-
Exactly! To prove what? That it's a waste of time? Why not play a really nice Naima we can all appreciate?
Originally Posted by Jonah
Last edited by ragman1; 04-16-2020 at 09:52 AM.
-
04-16-2020 06:40 AM
-
I do not need 'nice Naima' - I need truth..Exactly! To prove what? That it's a waste of time? Why not play a really nice Naima we can all appreciate?
Hope it exaplains all briefly.
And do not really care what people appreciate... I did not play anything I would have been ashamed of.
There is also partly an idea of art (and especially of jazz for me) - you do it the way you do it and move on...
-
I like the documentation of the process. If you do this enough, you will get better at it. Originally Posted by Jonah
The fact that rag talked about guesswork - apes and that - makes me think that the missing aspect is reflexivity for many. Apes for instance can't reflect on their efforts and find things to develop or explore in the same way as humans can... (Maybe they can, sorry I'm not a primatologist.)
As a teacher it's something I'd like to encourage in students, although self reflexivity isn't always enough on its own, it's a powerful tool...
OTOH students who want to learn jazz are rarely blank slates to be filled up with information. I often think jazz pedagogy acts as if they are.
-
I think actually it is presuming that all people are like you (rag in this case)...The fact that rag talked about guesswork - apes and that - makes me think that the missing aspect is reflexivity for many. Apes for instance can't reflect on their efforts and find things to develop or explore in the same way as humans can... (Maybe they can, sorry I'm not a primatologist.)
I would even go far enough to say that speaking from point of view of morality the rag's statement about 'guesswork and apes' says that people are pretenders and liars.
For him this 'blind playing' is somethin fake ... so he implies it to everyone (or uses this implication for trolling - i do not know).
-
Nothing against chimps. A random generator then, anything you like. But I'm definitely saying that one can't possibly play a tune like Naima without musical knowledge and study, that's all. And, in the case of Naima, fairly advanced study.
Which, of course, is the province of the teacher. Or some other informative medium.
-
Yes, it doesn't follow that everyone does this: Originally Posted by Jonah
I honestly think the main thing I can teach anyone to do is this. Scales, whatever, that's just the 'stuff.'
'Talented' students - the type that you feel don't actually really teach, and that surprise you from lesson to lesson have this turning around like a Catherine wheel. It's a thing to see!
That's when mentorship kicks in, and you get this. My function then (for the limited amount of time they need me), is to give them the odd idea, offer professional advice, challenge or just show them the reality of it all... Whatever needs to be done.
It's also REALLY interesting to see the fundamental incompatibility between your worldview and Rag's. It's like a profoundly different way of viewing the world, music and learning.
-
Well, I'm practical, you see, I like to know where I am. I don't fancy the idea of just launching out into the unknown hoping for the best. Call it complete cowardice if you like :-)
Mind you, all improvisation has a great element of going into the unknown. It's what improvisation is.
About teaching, I always used to say 'I can teach, I'll painstakingly show you everything you need to know - but can you learn? Because ultimately one teaches oneself'.
Fact is, only a few could do it. Most thought some other person was magically going to make them good players, usually overnight :-)
-
I've heard the argument made (by Bruce Forman) that one shouldn't share one's practice online - that he wants to hear people play music, not just working on stuff. Closer perhaps to rag's view.
With respect to Bruce, I think this is missing the potential of the web as a learning tool. I also think he was talking more about people practicing scales etc rather than playing songs..
-
Yes. As a teacher I see my job as teaching people to teach themselves. This can be like pulling teeth. People are heavily invested in the 'banking model' of education (Paulo Freire, Critical Pedagogy in general). I know nothing, give me the info! (They usually know all the info lol) Originally Posted by ragman1
Gramscian Marxists like Freire would characterise this as capitalist realism... Because capitalism is to blame for everything, right?
I myself, suspect it's more psychological rather than emergent from social organisation or economics... I think freedom and self determination is scary, and people like daddies. Even a jazz daddy. (And the left has plenty of daddies, it's not just the right.)
How you were brought up has a big bearing too. Gender is an interesting vector in improvisation for instance, that has barely been explored (why is jazz such a sausage party?)
But - bear in mind the important role of third parties even to the very self motivated student. Sometimes you are not enough on your own. For someone as individualist, autodidactic and basically unteachable as myself, that's hard to admit.
But the third party advice I did get was like a bolt from the blue. Shook me up. Made me question everything for a while.
All working jazz musicians are self taught anyway, with input from mentors. Don't believe their CVs haha.
-
Yes, all you said. Probably girls/women are better at actually learning and applying, although not many want to do serious jazz guitar.
What was the advice?But the third party advice I did get was like a bolt from the blue. Shook me up. Made me question everything for a while.
