check it out. Click here.



Science is pretty clear about the issue.

Just my 2 cents.

DB

I agree with this. I think it’s very hard to know what to listen for. I certainly got a shock when I went to my first proper jazz guitar lesson after mucking around at jams for a few years - the stuff that they brought up wasn’t anything I’d really considered before.

I also think you have to form an amicable relationship with self doubt. Self doubt will drive you to improve and work on things, but you also have to keep it close to your chest.

(Sometimes it is incredibly difficult not to apologise for your playing. Resist that temptation.)

[DB's Jazz Guitar Blog]

I also think you have to form an amicable relationship with self doubt. Self doubt will drive you to improve and work on things, but you also have to keep it close to your chest.

Dunning Kruger is a weird thing. Beginners or unskilled players think they sound pretty great often and advancing players are full of self doubt.

Here is the competence/confidence relationship visualised.

[christianm77]

The chart you showed... I think it's more complicated. Like I honestly get the impression Holdsworth thought he played badly most nights (from what I hear) but he must have known OTOH guitarists flocked to hear him play. So I'm not sure he ever thought 'I'm pretty good but I know my limitations' - it was much more complex than that. He must have known he was a legendary figure, even if it may have baffled him.

Most good musicians strike up a working relationship with their natural perfectionism and the needs of their profession.

One thing that is easy to underestimate is preparation and the quality of preparation of music. If I had to identify one issue among the many reams of problems I have with my own playing, it would be that. You have to get on top of music to play it at all well... that's why the 1000 tunes is a useful milestone; you'll have seen most of it....

It's always a sobering thing when you turn up to the gig and everyone knows your tunes better than you do.

More than anything else proper day in day out Professional musicians are MACHINES for learning and/or reading music. They are incredibly good at it. They pay it no thought, because it's what they do day in day out, and every time they slip up it's like a huge deal for them. The audience won't even notice. 'Oh no I played that note a millisecond early.'

So I've been exercising the muscle of learning music and recording it. Which makes me a total perfectionist who hates their own playing, but I'm OK with that. It's fine, I actually think it's really healthy. I'll put the music there anyway, and maybe some people will like it because they are not me. I can let go of it enough to do that.