The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 35 of 35
  1. #26
    klk
    klk is offline

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    I think one reason Howard's teaching fell out of fashion is that the 'brain-as-computer' analogy is less compelling than it used to be.
    i don't have an informed opinion on the ways in which howard roberts's teaching has shaped formal training, but if it has become less fashionable, i don't think it's because of his sort of casual and amateur philosophical account of why some kind of training works. for a start, the brain-as-computer (or for that matter, mind-as-computer) analogies remain amazingly popular with the general public.

    the basic teaching idea --practicing mistakes tends to reinforce mistaken practice, so students ought to practice at a level and speed that allows clean repetitions --is a consensus view in most areas of pedagogy. it's pretty ancient in classical music training and in some kinds of athletics.

    you could create any number of theoretical explanations as to why it works-- since folks doing serious philosophical research don't really have a strong, unified consensus on the theory side, i don't think guitar teachers need to worry too much about it.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by klk
    i don't expect jazz guitar instructors to have a tight grip on the cutting edge of brain science, much less the related debates in philosophy. much of the debate in philosophical research over whether or not "mind" can be usefully reduced to "brain" has developed in the last few decades. it doesn't seem to have much to tell us about pedagogy. whether roberts said "brain" or "mind" doesn't matter much to the basic point for us, fortunately, although it's fun to think about.
    I don't expect that either. I think it's a good reason for non-scientists to avoid that lingo unless they're real clear about how they're using it. (And if you refer to technology, you run the risk of having your TEACHING thought to be outdated as soon as your EXAMPLES are outdated.)

    I'm fine with, "Practice things slowly and get them exactly right. Then do that over and over." But when you introduce 'the brain only knows data,' well, that takes the subject out of guitar playing and into neuroscience (-which has changed dramatically in the past few decades.) That distracts me.

    Like Wes said, "Play your guitar as much as you can and learn good tunes." That's great advice.

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by klk
    the basic teaching idea --practicing mistakes tends to reinforce mistaken practice, so students ought to practice at a level and speed that allows clean repetitions --is a consensus view in most areas of pedagogy. it's pretty ancient in classical music training and in some kinds of athletics.
    You definitely see it on really basic levels of learning. I've heard young musicians play the same simple thing over and over and always slow down at the "hard part". It may be just a little hitch in timing. 6 months later it's all faster and "better", but the hitch is still there, just at a faster overall tempo. I've also heard overall sloppiness turn into "faster and more proficient overall sloppiness" in time as well.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by klk
    the basic teaching idea --practicing mistakes tends to reinforce mistaken practice, so students ought to practice at a level and speed that allows clean repetitions --is a consensus view in most areas of pedagogy. it's pretty ancient in classical music training and in some kinds of athletics.
    You definitely see it on really basic levels of learning. I've heard young musicians play the same simple thing over and over and always slow down at the "hard part". It may be just a little hitch in timing. 6 months later it's all faster and "better", but the hitch is still there, just at a faster overall tempo. I've also heard overall sloppiness turn into "faster and more proficient overall sloppiness" in time as well.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Of course. But we need to look at those great players who play clean and in tine and swing at any tempo and get a consensus on how they did it. It's less useful seeing how bad players learn how to play poorly.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Back to triplets for a minute...

    It's one of those things I never had a problem with. Not bragging--I've had a problem with just about everything. So I sat down to think "why do triplets feel natural?"

    And I totally think it's from all the Jerry Garcia I transcribed as a kid. And he took em from Django.

    So whats my point? That might be worth doing too...transcribe stuff with a bunch of triplets so you can hear em used in a variety of situations.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Lol. That's great. I used to play a lot of triplets because at times I couldn't quite make double time. But I wasn't aware I was playing triplets!
    Last edited by henryrobinett; 08-03-2014 at 08:46 PM.

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    I think I once asked who's good to transcribe for triplet insight. Didn't get much back, but eventually discovered that Oscar Peterson's solo's are a treasure trove in terms of triplet bop vocab. Any other suggestions?

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Thanks for bringing it back to the triplets guys (not that I minded the digression). Transcribing is a great idea. Seems like a lot of players favor triplets as more of an occasional or ornamental thing, not lots of running lines. I'll try to listen more for triplet ideas.

    Mr. B - I was really into the Dead many years ago too-never really copped a lot of licks or tried to analyze Garcia's playing though. I was mostly playing a lot of straight ahead blues at the same time I was going to Dead shows. As far as their music, I would mostly just learn the songs to sing around the campfire with friends, that sort of thing. Maybe a few lines from their jammy stuff like Help on the Way or something. I think I actually always dug their songs more than the jamming. That's an interesting insight though, re: Garcia copping Django. I think I actually remember an interview where he talked about how much he dug Django.

    Henry-what's kind of hilarious is that I realize I currently occasionally do what you describe in post #33- I sort of stumble through a triplet line when I'm hearing a need for variety but am unable to hang with 16ths at the tempo I'm playing. I have a lot of work ahead.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MattC
    Seems like a lot of players favor triplets as more of an occasional or ornamental thing, not lots of running lines. I'll try to listen more for triplet ideas.
    There are more of them than you'd think. Very often they're kind of disguised by a different melodic rhythm, like playing a sequence of 2 or 4-note melodic patterns in a triplet rhythm. (You also hear a lot of 3-note stuff against 16th notes etc.) They're not always accenting the first triplet either. The melody implies a different accent, or they will even play a different accent altogether. Triplets are kind of the common denominator for basic jazz tunes.

    Joe Pass's solo recordings have a ton of the 2-note "bass - chord" patterns on eighth note triplets. If you don't know what you're listening to (like I didn't), they sound like measures of straight 8ths with extra beats in the measures. Joe is still really difficult for me to "hear" rhythmically on those solo records, but now, I at least hear some aspects of it a little better. I'm convinced that he "hears" the band playing with him. I just can't hear it a lot of the time. :-)

    I'm not really up on correct terminology for things re. polyrhythms or cross melodic whatever's. Perhaps someone else can explain better.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 08-05-2014 at 10:43 PM. Reason: stinkin' grammar