-
I do not know what Bruce meant of course... Originally Posted by christianm77
But in concern of songs .. people may have different ideas on what is elaborated and what not... I recently heard a few Sco's solo guitar playing... they did not sound elaborated in comparison to Martin Taylor for example)))
I admire Martin but I do not want to sound like him - ever... it is too weel-elaborated.
Of cours Sco has tremendous experience and such a solodity of phrasing that even raw stuff sounds solid and with conviction.. but still he sounded as if he just took chances.
Have you heard Bobby Broom playing from home with no amp? To me it is great ... but I would not be surprised if it were only audio with no video and name... that someone would say that it is just practicing a song...
There is a Russian guitarsit... I do not wabt to call the name - he has the job and nice guy... he plays lots of chord melody and comps a lot too... very elaborated stuff... but he always sounds to me as if he learnt it all by heart ... and very dead time.. I mean it just does not go anywhere... as if he does not hear the harmony.
But people admire him (I saw some say he is like Joe Pass and so on -- -)
and about the idea... as you said it could be a good source for mentorship.
Xavier Diaz - Lattorre - one fo the few leading llute teacher and lutenists today as a soloist and regular member of Savall's orchestra and ensembles - now during isolation he does his morning practic on FB online... it is some kind of morning gymanastic - he plays very basic physological and technical excersises
(by the way I knew these excersises from him earlier and they helped to overcome problem with one of my instruments).... he does what he does usually just gives a bit more explanation.
-
Quite. That is not using the ear! One should have the basic ideas and then move round them. But maybe he's nervous playing in public, especially solo. Easier with a good band behind you, gives you confidence. Originally Posted by Jonah
-
You've got to ask why... My wife has a theory about this. Men are more happy to play BS and get it together in public. So the way we teach improvisation encourages the more noisy, confident people (at least on their instrument) who are happy to give it a go whether or not it's any good as music. She felt women are much less likely to want to do this due to upbringing, social expectations etc. Originally Posted by ragman1
So the reaction she had to someone saying 'make something up on the blues scale I've just taught you.' is 'why? Why would I do this? What value would this have? And it would sound like shit because I'm not very good at this.' She's a good classical musician. She's not terribly interested in doing things that sound bad.
I think it's crap as well. There's more to music than this. For some it is a perfectly reasonable task, but those people are already willing to improvise. It's not that classical musicians can't improvise, it's more that they are unwilling to do it, because they know that they won't sound like music when they do it at first. And the finished product is very important in western art music. But - actually - I think the finished product is actually incredibly important in jazz too... see Bruce Forman's comment. To reduce it to a form of 'participatory music' is actually insulting to its traditions.
Anyway, I don't want to say too much about the gender side of it, as I am not an expert in this area, and a bloke. But it is interesting what comes up talking to me female colleagues.
Alternative modes of teaching improvisation become necessary because it's clear that this 'make up a solo from these pitches' concept - be it CST, chord tones & embellishments or whatever is not a good entry level approach for some people (I'd go further and argue it's a bad entry level approach for everyone.)
Fifteen years ago I had no idea how to work on time, or even how important time is to jazz. I needed to be told. It completely broke me down for a few months.What was the advice?
Fifteen years on I am obsessed with rhythm, and now listen to music in a completely different way.
I would never have made that jump on my own.
-
Find the clave in EVERYTHING.
-
That's her theory? Not wrong. Just a lot of big show-offs, the lot of themMy wife has a theory about this. Men are more happy to play BS and get it together in public.
I don't think it's just the put-down woman syndrome, I think it has to do with seriousness and humility. Men are egoists and women know it.She felt women are much less likely to want to do this due to upbringing, social expectations etc.
Oh, I don't go with that. To see if it works, presumably! I mean, if you show someone something you'd normally say 'Now you have a go'. That's definitely okay.So the reaction she had to someone saying 'make something up on the blues scale I've just taught you.' is 'why?
Agreed, but it should be okay in front of a teacher. One isn't in public.She's not terribly interested in doing things that sound bad.
Well, improvisation isn't their thing, is it? They've spent ages learning the dots and someone says go off on your own, it's hardly surprising they look bewildered!It's not that classical musicians can't improvise
I'd go with that too. I know it sometimes looks as though I'm an advocate of CST but it's not that simple, especially on an actual guitar. It's a question of throwing in everything according to experience. I'd find just using a set scale quite hard now (although I could do it) because I know how to work round it with passing notes, subs, slides, changes of position, etc etc.Alternative modes of teaching improvisation become necessary because it's clear that this 'make up a solo from these pitches' concept - be it CST, chord tones & embellishments or whatever is not a good entry level approach for some people (I'd go further and argue it's a bad entry level approach for everyone.)
But... when you're learning, what do you do? You've got to start somewhere and the basics have got to be sorted before one can take off and fly. So I don't know. Difficult.
