Best way to work through books?

[diode]

In the past I’ve always been bogged down by jazz/music books and sought total understanding/memorization of the material. As a result I rarely finished the books or even progressed very far, not wanting to move on from the first few pages or chapters.

Lately I’ve been trying to just move quickly through a given book and return to concepts over time. I’ve found this to be a lot more helpful.

How do you use books?

[AllanAllen]

I set a timer and make myself focus for 5-10 minutes. Learning from books is not my favorite way to practice. Essential, but I have to make myself.

[Tal_175]

The best way I think is to pick one small idea and close the book. Don't open it again until you've fully integrated that idea into how you play tunes.
It's a hard thing to do from self discipline point of view but if you don't work this way with a book, you're probably wasting your time.

[TheGrandWazoo]

I have found that taking one single idea and then spending several days on it (even if its just 20mins) allows me to internalize it and remember it better.

This phrase/mantra has been very beneficial to me:
Live like you're gonna die tomorrow
Learn like you're going to live forever

[jameslovestal]

I agree with the comments above about focusing on a specific topic\idea. Many books have a chapter per each topic\idea.

Take as much time as one need to complete that chapter. Then decide if, based on where one is at, one should go to another chapter.

That "another chapter" doesn't have to be the next one in the book, or even in the same book. I.e. focus on chapters in books on areas where one believes they need the most assistance.

The above assumes one has a fair amount of knowledge. I.e. if one is just starting out then a book that is more of a lesson plan makes sense. (or taking lessons with a teacher).

[pamosmusic]

The best way I think is to pick one small idea and close the book. Don't open it again until you've fully integrated that idea into how you play tunes.
It's a hard thing to do from self discipline point of view but if you don't work this way with a book, you're probably wasting your time.

Maybe not intentionally, but that’s definitely how I’ve used them. If they’re good, you can probably work as long as you like on that one idea. I usually also try to listen to my boredom. If I’m bored and want to move on … then it’s time to move on.

One difference is that I like to read through a book straight through and copy down stuff I like right from the get go. I save it all in this red binder so I can come back to it later. But then I pick one thing and etc etc.

[Reg]

At whatever speed it take for you to understand or get the concept or point the book is trying to make.

[John A.]

I think the best way is to not read the book, and then tell people "oh yeah, I have that book". It's also the worst way. And the only way.

[James W]

The best way I think is to pick one small idea and close the book. Don't open it again until you've fully integrated that idea into how you play tunes.
It's a hard thing to do from self discipline point of view but if you don't work this way with a book, you're probably wasting your time.

I think the trouble (I have) with this is 'fully integrated'. How does one decide that something has totally been integrated, considering there is limitless ways of applying ideas? Maybe better to give an idea say, a month, before moving on to something different. Also strikes me as a bit narrow-minded to assert that any other approach is wasting one's time...

Regarding the topic of this thread, this is probably a cop-out answer but everyone is different. I have quite a few books and the few I have by Jens Larsen include ways of applying the material at the end of each chapter - e.g. write five licks or a short solo (i.e. one chorus) demonstrating the ideas explored in the chapter - which is a good way of practically absorbing the topics.

Overall it's just about chipping away at this stuff gradually over time. For some that might mean exhaustively exploring one thing for a long time, for others it might be changing back and forth over a few different things...

[mr. beaumont]

It's very true, you can get things to where you think they are fully integrated too, but if you don't work on them, they're gone.

I think Tal_175's idea of taking ideas and REALLY putting them through the paces is a great idea though. Sometimes we are eager to amass all the knowledge we can get when we'd be better off really knowing how to do a few things well.

I actually think concept wise, much of what a player needs to know to play jazz is pretty simple. It's just not easy.

[ragman1]

Since books are arranged logically (one hopes) I start from the beginning. If I know it, I skip over it and continue. The exception is if I bought the book for a particular reason, in which case head straight to that.

At least, I used to. I haven't bought a book for years.

[AllanAllen]

It's very true, you can get things to where you think they are fully integrated too, but if you don't work on them, they're gone.

I think Tal_175's idea of taking ideas and REALLY putting them through the paces is a great idea though. Sometimes we are eager to amass all the knowledge we can get when we'd be better off really knowing how to do a few things well.

I actually think concept wise, much of what a player needs to know to play jazz is pretty simple. It's just not easy.

The hard part is having taste, once you get the major scale down, add a blue note, learn to slide into the 3rd and 6th boom, you're Lester Young. If only.....

[Tal_175]

The important thing for me now is to be honest with myself about what I'm getting out of what I'm working on.
I used to put concentrated effort into something that I perceived as important. Sometimes that would be going through a book or transcribing a solo. But after a couple of weeks I'd finish it and move on to the next "big" thing. I wasn't that critical about what I have gotten out of what I was working on previously. Putting a month into something only to completely forget it a few weeks later should be a bigger deal than how it felt to me. So I became more mindful of this.

