For those who Pino did not study because he does not read...

[LBS-bass]

Saying that one is not going to bother learning reading because Hendryx, MacCartney, or Prince, didn’t read amounts to someone saying that because great geniuses didn’t learn to read, I won’t. The problem is that the great majority of those non-readers are nowhere near genius status.

Right. But you might just discourage the next true genius through sheer boredom if you make it too theory-heavy for them right away, or if you don't work with them to help them understand why they need it.

A big problem in music instruction is that we can mistake teaching theory for teaching music. It's understandable because the tools for getting someone to play what you want them to play involve some basic stuff like learning to read notation (which is not actually theory) and then from there we try to help the students along a path that's been more or less laid out by some instructive program or another.

None of that gives Mozart a chance to show anyone that he's Mozart though, and pretty soon he's just doing it all on his own because nothing anyone gave him held his interest for very long.

I know of former music students who left music instruction because their teachers didn't want to hear what they could do, they only wanted to hear them play what they were required to learn, which was boring them to tears.

I don't know what the solution to that is beyond better teachers, maybe. But what's the point in that? A musical genius still has to make a living and there's not much money in music, that's for sure.

 

[Dr. Cheese]

Right. But you might just discourage the next true genius through sheer boredom if you make it too theory-heavy for them right away, or if you don't work with them to help them understand why they need it.

A big problem in music instruction is that we can mistake teaching theory for teaching music. It's understandable because the tools for getting someone to play what you want them to play involve some basic stuff like learning to read notation (which is not actually theory) and then from there we try to help the students along a path that's been more or less laid out by some instructive program or another.

None of that gives Mozart a chance to show anyone that he's Mozart though, and pretty soon he's just doing it all on his own because nothing anyone gave him held his interest for very long.

I know of former music students who left music instruction because their teachers didn't want to hear what they could do, they only wanted to hear them play what they were required to learn, which was boring them to tears.

I don't know what the solution to that is beyond better teachers, maybe. But what's the point in that? A musical genius still has to make a living and there's not much money in music, that's for sure.

The genius who has the drive is going to do what she or he is going to do.

 

[LBS-bass]

The genius who has the drive is going to do what she or he is going to do.

That is true. And everyone else will tell that person they don't exist, because they don't learn the same way as others

 

[Dr. Cheese]

That is true. And everyone else will tell that person they don't exist, because they don't learn the same way as others

That is life. A famous biologist once said that he was less impressed with how smart Einstein was than he was struck by the fact that there have been geniuses who were forced to spend life picking cotton. Life just isn’t fair. Although Prince never became a good reader, his high school band teacher saw his talent and let him have free reign of the school’s instruments, and he spent every minute of his free time in the band room playing instruments. Another teacher may have just kicked him out. Frank Zappa taught himself theory and reading by going to his local library and checking out books on music. Had he looked different and lived in the South, he would not have been allowed into public libraries in most towns in the region, at least until 1965.

I am not looking to make a debate on race, I am just showing that opportunity is not equal.

 

[WG Plum]

Right. But you might just discourage the next true genius through sheer boredom if you make it too theory-heavy for them right away, or if you don't work with them to help them understand why they need it.

A big problem in music instruction is that we can mistake teaching theory for teaching music. It's understandable because the tools for getting someone to play what you want them to play involve some basic stuff like learning to read notation (which is not actually theory) and then from there we try to help the students along a path that's been more or less laid out by some instructive program or another.

None of that gives Mozart a chance to show anyone that he's Mozart though, and pretty soon he's just doing it all on his own because nothing anyone gave him held his interest for very long.

I know of former music students who left music instruction because their teachers didn't want to hear what they could do, they only wanted to hear them play what they were required to learn, which was boring them to tears.

I don't know what the solution to that is beyond better teachers, maybe. But what's the point in that? A musical genius still has to make a living and there's not much money in music, that's for sure.

This exactly what happened to me.

 

[LBS-bass]

That is life. A famous biologist once said that he was less impressed with how smart Einstein was than he was struck by the fact that there have been geniuses who were forced to spend life picking cotton. Life just isn’t fair. Although Prince never became a good reader, his high school band teacher saw his talent and let him have free reign of the school’s instruments, and he spent every minute of his free time in the band room playing instruments. Another teacher may have just kicked him out. Frank Zappa taught himself theory and reading by going to his local library and checking out books on music. Had he looked different and lived in the South, he would not have been allowed into public libraries in most towns in the region, at least until 1965.

I am not looking to make a debate on race, I am just showing that opportunity is not equal.

I agree with all of this.

One argument that gets tossed around a lot is "musical gifts are a myth because if you ask someone who you think is a genius how they got that good they will tell you they practiced hard to get there."

And that is a logical fallacy, because learning to execute anything at a high level takes a tremendous amount of practice time. Nobody has ever popped out of the womb knowing how to play a classical concerto, but there have been people who have learned pretty quickly how to do it after just hearing it.

I'm a bit fascinated by the savants out there who seem impaired in certain areas of cognition but have unimaginable aptitudes in music or art, or even mathematics. Most musical geniuses are probably not savants, though. They have to practice, a lot, to get to the "execution" part of the list someone posted above, because it takes a lot of time to refine how to properly do the mechanics to clearly replicate what one hears in one's head.

And most savants do not practice, and their gifts, while formidable, often result in unsteady renditions. Still remarkable, but not necessarily refined.

But for any of that to manifest in someone's life, somebody has to hand them an instrument and encourage them to play it.

 

[mambo4]

A big problem in music instruction is that we can mistake teaching theory for teaching music.

Also a big potential problem in self teaching. I probably learned more theory than actual songs, to my detriment.

 

[mambo4]

But for any of that to manifest in someone's life, somebody has to hand them an instrument and encourage them to play it.

