It is interesting that he is against slowing down recordings. That is something my teacher suggested for me and I like the results.
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Janek Gwizdala Transcription Advice
- Thread starter Dr. Cheese
- Start date
It is interesting that he is against slowing down recordings. That is something my teacher suggested for me and I like the results.
I've been transcribing for decades and my observation is that the longer I do it there are fewer situations where I feel like I need to slow stuff down, but there are still times when the audio quality is bad or I'm having trouble hearing something and the slow down stuff helps. So in a sense if you want to be a good transcriptionist, you are obviously going to have to spend hundreds of hours doing it, and you do that your ear is going to be trained in a way that a beginner's ear is not. So I disagree with him that you should never slow anything down, but I do think that if transcription is something you want to be able to do well, you have to do it a _lot_, and if you do it a lot you're going to need the slow-down stuff less, or maybe not at all. So maybe what he's really getting at is that you just need to put in the hours.
That being said, the thing I would absolutely not ever in a million years give up is the looping feature of something like Transcribe. Cassettes were a huge improvement for me but it was just brutal on the user and the machine going back and forth over and over trying to figure something out. The looper, whether you slow the loop down or not, deserves a Nobel prize.
That being said, the thing I would absolutely not ever in a million years give up is the looping feature of something like Transcribe. Cassettes were a huge improvement for me but it was just brutal on the user and the machine going back and forth over and over trying to figure something out. The looper, whether you slow the loop down or not, deserves a Nobel prize.
Meh. Do what gets you results. Dogmatic approaches should always be seen as suspect.
Exactly. (see Jeff Berlin's thoughts on using a metronome).
Also, I think it's quite a stretch to call the method of slowing things down a "trick" or "********".
It can be amazing how your ear can fool you, especially when a note goes by quickly. I’d rather get the notes right because I’ve slowed the track down than get them wrong because of some firm rule. Does that mean always slowing a track down as a reflex action? No, but it’s nice to have the option.
I agree. Nothing wrong with slowing down. In many cases that’s the only way to know what’s really happening. I am not saying you have to slow down every thing. But try to transcribe some Indian music for example. As a layman in that music and even as an advanced player in that music you will never hear what they are doing exactly at speed in certain parts. So the only way to find out is to slow it down. Or the recording quality is too bad or the bass really low in the mix etc. Many more examples of this.
To call that cheating or a trick is a bit stupid and denigrating and even arrogant I think. Maybe he is just trying to get more views by saying something controversial? It’s working!
Last edited:
Also: better slowing it down and transcribing it right than transcribing it wrong at speed and wasting your time on practicing a wrong lick!
Slow when needed, forge ahead when you can. Its a tool, use it if you need. As stated, Youll need it less as you improve.
As someone who learned to transcribe long before the technology to alter playback speed without impacting playback pitch existed, I'll offer this: Don't overlook the value of some judicious low-pass filtering when trying to identify notes at speed.
I see what you did there.... intentionally or not. That's a pretty dogmatic statement...
I didn't watch the video linked in the OP. I HAVE been transcribing stuff since the late 60s, far before any of today's cool tools were available. The process?
1. Listen to a passage (length depends upon complexity) until you can sing it back.
2. Write down what you sang, and don't worry about making a mistake.
3. Go back and listen again, looking at what you notated. Any mistakes will be a LOT clearer when you see them as you listen... correct them
4. Repeat.
Slowing stuff down generally wasn't available (without changing octaves and seriously messing up timbre), so I never used it, and still haven't. I can see how on a bad recording it may be useful. Typically, if something is so fast you can't tell what it is, at least in a lot of the jazz stuff I transcribe, it's either kind of sloppy and "in-the-cracks" anyway, or more of an effect than an actual carefully constructed, harmonically-relevent lick. There are times when notation just kind of fails to accurately represent what someone plays. Slowing those kinds of things down only makes them more puzzling, at least for me.
1. Listen to a passage (length depends upon complexity) until you can sing it back.
2. Write down what you sang, and don't worry about making a mistake.
3. Go back and listen again, looking at what you notated. Any mistakes will be a LOT clearer when you see them as you listen... correct them
4. Repeat.
Slowing stuff down generally wasn't available (without changing octaves and seriously messing up timbre), so I never used it, and still haven't. I can see how on a bad recording it may be useful. Typically, if something is so fast you can't tell what it is, at least in a lot of the jazz stuff I transcribe, it's either kind of sloppy and "in-the-cracks" anyway, or more of an effect than an actual carefully constructed, harmonically-relevent lick. There are times when notation just kind of fails to accurately represent what someone plays. Slowing those kinds of things down only makes them more puzzling, at least for me.
"Don't play faster than you can hear" Was advice I read here on TB once.
I think not slowing it down is part of exercising how "fast" you can hear
There are certain rhythms I can recognize by ear and know exactly how to notate.
In those cases I find the tempo typically has little to do with ease of recognition
It's more of a vocabulary recognition problem than a speed problem
So slowing it down won't matter much.
There are doubtless edge cases where slowing it down would be helpful
- bad recordings, high speed metal riffs, odd changes / meters etc
but in general, for most musical styles and tempos, I think ears, pencil and paper are sufficient.
I think not slowing it down is part of exercising how "fast" you can hear
There are certain rhythms I can recognize by ear and know exactly how to notate.
In those cases I find the tempo typically has little to do with ease of recognition
It's more of a vocabulary recognition problem than a speed problem
So slowing it down won't matter much.
There are doubtless edge cases where slowing it down would be helpful
- bad recordings, high speed metal riffs, odd changes / meters etc
but in general, for most musical styles and tempos, I think ears, pencil and paper are sufficient.
I see what you did there.... intentionally or not. That's a pretty dogmatic statement...
I have a very strong opinion about Janek's "shock jock" statement, but it's senseless and a huge waste of time to argue about.
Just one thing.
From Janek's youtube channel.
"Could I Play Bass With John Mayer? | Queen of California."
Janek's comment:
"I used LALAL.ai to extract
the bass (not a sponsor of this video)..."
P.S. Janek it's a simple pop song. Why do you need to use LALAL and extract that bass-line?
LOL!
P.S. Lalal does a good job on extracting the bass-lines.
(Not a sponsor of Lalal.)
Just one thing.
From Janek's youtube channel.
"Could I Play Bass With John Mayer? | Queen of California."
Janek's comment:
"I used LALAL.ai to extract
the bass (not a sponsor of this video)..."P.S. Janek it's a simple pop song. Why do you need to use LALAL and extract that bass-line?
LOL!
P.S. Lalal does a good job on extracting the bass-lines.
(Not a sponsor of Lalal.)
Just a short clip - one bar - of a bass-line from "Let's dance" - Chris Rea.
At a 100% tempo - the bass plays a regular shuffle pattern (that's what I hear) in the very beginning.
https://www.talkbass.com/attachment...7/?temp_hash=6ea48abe47ef5e5fd226b5dfd7750be8
At a 50% tempo - I hear a clearly pronounced triplet in the bass line (in the very beginning.)
https://www.talkbass.com/attachment...1/?temp_hash=6ea48abe47ef5e5fd226b5dfd7750be8
I'd say do whatever fits your goals. Maybe you don't have enough time to transcribe this correctly without slowing down and you need to deliver a transcription or practice the transcribed material.
I'll also say that in my experience the best musicians are rarely the best teachers.
I'll also say that in my experience the best musicians are rarely the best teachers.
I’ve been using Transcribe software to help transcribe bass parts.
Bottom line is whatever helps you gain knowledge of the instrument
is the bottom line.
Bottom line is whatever helps you gain knowledge of the instrument
is the bottom line.