I think the linearity of the book format disguises the pedagogical nonlinearity of learning music. You can't just flip pages and play through exercises and expect that to have a meaningful impact. Sometimes a small example in a footnote can be more juicy if one really works on it than the rest of the book. Sometimes the book can present 500 concrete ideas but if you really master a few critical concepts you can have a good command of the rest. You can work on all 500 and get less out of the book than really mastering a few.

[Tal_175]

In short, if I work on something for a period of time and I feel like the purpose of why I was working on that concept didn't come to fruition, I now don't just move on but do a post-mortem. Did I just abandon it too quickly? Were my goals not realistic? Did I not approach it the right way?

Often the answer is: I didn't take the time focus on integrating what I learned into expanding how I play tunes (comp, improvisation, chord-melody, rhythmic variety etc.).

[Tal_175]

Sometimes we are eager to amass all the knowledge we can get when we'd be better off really knowing how to do a few things well.

Yeah, that's been a problem for me.

[mr. beaumont]

Just my personal experience--your mileage may vary, as they say...

If I'm trying to learn a concept (in pretty much anything, not just music) and it's not sticking, it's usually one of two things.

1. It's over my head and I ain't ready for it.

2. I'm distracted, whether I realize it or not.

[pamosmusic]

The important thing for me now is to be honest with myself about what I'm getting out of what I'm working on.
I used to put concentrated effort into something that I perceived as important. Sometimes that would be going through a book or transcribing a solo. But after a couple of weeks I'd finish it and move on to the next "big" thing. I wasn't that critical about what I have gotten out of what I was working on previously. Putting a month into something only to completely forget it a few weeks later should be a bigger deal than how it felt to me. So I became more mindful of this.

I think the linearity of the book format disguises the pedagogical nonlinearity of learning music. You can't just flip pages and play through exercises and expect that to have a meaningful impact. Sometimes a small example in a footnote can be more juicy if one really works on it than the rest of the book. Sometimes the book can present 500 concrete ideas but if you really master a few critical concepts you can have a good command of the rest. You can work on all 500 and get less out of the book than really mastering a few.

Preach.

Yeah one thing about being "older" is that my time horizons have gotten much longer. I pretty routinely sit down with something, or someone's method, or some concept I want to work on and find myself pretty focused for six months. I used to think I needed to move a lot faster and would be lucky if I spent a couple weeks on one thing.

And a big plus one on the nonlinearity of learning music (or anything). I think for that reason, I'm actually not terribly bothered when I forget something I've been working on. Tunes are one thing (that drives me nuts) but I think when I've spent a lot of time on some concept or some way of playing or thinking, then I never really forget it. The good stuff stays in my head, even if the actual literal lines I learned or whatever are gone.

[James W]

The important thing for me now is to be honest with myself about what I'm getting out of what I'm working on.
I used to put concentrated effort into something that I perceived as important. Sometimes that would be going through a book or transcribing a solo. But after a couple of weeks I'd finish it and move on to the next "big" thing. I wasn't that critical about what I have gotten out of what I was working on previously. Putting a month into something only to completely forget it a few weeks later should be a bigger deal than how it felt to me. So I became more mindful of this.

I think the linearity of the book format disguises the pedagogical nonlinearity of learning music. You can't just flip pages and play through exercises and expect that to have a meaningful impact. Sometimes a small example in a footnote can be more juicy if one really works on it than the rest of the book. Sometimes the book can present 500 concrete ideas but if you really master a few critical concepts you can have a good command of the rest. You can work on all 500 and get less out of the book than really mastering a few.

Ok, but I prefer to recycle stuff in and out of what I practice. And personally I don't recall forgetting stuff I've been working on for a month after a few weeks (although like I say, I know I'll return to it). Taking Jens's first book again as example, its contents present some pretty fundamental stuff, and I'd say personally I'd want to have all those scales down and memorised before I have comprehensively explored and mastered each one. But of course it all depends very much on the type of learner and the type of book it is you're using - but I think you can carry on mining the major scale for stuff even while learning and exploring the diminished and whole-tone scales etc. I don't think anyone thinks you can just read stuff and play it and expect it to be meaningfully absorbed and come out in your improvising. Hence the need to compose lines (which what the book I took as my example gives as exercises at the end of each chapter).