There are periodic threads about weather or not "talent" is real, as opposed to long effort and practice.
I tend to think of musical skills (and similar) as a sort of epigenetic phenomena: People have varying amounts of "genetic" potential (talent) but it is the environment (effort and practice) that determines of those "genes" are actually expressed.

 

[LBS-bass]

There are periodic threads about weather or not "talent" is real, as opposed to long effort and practice.
I tend to think of musical skills (and similar) as a sort of epigenetic phenomena: People have varying amounts of "genetic" potential (talent) but it is the environment (effort and practice) that determines of those "genes" are actually expressed.

I agree with this, too. I don't for a moment consider myself a musical "genius" of any sort, because I'm certainly not that. But I do come from a musical family (my mom's side was very Carter family-ish) and I do seem to learn music in a different way from most people, which is one reason I think about this so much.

I have to conclude that there are different degrees of aptitude; you can call that talent if you want, and I am pretty certain I would have been better served if I had better instruction and encouragement in my younger years. Particularly, when I studied piano it was a bit of a disaster as the teacher was using a method that didn't even have me playing a piano at all, just pretending to play on a plastic keyboard. So I'd come home and play whatever I wanted to on my own piano. I had books and I could figure out chords because I knew what the notes were on the keyboard, so I'd just play through the chord changes and sing along with that. I've never gotten good at piano but I can play well enough to write a song.

I did have some early encouragement from a music teacher in grade school, which was very helpful, and I learned fundamental things there, enough that I knew how to coax a sound out of a few types of instruments, and ultimately that was helpful. But voice was what I was really good at because I never needed an instrument to do that - I was born with that instrument in my throat and all I had to do was listen to make it do what I wanted. So that was my entry into music as a profession, but ultimately I ended up with bass as a necessity, and took to it very well.

So this is a long-winded confession that I do have some personal interest in this subject because I seem to learn differently from most, but I hesitate to personalize it too much because, as I said, people think I don't exist.

 

[Howardzark]

I agree with this, too. I don't for a moment consider myself a musical "genius" of any sort, because I'm certainly not that. But I do come from a musical family (my mom's side was very Carter family-ish) and I do seem to learn music in a different way from most people, which is one reason I think about this so much.

I have to conclude that there are different degrees of aptitude; you can call that talent if you want, and I am pretty certain I would have been better served if I had better instruction and encouragement in my younger years. Particularly, when I studied piano it was a bit of a disaster as the teacher was using a method that didn't even have me playing a piano at all, just pretending to play on a plastic keyboard. So I'd come home and play whatever I wanted to on my own piano. I had books and I could figure out chords because I knew what the notes were on the keyboard, so I'd just play through the chord changes and sing along with that. I've never gotten good at piano but I can play well enough to write a song.

I did have some early encouragement from a music teacher in grade school, which was very helpful, and I learned fundamental things there, enough that I knew how to coax a sound out of a few types of instruments, and ultimately that was helpful. But voice was what I was really good at because I never needed an instrument to do that - I was born with that instrument in my throat and all I had to do was listen to make it do what I wanted. So that was my entry into music as a profession, but ultimately I ended up with bass as a necessity, and took to it very well.

So this is a long-winded confession that I do have some personal interest in this subject because I seem to learn differently from most, but I hesitate to personalize it too much because, as I said, people think I don't exist.

I play Bass. My 7 y/o grandson is into all things music. He keeps "borrowing" his sister's guitar much to her displeasure. Thinking I could ease the home situation, and divest myself of an unplayed instrument, I offered him a mandolin. Told him to take it home and mess around with it, see if he liked it. With big puppy dog eyes, he assured me he wouldn't mess around with it, he would take care of it and play it! That was my 2nd warning.

Two days later, his Dad called me to say Hunter had been watching mandolin videos and doesn't understand what they are saying. Hunter wants ME to teach him how to play mandolin! Uh oh, 3rd warning, and RED ALERT!

Okay, I'm thinking. All I have to do is stay ahead of him, right? How hard can that be? Depends on how hard I want to make it. Remembering my instructors telling me, "Just learn your scales, that's all you need," without explanation of what a scale is, I decided to start with "This is a mandolin, there are many like it. This one is yours. Here are the names of all the parts."

So, put an instrument in the hands of a child. Make sure they have a tuner, strap, and a bag for everything. Teach them how to care for their instrument and keep it safe. Assure the parents that accidents will happen and can be dealt with. Set aside a regular time to meet with the student, and make sure you honor that commitment. Be gentle and loving. Give them what you wish YOU had been given. Make it up as you go along. Remember, it's called playing for a reason. Have fun! If you can, allow extra time to teach a young one how to play checkers or Yahtzee.

Thanks for listening. If Hunter maintains interest, He will understand "music theory" before he ever hears the term. He will be able to read music without knowing how he learned. This is the best thing I have ever done!

P.S. I had to buy another mandolin so I could SHOW him what I was teaching him. What was I thinking?

 

[DavidEdenAria]

Eddie Van Halen won a piano concerto at like age 9 and he never learned to read music.

 

[mambo4]

Eddie Van Halen won a piano concerto at like age 9 and he never learned to read music.

Such skill is not uncommon for players who grow up in musical families.
But What do such anecdotes have to do with your practice and study efforts ?

 

[DavidEdenAria]

Such skill is not uncommon for players who grow up in musical families.
But What do such anecdotes have to do with your practice and study efforts ?

I learned to read music on trumpet in the 6th grade but i dont really apply that to bass, however i can read the bass clef...in EVH case he was extremely motivated to create his own style and always applied keyboard knowledge to guitar from what i gathered...thought i would throw that in...motivation was the key and always with a fun attitude.