Will good jazz schools accept a thumb player?

[dasein]

I play with a thumbpick, but I place it on my thumb just far back enough that I can play pick-less with my thumb whenever I want. So I have a fair amount of experience with thumb playing, obviously nothing on the level of someone like Wes.

There are advantages and disadvantages to it. The disadvantages are obvious. Upstrokes are pretty much out -- you can do them occasionally, but the sound is going to be much different and weaker. Something like a sweep picked arpeggio going from high to low is trivial with a pick, but nearly impossible with a thumb. Big string skips are tough. You may want to experiment with adding your other right hand fingers to help execute certain ideas.

To play anything uptempo, slurs are mandatory. And I personally have never had this issue, since I can always switch to flatpicking whenever I want, but I can definitely see how if you're not careful, a thumbs-only approach could lend itself to overuse injuries. Those are no joke in a college program, they can derail you entirely.

The disadvantages are obvious, but the advantages only really reveal themselves when you've worked with it for a while. The sound is one; there is simply no way you can get that kind of sound with a pick. The closest would be a very warm sounding pick like a D'Andrea 351 or using the non-pointed part of a Fender Medium like Metheny. But it's not the same.

No, you cannot play upstrokes. This seems like a complete loss at first. But when you start playing with it, you realize there are some advantages. To really get good, swinging jazz 8th note lines like a horn player, you really cannot pick every note, you pretty much have to use slurs. And in some ways, it's easier to learn how to do that with a thumb. You're going to have to slur anyways, you might as well make it sound as good as possible.

The last thing is something I don't see discussed much. In certain blues, country, and rock players, they will play chords or single lines, and intentionally hit additional muted strings to fatten up the sound. I've heard it called "raking," but the name doesn't matter much. Think of something like "Cold Shot" by Stevie Ray Vaughan: if you just play the notes, it won't sound right. Raking is an essential part of the sound.

There are definitely jazz guitarists who do the same thing. The most obvious example is Freddie Green. A huge part of his sound was using muted notes in his rhythm playing. But it's not something you hear quite as prominently in jazz solos as you would in a blues solo. When Jimi Hendrix does it through a Strat, it sounds marvelously thick and percussive. With a jazz box with thick flatwounds going through a solid state clean amp, it can sound a little harsh.

But with thumb, that harshness is gone. This is one of the secrets of Wes's playing, IMO. If you look at videos of him doing his octave solos, he's essentially hitting all 6 strings with his thumb. It sounds gloriously thick and percussive. It swings like mad. And he does it a fair amount in his single line playing, too. On a personal note, I've found it's very easy to play behind the beat this way. If you rake a string or two below the actual note, the latter will ring out just a microsecond late.

Will college programs hold it against you? It depends on the college. I think you'll have a better shot at a school with multiple guitar teachers. If it's just one guy teaching all the guitarists, there's a greater chance that they're going to insist that everyone use a certain technique.

My feeling: if you can play (and that's a big, important caveat), and a college holds the fact that you use a certain technique against you, then they aren't worth your time.

And I think it's important to note, it's not just Wes. Benson can play masterfully with his thumb when he wants to. Rodney Jones can, too. Kevin Eubanks can hang with anyone. And he's not a jazz player, but I think there's definitely a reason why Jeff Beck used his thumb so much, someone who cared so much about his sound.

There are reasons why technical pedagogy develops over time, and outliers don’t negate the effectiveness of the pedagogy for a large majority of the people approaching an instrument.

I was broadly sympathetic to your argument, even if I was coming to a different conclusion. But this is where you lose me.

Jazz guitar, and really electric guitar in general, does not have a technical pedagogy anywhere close to what you'd find for classical piano or violin. Those instruments have hundreds of years to figure out what works. And having a defined, largely static repertoire gives everyone a benchmark. You can either play a Chopin etude at speed, or you can't.