[Tal_175]

Ok, but I prefer to recycle stuff in and out of what I practice. And personally I don't recall forgetting stuff I've been working on for a month after a few weeks (although like I say, I know I'll return to it). Taking Jens's first book again as example, its contents present some pretty fundamental stuff, and I'd say personally I'd want to have all those scales down and memorised before I have comprehensively explored and mastered each one. But of course it all depends very much on the type of learner and the type of book it is you're using - but I think you can carry on mining the major scale for stuff even while learning and exploring the diminished and whole-tone scales etc. I don't think anyone thinks you can just read stuff and play it and expect it to be meaningfully absorbed and come out in your improvising. Hence the need to compose lines (which what the book I took as my example gives as exercises at the end of each chapter).

It seems like we are talking about very different kinds of things. You seem to be talking about broad topics like the major scale. Yes, if the book you are reading shows you the major scale, you are not expected to have exhaustive exploration of it before you move to the next chapter, you also probably won't forget the major scale after a few weeks.

An example of the type of thing I'm talking about is mining a Charlie Parker solo for vocabulary. Extracting several lines, analyzing them, figuring out how to apply them to different chords but moving on before these lines are integrated into your playing. Or going through Randy Vincent's "Three Note Voicings" book but realizing that you still fall back to the old muscle memory grips when you comp under pressure because it is one thing the understand and play concepts from a book, it's a whole another thing for those ideas to come out on the bandstand. It takes time to master things to that level. Being selective and focusing on a small number of concepts has been more productive for me. Often authors themselves haven't mastered every concept they cover in their books. Moreover, not every idea in a resource is gonna be appealing to every musician.

[fep]

I like to record my way through books. That way I don't just quickly BS my way through the book. Sometimes making up a bit of groove to practice to. Making a bit of a project out of each lesson.

Like this:

[Reg]

Yea... when I was a kid I would take different books and then notate out different possibilities that could be developed from their concepts.... say like the MB books. I would make examples using his approach... and then try to make my own example by using his examples as the reference... and then introducing different chords or melodic ideas and see where they went.

For the last 30 or 40 years... I just buy books by musicians I know or have performed with. Almost a support kind of thing. I mean I've known Chuck Sher for decades... I'm local in the area etc. So that's a library in it's self.

I think most musicians don't have a working understanding of music theory... just because they haven't put in the time to become aware for any number of reason... Haven't composed and arranged enough music etc... It takes time away from living etc... You need to enjoy it and be willing get organized with your time.

It's difficult to understand something and be able to become aware of different understandings of the same thing.

Jazz isn't just having chops or technical skills... it's also being aware of different understandings and organizations going on at the same time.... like in real time.

Check out David Berkman's The Jazz harmony book"... It's a softer approach and his introduction... even though from 2013... is still cool. It's 4 pages and still one of the better basic approaches for starting to understand Jazz.

[wolflen]

Years ago I started working with Intervallic Designs by Joe Diorio

I was very drawn to the concept and lessons it fit my "style" of playing many of the lessons opened up
many new ways to play with concepts I was already using

and yes I had to work at making the material part of my playing..I had to really understand it .. digest it fully..
not just play the lesson a few times..but really use it..play it in song context..in a blues..fusion..even prog rock settings

and as you would use any tool that works well..you use it more than once..

I still review some of the lessons and they now seem new again..they open up new ideas..

sometime just adding one or two notes to the lesson is like a bridge to a new concept

[Reg]

Years ago I started working with Intervallic Designs by Joe Diorio

I was very drawn to the concept and lessons it fit my "style" of playing many of the lessons opened up
many new ways to play with concepts I was already using

and yes I had to work at making the material part of my playing..I had to really understand it .. digest it fully..
not just play the lesson a few times..but really use it..play it in song context..in a blues..fusion..even prog rock settings

and as you would use any tool that works well..you use it more than once..

I still review some of the lessons and they now seem new again..they open up new ideas..

sometime just adding one or two notes to the lesson is like a bridge to a new concept

yes Joe Diorio's books are great. I think I still have a few. Jazz Blues styles is still cool. His playing on Sonny Stitt's "Move on Over" from mid 60's is still killin it. Didn't really like his later stuff.... still respected and he's still missed. Were you at USC or GIT...

[wolflen]

Were you at USC or GIT...

back when GIT was just formed with Howard Roberts and all and it was tempting and very close to me geographically..

but at the same time I was fortunate to study with Ted Greene for two years

I think there is a UTube of Ted giving a seminar at GIT..

[RickyHolden]

The best way I think is to pick one small idea and close the book. Don't open it again until you've fully integrated that idea into how you play tunes.
It's a hard thing to do from self discipline point of view but if you don't work this way with a book, you're probably wasting your time.

Agreed, same with anything, e.g. a You Tube video.

10 Killer Jazz Guitar Licks.... great, lets learn them all... but better to pick one that you like and play with it, extract the general idea and then be able to integrate it into your playing over a backing track, transitioning into it and out of it from different chords and other licks. That can take time even with just one lick.