So what did they say? Metronome? Subdividing? All that sort of thing, probably. Personally, I like to do things slowly-ish because I can think, but when it's very, very, very slow I tend to wander and get lost. I know why, because trying to keep an excruciatingly slow pace is a distraction from the sounds I'm trying to make. But that's about it. I definitely have a comfort zone :-)Fifteen years ago I had no idea how to work on time, or even how important time is to jazz.
-
Re: improvising pedagogy/scales
It's a terrible method, akin to giving someone a 1,000 jigsaw puzzle in a paper bag and not letting them see the box, and then saying "why can't you figure it out, I gave you all the right pieces?"
-
Yup. There's the danger of being wise in hindsight, as it were. We've forgotten what it feels like not to know anything. Someone says 'There's the chords, there's the notes - play something' and we can't understand why they go blank and look confused.
-
This is a common method in modern pedagogy. Originally Posted by christianm77
I have been a University lecturer for 27 years and in those years teaching has shifted to coaching more and more.
You cannot really learn people jazz guitar. You can coach them while they learn it themselves though. Give them the tools and info. And the inspiration etc.
DB
-
OK, so in effect you are saying it is the student's fault for not going with the task. Look, you and I might find this a reasonable task. But I have to be professionally interested in teaching people who are not like me. Originally Posted by ragman1
That's her theory? Not wrong. Just a lot of big show-offs, the lot of them
I don't think it's just the put-down woman syndrome, I think it has to do with seriousness and humility. Men are egoists and women know it.
Oh, I don't go with that. To see if it works, presumably! I mean, if you show someone something you'd normally say 'Now you have a go'. That's definitely okay.
Agreed, but it should be okay in front of a teacher. One isn't in public.
Well, improvisation isn't their thing, is it? They've spent ages learning the dots and someone says go off on your own, it's hardly surprising they look bewildered!
As a result, I believe, the task is at fault. At least for that person. I have to have a broader set of tools at least.
Teach the person in front of you, right?
-
Eh? Of course not, that's not what I said at all. Really!in effect you are saying it is the student's fault for not going with the task.
-
Regarding teaching, we have to teach techniques but if the teaching process itself is reduced to a 'technique' then I don't think it'll be very effective because one is distanced from the student. Far better to go in human being to human being.
-
They advised I practice with a metronome, and (I think this was the side of advice that is less recommended, but highly effective) speaking the beat out loud while you play. I did the former, but not much of the latter until recently. Try it. Good exercise for syncopated music in particular.So what did they say? Metronome? Subdividing? All that sort of thing, probably. Personally, I like to do things slowly-ish because I can think, but when it's very, very, very slow I tend to wander and get lost. I know why, because trying to keep an excruciatingly slow pace is a distraction from the sounds I'm trying to make. But that's about it. I definitely have a comfort zone :-)
They didn't have the extensive tool kit for working on timing that I've put together for myself in response to this initial spark (and they themselves probably have more now.) In retrospect the person was unhappy with their time feel, and this was a preoccupation for them too. They had probably had been told the same thing by another musician so were themselves sensitised to it.
Learning to hear whether things are in time or not is actually quite a big part of it. I just couldn't tell the difference.
-
I don't know if I could do that. Chords, yes, notes, I doubt it.speaking the beat out loud while you play
I can speed up a little playing chords for a backing. You don't realise till you loop it. So now I make my own simple tapped rhythm track, saves time.I just couldn't tell the difference.
-
I don't want you to feel I am twisting your words, but your use of language suggests that you feel that not going with the exercise is unreasonable: Originally Posted by ragman1
-----
So the reaction she had to someone saying 'make something up on the blues scale I've just taught you.' is 'why?
Oh, I don't go with that. To see if it works, presumably! I mean, if you show someone something you'd normally say 'Now you have a go'. That's definitely okay.
She's not terribly interested in doing things that sound bad.
Agreed, but it should be okay in front of a teacher. One isn't in public.
------
Hence my conclusion... I'm not trying to pick on you, this is the way I felt when I first started failing to teach classical musicians improvisation.
Now I think it should be OK to do things that sound bad... important in fact. However, when improvisation is so far removed from someone's comfort zone, this can be emotionally different from say, not playing a written passage very well and working on it in a lesson. More like 'I'll never be able to improvise, I can't even do this simple task. I'm not an improviser.' As a teacher the thing is to avoid that self talk.
In the jargon, some extra scaffolding is required.
-
Or this type of thing, for instance, coming to rhythm. Very fixed mindset statement:
I spend quite a lot of my time practicing rhythmic stuff I can't do AT ALL at first. Not saying I'm Captian Fantastic or anything, just I get really happy when I find something fundamental I can't do and look forward to learning how to do it and getting better. Originally Posted by ragman1
Measurable gains are nice. Not the whole picture, but satisfying.
Reply With Quote
"Clam Chowder"
Today, 10:32 AM in Composition