Jazz guitar has barely been around a century, has only been in conservatories for 60ish years. And there is so much stylistic diversity, in technique and repertoire and style, that players like Pat Martino and Bill Frisell can both be considered masters, even though there's hardly any overlap in their technical strengths.

Something like Troy Grady's work seems like a necessary, if not sufficient, step towards actual developing a pedagogy. The closest would be something like the whole gypsy jazz school -- they have their method, and the proof is in the pudding, since they're churning out a never ending processions of 10 year olds that can play all of Django's solos in their sleep. But until then, it really should be "if it works." The best teachers I've had have more or less taken this attitude. In fact, a lot of technical issues I ran into over the years came from teachers who did think they had a standardized technical pedagogy and insisted their students follow suit. I have been told, from various teachers:

- that I should economy pick everything
- that I should only alternate pick, with the motion coming primarily through side to side wrist motion
- that the motion should primarily come from forearm rotation
- that the motion should primarily come from thumb and pointer finger motion, like a pencil
- that I should use the smallest pick motions possible
- that I should use reststrokes with every downstroke, and only switch strings on downstrokes
- that the right hand should always rest on the bridge
- that the right hand should always float, and never touched the guitar

These weren't scrubs, either, these were very high level players and teachers (I'm not going to name who said what, but I guess you can DM me if you're curious). Who was right? In hindsight, it feels very much like a "blind men with the elephant" scenario.

[pamosmusic]

I was broadly sympathetic to your argument, even if I was coming to a different conclusion. But this is where you lose me.

Point taken, I would change my phrasing if it hadn't already been quoted. I didn't mean that there was a specific detailed step-by-step pedagogy pertaining to pick technique. I believe I used that phrase after referring to Dizzy's puffed-out cheeks, so I was speaking a little more generally.

For example, we're not really talking about the proper way to pick or not pick. We're talking about ... holding a pick or playing fingerstyle, versus playing just with the thumb. Playing with a pick on a guitar is a pretty recent phenomenon, but having a hundred years or so with this style is enough to establish its advantages and disadvantages (your assessment of which I'd pretty agree with across the board). For most people, most of the time, those advantages outweigh the disadvantages. And I wouldn't have the same reservations if we were talking about alternating fingerstyle -- tradition or p i or p m.

Though I might also point out that classical guitarists talk about the newness and feral-ness of their pedagogy by comparing themselves to violinists and pianists, the same way that electric guitarists talk about it by comparing themselves to classical guitarists.

This is also interesting:

And having a defined, largely static repertoire gives everyone a benchmark. You can either play a Chopin etude at speed, or you can't.

Jazz studies at a music school is sort of engaged in the project of establishing these benchmarks. You can either play Donna Lee at speed, or you can't. Any school is going to have those lists of standard repertoire. That they don't accompany that list necessarily with a graded technical pedagogy the way that a conservatory piano studio will is a shortcoming of the program but it's still a hurdle that exists and that you'd have to consider if you're going to enroll in a program like that.


Something I'd note about your description of the advantages and disadvantages of thumb playing would be this little phrase too:

The disadvantages are obvious, but the advantages only really reveal themselves when you've worked with it for a while.

That's really important, I think. We're talking about someone auditioning for a college. So those disadvantages will take a while to accommodate and the advantages might not show up for a while. So even if you grant that playing with the thumb is just as cool and good as playing with a pick (which it is, in a player who does it really well), that still might lead to some big obstacles in this specific phase of playing with this specific goal.

The best thing about music school is that you get really intense training in a short period of time. The worst thing about music school is all the artificial deadlines and benchmarks. So it's going to weed people out when they aren't ready right now for the thing they're supposed to be doing right now. You mentioned overuse injuries, burnout and washout are obviously also super common for music students.

[James W]

This is a pretty fundamental thing about the techniques and I’m a little confused as to why we’re arguing about it.

Probably something to do with the fact that I suck using a plectrum lol.

But I do think that performing a fast tremolo with a plectrum is one thing, trying to translate that onto a medium to up-tempo tune like Donna Lee another.

But anyway...

[pamosmusic]

But I do think that performing a fast tremolo with a plectrum is one thing, trying to translate that onto a medium to up-tempo tune like Donna Lee another.

But anyway...

Of course it is. I never said it was a walk in the park the same way I never said playing with the thumb was bad and dumb.

But why is that something Grady does at all? It establishes a baseline for the speed before you engage in string crossing. The thumb is almost by definition going to have a much much lower baseline. Not to mention what Dasein and Christian both pointed out about descending sweeps being hugely problematic.

These programs all evaluate their auditions differently and unfortunately speed is easily quantifiable.

Play Oleo on your audition at 200 please. Here’s the metronome. No? Bummer.

And it will replicate in the program.

Here’s a sax soli, you’re doubling alto 1 — it’s this fast, no they’re not slurring there.

Lots of places put metronome markings on audition requirements, or otherwise detailed preferences and then turn out to be less picky about it than the website might have suggested. But still this is a big hurdle for an upcoming audition and something that will keep presenting itself in music program. Really good players will absolutely be able to execute this stuff and make it work. Which is great. But it’s a thing they’ll be thinking about or have thought about quite a bit already.

[eddie chai]

Thanks Pamos. i agree with ur take alot. For me, the reason I want to play with my thumb is because i think the tone is much superior. I think the percussiveness of thumb playing lets me swing harder. Also, the tone is fuller, which imo makes single note lines sound better. Clean tone + pick just sounds thin to me -- i think it's why a player like scofield used chorus or extra distortion. Also, u can get away with turning up the gain higher for thumb-playing than for picked-playing.I think i have a long guitar journey ahead of me, and I will allow myself a few months to see if I can get close to playing up tempo tunes @tempo. Even wes played tunes liked cherokee or oleo a bit under tempo, but I believe that with a combination of hammer-ons, alternate thumb picking, and some clever fingering that reduces string crossing, i could play pretty fast. I'll just have to give it a shot. Anyway, i've never loved jazz for being fast. i think good lines have a little to do with speed and alot to do with swing. So i gotta get more swing in my playing first!Thank you everyone for your replies. What an amazing community

[Freddels]

I doubt they will care how you execute the notes. If you were attending a conservatory for classical guitar, then I would think it would be an issue. But, for most other styles of music (jazz, rock, country, etc.), it's not going to matter. They are going to be more interested in whether or not you can read music.

[eddie chai]

WOW! Thank you everyone. There's a few too many comments to respond to individually --- but --- reading through everyone's takes has been incredibly helpful. I'm new to jazz and new to guitar, and completely self-taught, so your guys' discussion has given me alot of insight.

I think I will give thumb-playing a real shot. The sound of Wes playing with his thumb is the first (and still the #1) reason I play guitar. Just as he innovated the technique, I think it's not a stretch to say I will find my own workarounds to play faster with my clunky thumb. Your guys' discussion has also given me some idea of what things I need to work on, technically, to prepare for an audition, as well as brought to my knowledge a bunch of really good thumb-players who I'm going to analyze videos of.

For me, I like the tone of the thumb so much, that to play with a pick isn't worth it. No offense to anyone who prefers the sound of the pick obviously!. I'd rather play not-as-fast thumb stuff than super-fast pick stuff. If schools won't accept me for it, I'll find my own way. I am definitely not good enough right now, but I'm confident that I can get good.

P.S. this was my first post on Jazz Guitar Forum, I love how many comments you guys left. I can't understate how happy I was to see like 50 comments on my random post.

[Peter C]

I enjoy playing some stuff thumb-only and being able to do that convincingly enough in a jam (in both senses of the word: somebody shoves a guitar in your hands and says play something - no pick in sight). 16th notes are, however, not generally on the menu.

Now, the way Wes and Jim Mullen use/d their thumbs is very idiosyncratic; just look at the way they both spread their fingers like tentacles over the pickguard! Give it a go and see if your thumb shows signs of being able to articulate in the desired manner. Then you're going to need to work on integrating slurs and hammer-ons etc. plus a modicum of voodoo.

So 98%, it's going to be with a pick. Don't know if the OP is still around ......looks like he just turned up, so don't forget to post a video of your trials/progress!

[lammie200]

If it helps I will restate what I have written before in a different way:

Thumb use only may be a limitation for speed for some song forms unless you can work both down and up strokes with it. That is not impossible. Thumb and index finger use is another possibility for hitting speed requirements with down and up strokes. Thumb down strokes and index finger up strokes. The physical part is very much like holding a pick except using the thumb nail and the index finger nail in its place. I prefer all of the above instead of using a pick. But I also am not a college educated jazz guitarist. Only a guitarist with over four decades of playing experience now.

[Peter C]

There is/was a video somewhere on youtube of Tim Lerch using thumb and index for fast lines, maybe to "prove" a point (I don't remember), and it sounded pretty good. I believe he's now in the general habit of using a pick for single lines. Anyway, I think this thread is about thumb only? By the way, in an interview, Jim Mullen said he was downstrokes only...

[rpjazzguitar]

I just read through Berklee's promotional materials on guitar performance. As far as I can see there is no speed requirement to be admitted to the program. I also don't see a speed requirement to graduate, although I recall hearing about some.

The promotional materials don't include specifics like which scales or how fast. I looked for something like, play X scale at Y bpm, but I didn't find anything like that.

Does anyone know if collegiate guitar performance programs have benchmarks of that sort?

My guess is that you can get admitted with a thumb audition, but if you tell them you're going to always refuse to use a pick (not that you'd be asked about it) they might smile and think "we'll see about that" or, if admission is competitive, and pick speed is required, they'd take someone else. More likely, they let you in, cash your check and you're free to try to meet whatever the requirements are with your thumb.

I'd imagine that they have an interest in having a Berklee guitar performance degree mean that the player has a specified broad range of competence. But, I haven't established, or ruled out, a specific speed requirement. I'd guess that you'd be expected to sight read at a pretty high level. That they might not want somebody to show up for something based on a resume with a Berklee degree - who can't read decently.

[Alter]

Here's an old video of mine showing my take on Wes thumb playing. You can get pretty fast by combining slurs, hammers, pulloffs, upstrokes, etc. The thing about upstrokes is to have the thumb face the guitar and not the floor, and keep the nail really short (which i unfortunately don't do anymore cause of classical guitar, hence the pinch in the sound sometimes).

[Jimmy blue note]

I just read through Berklee's promotional materials on guitar performance. .

Berklee admissions are not based on anybody's idea about what jazz should be about; leave that to the people who want to be educated to work out on their own terms. There are even teachers like Richie Hart who are as close as you might get to studying in depth immersion in Wes's music, and he will steep you in the right and left hand techniques of Wes. But all in all, they're in the business to answer your questions if you demonstrate the basic abilities to play your instrument and the willingness to learn through a comprehensive program.

And you don't have to play fast or play with any specific right or left hand techniques if you show that you can play music with some degree of intelligence and control.
There has never been a mandate that one must be able to play bebop lines to learn about playing jazz. Where do these ideas come from?

[pamosmusic]

There has never been a mandate that one must be able to play bebop lines to learn about playing jazz. Where do these ideas come from?

music schools

I mean … Berklee is always an interesting case, and I had some good friends who studied with guys like Garzone and Jerry Bergonzi and Hal Crook. They came out of Berklee as incredible musicians but had no interest in or skill with bebop stuff. No one particularly cared because they had voices and had something to say and that wasn’t the music they wanted to make. And to Berklee’s credit, they really cast a wide net and offer a lot of rigor without pigeon holing their students. So they turn out a lot of interesting and creative musicians.

But Berklee is a bit of an outlier among jazz programs. I’m sure I don’t know them all, but other than Berklee I’m not sure of a jazz program that doesn’t require basic proficiency with bebop, whether it’s some vocabulary or (more likely) a small collection of the big bebop standards.

[Bob_Ross]

I just read through Berklee's promotional materials on guitar performance. As far as I can see there is no speed requirement to be admitted to the program. I also don't see a speed requirement to graduate, although I recall hearing about some.

The promotional materials don't include specifics like which scales or how fast. I looked for something like, play X scale at Y bpm, but I didn't find anything like that.

Does anyone know if collegiate guitar performance programs have benchmarks of that sort?

With the huge caveat that I attended (and graduated from, in case that's germane) Berklee 40+ years ago and so it's quite possible their requirements have changed, it's worth noting that Berklee didn't have a Pass/Fail threshold for their entrance audition.* If you sucked, Berklee would still take your money and put you in the most remedial classes and ensembles that they offered. If you were really good, Berklee would also take your money and put you in the highest ranked classes and ensembles that they offered.

And between the time that you started at Berklee and finished at Berklee, they hoped that your ratings -- the numerical metric they use to rank those classes/ensembles -- improved. It was theoretically possible to enter the college with a 111 rating, and graduate with an 888. (Not that I know anyone who ever did.)

And the proficiencies (the exams that allowed you to progress from a 111 to a 222 to a 333 etc.) didn't have a speed requirement. They did have a Demonstrate Comprehensive Knowledge & Technical Facility component, but the metrics weren't explicitly called out, or even necessarily objective. They were juried performances, with ~3 faculty members in attendance.

During my proficiencies, no one ever asked me "Can you play that faster?" Or even "Can't you play some be-bop?" I think I had to play some 2- or 3-octave scales, solo over a blues and rhythm changes, play a fully notated composition that I had prepared in advance, sightread some chicken scratch, and sightread a lead sheet of a jazz standard.

In fairness, I wasn't a performance major, so I only had to achieve the minimum requirements for my instrument.


*Edit: In fact, 40+ years ago they didn't even have an entrance audition. They took care of that after you showed up on day 1 and had paid the bursar. But I know that has changed in recent decades.

[Jimmy blue note]

But Berklee is a bit of an outlier among jazz programs. I’m sure I don’t know them all, but other than Berklee I’m not sure of a jazz program that doesn’t require basic proficiency with bebop, whether it’s some vocabulary or (more likely) a small collection of the big bebop standards.

Some schools and the instructors I learned from:
New England Conservatory. Present and past faculty: Fred Hersch, Dave Holland, Julian Lage, Mick Goodrick, John Abercrombie, George Russell, Jackie Byard, Eric Dolphy, George Garzone, Jerry Bergonzi, Joe Morris among many more. You can learn bebop if you want. You can learn to be a great musician even if you choose not to go the bebop route.

I spent several years in the 5 college consortium in Western Massachusetts. Faculty I studied with or had at my resources: Ray Copeland (played with Coltrane), Archie Shepp, Yusef Lateef, Max Roach, and yes there was a great respect for the traditions of Ellington and the languages of improvisation that followed, but never did they see the bebop approach as the be all and end all.

Berklee mentioned above... well I'll only say when Mick Goodrick who was the archetect of their jazz guitar program was asked if he ever played bebop, he responded with "It's all bebop" but he taught that bebop was an evolutionary music form that included all the people who studied with him from Sco to Frisell to Wayne Krantz, Mike Stern, Julian Lage, Wolfgang Muthspiel all knew their improvisational principles but the ways it was realized is not what we now see as "the rules of bebop".

NYU has a fine program. Sco teaches there. It's not a bebop factory.

New School in New York... many more serious schools teach the improvisational music known as jazz but it's not what you think.

It's an expansive world and aesthetic, and in the lineage that started with Ellington, Charlie Parker's bebop was one part in an evolutionary and advancing tradition. Artists on the forefront can choose any dialect and era's sensibilties to make their own mark in, but it's very open ended, foreward thinking and not constrained by the strict retrospective rules of the bebop exclusive community.

[pamosmusic]

I’m not trying to say jazz IS bebop or whatever. Truly I’m not. When I was in New York I played a lot of Not Bop or Barely Jazz or Contemporary Improvisational music or whatever you want to call it.

Im not trying to comment on art, or the things you can do with a jazz education.

Im just trying to note a practical hurdle that most jazz programs have in the process somewhere based on my experience with students auditioning over the last few years. Students of friends auditioning over the last few years, etc etc.

For example, you mentioned NYU. I had a bunch of buddies go there. One studied with Scofield. But here are their prescreen requirements listed on the site:

12-bar blues: (“Billie’s Bounce” by Charlie Parker, etc.)

• 175 bpm or faster
• Saxophone/Trumpet/Trombone/Violin: play the head and four choruses of improvisation
• Guitar/Piano/Vibraphone: play the head, two choruses of accompaniment behind a soloist, and two choruses of improvisation

And down the list a bit …

• Perform one or two choruses (minimum 32 bars) of a solo transcription from your instrument. This does not need to be memorized.

So I’m not trying to be a dick. But like … there are some technical requirements here that are worth noting — a suggestion that someone play a bop blues (admittedly not a rule), a specific minimum tempo, and a transcription requirement.

Someone who is new to the instrument, wants to do this, and wants to do it with their thumb should have a realistic picture of the process. It seems at this point that he has that, and that he wants to play with his thumb. Which is lovely.

I think something that’s useful to highlight from your post and the posts of others is that where are person goes and who they study with is a huge factor.

Somewhere like Indiana or UNT is going to have some more regimented requirements for auditions, some more uniformity in proficiencies. Somewhere like Berklee or New School is going to have notably more flexibility on both those fronts. Smaller schools might not be as regimented with the proficiencies but will have fewer options on who the teacher is. Even at somewhere like Berklee, the specific teacher is going to make a huge difference as well.

[Jimmy blue note]

I think something that’s useful to highlight from your post and the posts of others is that where are person goes and who they study with is a huge factor.

Somewhere like Indiana or UNT is going to have some more regimented requirements for auditions, some more uniformity in proficiencies. Somewhere like Berklee or New School is going to have notably more flexibility on both those fronts. Smaller schools might not be as regimented with the proficiencies but will have fewer options on who the teacher is. Even at somewhere like Berklee, the specific teacher is going to make a huge difference as well.

100% in agreement panosmusic. It is a real issue here to define the focus of an academic approach based on ...a philosophical concept of what that music is.Yes schools must, by definition have an idea of what constitutes jazz to have a jazz program (duh), and I don't envy them. Gotta have filters so you can place a metric on whether a student is actually learning.

I suppose in truth, I'm most aligned with the faction of musicians who redefine the music every night in the small clubs of Brooklyn and Manhattan. They are the true champions of the primary rule going back to Ellington: If it sounds good, it is good.
Good points in this thread. It takes a lot of knowledge to know where and how to learn this music. Good luck to the OP.

[pamosmusic]

100% in agreement panosmusic. It is a real issue here to define the focus of an academic approach based on ...a philosophical concept of what that music is.Yes schools must, by definition have an idea of what constitutes jazz to have a jazz program (duh), and I don't envy them. Gotta have filters so you can place a metric on whether a student is actually learning.

I suppose in truth, I'm most aligned with the faction of musicians who redefine the music every night in the small clubs of Brooklyn and Manhattan. They are the true champions of the primary rule going back to Ellington: If it sounds good, it is good.
Good points in this thread. It takes a lot of knowledge to know where and how to learn this music. Good luck to the OP.

I should also say that Im being a bit of a curmudgeon in part because I LOVED music school and would’ve kept going if I’d been good enough to get it paid for. Virtually all of my friends while I was up there went to music school too and had their quibbles but generally loved it and would’ve gone again if they had the choice.

So I don’t want to give OP the “ehh if they don’t want you as you are, then f*** em” line either.

It’s not right for everyone, but if someone thinks it’s right for them, they can do it. They can also probably do it the way they want to do it if they know what they’re getting into. So if the OP gets cracking with an idea of the hurdles they’re likely to run into down the line and starts thinking about those now, then they’ve probably got a chance to find the right spot and do it the way they want to do it.

If they don't think about that stuff, they might end up with some choices to make about the alignment of their individuality with their goals and timetable.

[Christian Miller]

Tbh I didn’t wade through the last few posts so I’ll apologies if I’m repeating anything, but to get back to the practicalities, you’ll get an idea of the technical level you are expected to meet from the audition requirements.

From preparing students for college auditions usually they do like to hear you play a bebop head. Not super fast necessarily. Blue for Alice is one thing that im looking at with a student at the moment for example.

If you can do that sort of thing with whatever technique you adopt than I’m sure that it will be ok.

[James W]

Of course it is. I never said it was a walk in the park the same way I never said playing with the thumb was bad and dumb.

You did sort of compare playing with the thumb to a classical guitarist using some wacky RH fingerings. But it doesn't matter...

[pamosmusic]

You did sort of compare playing with the thumb to a classical guitarist using some wacky RH fingerings. But it doesn't matter...

well I was having a hard time getting you to understand how all down strokes was going to make speed a challenge as opposed to alternating so I was pulling out all the stops.

[orri]

I mainly play with my thumb when I play jazz with other people or perform.

But I do plenty of practising and technique work with a pick too and I can play faster with a pick.
When I take lessons, my teacher plays with a pick and I play with my thumb, but when we have specifically discussed right hand technique I've used a pick.

I feel if I would do a jazz school programme, I would simply use a pick when that is required or a better suitable choice, and then use my thumb when it fits the occasion and is appropriate. It's never going to be a disadvantage to be able to do both, and it doesn't take an insane amount of work or time to practise and maintain both.

[Christian Miller]

I just read through Berklee's promotional materials on guitar performance. As far as I can see there is no speed requirement to be admitted to the program. I also don't see a speed requirement to graduate, although I recall hearing about some.

The promotional materials don't include specifics like which scales or how fast. I looked for something like, play X scale at Y bpm, but I didn't find anything like that.

Does anyone know if collegiate guitar performance programs have benchmarks of that sort?

My guess is that you can get admitted with a thumb audition, but if you tell them you're going to always refuse to use a pick (not that you'd be asked about it) they might smile and think "we'll see about that" or, if admission is competitive, and pick speed is required, they'd take someone else. More likely, they let you in, cash your check and you're free to try to meet whatever the requirements are with your thumb.

I'd imagine that they have an interest in having a Berklee guitar performance degree mean that the player has a specified broad range of competence. But, I haven't established, or ruled out, a specific speed requirement. I'd guess that you'd be expected to sight read at a pretty high level. That they might not want somebody to show up for something based on a resume with a Berklee degree - who can't read decently.

The audition is as I understand it partly to stream the candidates by ability, although this may have changed.

For a while it wasn’t so much about getting in as how you got in. From what I heard the school post John Mayer was losing a bit of prestige as people started to see it as where trusties bummed around for a few years pretending to be rock stars, while many of the more serious jazz students started to look elsewhere. Since then I believe the school has become more selective again.

jbn can of course refute, correct or confirm this third hand scuttlebutt.

[Christian Miller]

So I think the answer is as always - how well can you play?

And by well that’s not necessarily how fast, just can you play the music and are you prepared to do the technical work necessary. While unusual it’s not like no one has done this before. Otoh a lot depends on who your teacher is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk