Jeff Berlin asks - What Is Taught Without Only Teaching the Facts!

[JeffBerlin]

False.

Adults can learn in the exact same manner as children - they just will not learn as quickly or easily due to the different manner within the physical structure of the brain in which learning occurs.

This applies to ALL learning, no matter the method and no matter the subject.

Read Jean Piaget!

 

[J_Bass]

You bet! Come to think of it, if you play a 5 string Bass, you should be able to play Bass Trombone Music too!

I guess I'll stick to the Trombone, then, ahah!

 

[Quinn Roberts]

due to the different manner within the physical structure of the brain in which learning occurs.

Wouldn't that make it a different manner?

 

[hintz]

The point seems painfully clear to me. I just don't agree as it an over generalization that assumes everyone has the same priorities and goals.

A couple of ideas to consider:
1. You could have all the music theory and knowledge known to man at your disposal, and it would be of no benefit to you as an instrumentalist if you could not competently play the lines.
2. Input the most incredible composition ever written into a sequencer and let it play without any sort of additional nuance applied like articulation, dynamics, touch, and feel. Compare this to performance by amateur and expert musicians, or even a good sequence programmed by someone who has mastered the language of musical touch and expression. Keep in mind that theory and musical nuance are separate types of knowledge. It's entirely possible to understand one without understanding the other.

My school required students to take lessons, perform in ensembles, and listen to recording; in addition to studying theory, history, secondary instruments, and voice training. During ensemble and lessons I was directed on how to produce and shape notes. Often the answer to "why" we play a note a certain way, was based upon harmonic structure or historical context, but I have a hard time believing that the only part of this experience that shaped my musical performance as a professional bassist was music theory and knowledge of correct fingering.

I would argue theory is eventually the most important factor for musicians who need to be skilled in composition and improvisation, and those who teach. But what percentage of bass players actually engage in composition, improvisation, or teaching; and how many good paying jobs are available to those that invest in an advanced music degree. In my experience most educated musicians are grossly over qualified for the positions they fill, and grossly under paid for the level education they hold.

I would agree that theory could be the pinnacle of study for some, but not the main focus for all. Most people start their musical education with a primary focus on technique and a very small focus on theory. For those who pursue music academically, the focus on theory will drastically increase once the individual begins to formally study music. However, the focus on technique will remain high until he or shes begins to approach mastery of their instrument or chooses a nonperformance music major. At this point the focus on technique tends to fall off, and the focus on theory will become primary until the individual's formal education is complete. What happens next depends upon what the musician's ongoing goals and needs are. Some may pursue advanced theory studies, while others forget most if not all of the theory they learned with exception of what is applied directly to their instrument during performance.

Often those who pursue advanced theory degrees essentially cease to see themselves primarily as instrumentalists. When this happens, a focus on technique becomes irrelevant. I believe this is where Mr Berlin may be. In a sense he has learned most if not all that he can about technique, and being a bassist is just a small facet of how he defines himself. Easy to see why theory is his primary focus. Hard to argue why it shouldn't be.

When I was in school, I hated class with my favorite professor. She was a wonderful person, an incredible musician, principle of the local symphony, and had perfect pitch. In short, I adored, admired, and respected her. I took solfege with her in my third semester and it was a disaster. In previous semesters I had always been top of my class. But the instructors in previous classes all had relative instead of perfect pitch, so they understood much better how to relate to someone who was trying to develop relative pitch. She pushed me to the point that I lost confidence in the intervals and almost dropped out of the class in frustration. I think I ended with B because she graded on a curve. but I felt like a failure.

It would have been incredible to study with her when my skills had advance to an appropriate level, but she really had no business teaching in a junior college. How could a god of a musician like her possibly relate to a mere mortal like me who did not posses her innate mastery of the 12 tones? I think many of us would perceive and relate to Mr Berlin in a similar manner.

Mr Berlin, I hold you up in the pantheon of bass demigods. I understand why you think study of technique is useless and banal; because, for you it is. I don't ask that you try to get down on our level and teach or study technique. That would be silly. But I hope that you can understand and accept that the study of technique is useful and worthwhile for us mere mortals and will stop inferring that it is a waste of time as that makes us feel insulted and demeaned.

For the record I made a very comfortable living with full benefits as a professional military musician. My formal music education ended in the third semester, but I continued to study technique and theory for an extended time as my job required intermediate improvisational skills and I was expected to perform on electric bass as well as bowed/plucked acoustic bass. Solid technical competence and versatility across styles, rather than being a monster specialized musician were keys to my success. At some point I lost my way and stopped growing, when I realized that my level of preparation and performance was often higher than the majority of others who held advanced music degrees.

Final words: I often observed that musicians who rely most heavily on theory (composers and jazzers) often have worse tone and technique than classical players who simply read the notes. There are only so many hours in the day, so people tend to develop/retain the skills that get the job done.

Nice! I can relate to your story *alot* Wasnex, I've been playing bass for the US Army for the last 7 years and also was one of the top students at my school (the now closed McNally Smith/musictech, had a scholarship and all that).

At my school they focused more on contemporary/pop music and jazz rather than classical, but we did learn classical theory, etc. For me alot of this stuff didn't "sink in" until years later playing bass for concert band or jazz combo, or hearing the commander reiterating alot of these theory concepts. Anyways thank you for your service!

To Jeff Berlin, your career speaks for itself! I remember trying to wrap my head around the articles you wrote back in the 90's and the backlash from some of my instructors, in particular an article about metronomes not helping with timing LOL! I do agree though, I found through experience that I've learned *more* from pianists than any other musician, but at the same time I've found things like warming up and working on fine tuning my technique to be very beneficial as well, sorta like trumpet players who work on long tones and revisit basic fundamentals. In short, I can entertain arguments on both sides of the coin as every person has a unique style of learning.

Very interesting OP and responses, gives me alot of food for thought and I will read all this with an open mind, Thank you!

 

[pudgychef]

As a former long time chef and hospitality manager...nothing worse than a cook that cannot produce 'in the rush' ....anyone can learn to make a single meal, in a vacuum where customers and time limits don't exist...similarly, many 'chefs' can produce delicious plates of food, than can't be sold for a profit...

Both of these are useless, if you cannot produce quality, profitable food 'in the rush/moment', and adjust, react and produce on the fly based on customer demand, you are not a professional cook or chef...

It is fine enjoy cooking at home...and in that case you can learn 'recipes' outside of the pace and setting of a restaurant...but to be a pro, you need to be learning, in context and in the heat of it.... as anything else is false and is not teaching you skills usable for a career in that field.

Recipes...like a chord sheets, in so many ways....a false attempt to quantify things difficult to quantity...
You can cook or you can't....you can play or you can't....
Replicating a single piece of music or a recipe outside if the meilleuix is a hobby...which is also great....but is very different.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Hi ... don’t want to contradict you, however, because of my job, I had to learn three foreign languages, that is: English, French and Chinese (of course spoken with different degrees of proficiency - I’m Italian)...
Last year I moved to Poland with another company ... bad situation there as only a few people is able to understand English ... long story short I had to start learning another language (Polish) ... the teacher adopted a “speak immediately with what you know” approach, which is basically ok, but without any formal explanations of the rules and exceptions ... being Italian I know how grammar is important in well structured languages and the Polish one seems to be quite complex as well ... I believe that in my case a mixed approach (informal/formal) would help as I frequently find myself asking the teacher about the reasons why a given sentence has to stated in a certain way rather than in another way ...

I think that the notion that we can learn music as a child learns it is the point that I don't see as true. I learned Spanish as a second language at age 35, but learned it starting out in an academic program as I assume that you do. It is the academic elements that make it easier for adults to learn other languages. I would submit that if as an adult, you were required to learn three new languages by ear, your story might be different.

 

[aborgman]

Read Jean Piaget!

You're misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting Piaget's theories.

How the brain physically changes in learning is different between children and adults. What methods work for creating those changes largely is not.

 

[pudgychef]

You're misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting Piaget's theories.

How the brain physically changes in learning is different between children and adults. What methods work for creating those changes largely is not.

Scaffold it brother

 

[JeffBerlin]

I redacted your quote above; then numbered the content that I have responded to.

1. I do accept you are trying to inspire people. But you can only inspire people to a level of knowledge that is limited by their intellect, the quality of their memory, and their motivation. As one approaches this intellectual plateau, it becomes difficult to comprehend increasingly difficult concepts. Many people are not capable of approaching your level of knowledge mastery. You need to accept that you have exceptional talent in some areas of intellect that are beyond what most people are capable of, and factor that into the way you try to motivate others. It's not one size fits all. Everyone has different abilities and experiences, and you have to remain humble and tie into individual needs if you want to inspire.

Have you studied any of the motivation theories? If you truly want to inspire people that might be a good subject to delve into.

Great idea! I do try to state in my posts that there is a better way to learn and that people can improve their playing if they wish to. I have the idea that this is inspirational if one really wants to improve their musical thing.

 

[aborgman]

Wouldn't that make it a different manner?

If you teach both a child an adult using the Suzuki method, and the adult learns by repurposing existing neural pathways and the child learns by creating new neural pathways... is that a different manner?

Identical teaching methodologies to me is "learning in the same manner"

 

[JeffBerlin]

You're misunderstanding and/or misrepresenting Piaget's theories.

How the brain physically changes in learning is different between children and adults. What methods work for creating those changes largely is not.

Good point! My view is if the physical brain is different, then the manner of learning will be as well. We all learn by ear. I do to this day. It just seems important that people know that because the adult brain is different than a child's brain. Because adults don't have the same capacity of learning as a child does, learning via the same methods that a child does isn't going to produce the same results. Is this fair to say?

 

[Dirk Diggler]

First lesson, learn to embrace the metronome.
You can thank me later.
Dirk

 

[JeffBerlin]

As a former long time chef and hospitality manager...nothing worse than a cook that cannot produce 'in the rush' ....anyone can learn to make a single meal, in a vacuum where customers and time limits don't exist...similarly, many 'chefs' can produce delicious plates of food, than can't be sold for a profit...

Both of these are useless, if you cannot produce quality, profitable food 'in the rush/moment', and adjust, react and produce on the fly based on customer demand, you are not a professional cook or chef...

It is fine enjoy cooking at home...and in that case you can learn 'recipes' outside of the pace and setting of a restaurant...but to be a pro, you need to be learning, in context and in the heat of it.... as anything else is false and is not teaching you skills usable for a career in that field.

Recipes...like a chord sheets, in so many ways....a false attempt to quantify things difficult to quantity...
You can cook or you can't....you can play or you can't....
Replicating a single piece of music or a recipe outside if the meilleuix is a hobby...which is also great....but is very different.

True. But, you have to first learn how to cook because you will get that gig. True? This is where I come from, far more to the "left" than other people do. Before you can do, you have to learn how. Bass players will do a lot better with their music if they learn how (that is, if they haven't already.)

 

[aborgman]

Good point, but I got this. If the physical brain is different, then the manner of learning will be as well. We all learn by ear. I do to this day. It just seems important that people know that because the adult brain is different than a child's brain. Because adults don't have the same capacity of learning as a child does, learning via the same methods that a child does isn't going to produce the same results. Is this fair to say?

Because adults don't have the same capacity of learning as a child does, learning via ANY method isn't going to produce the same results.

No matter the method - learning will always be easier for a child due to the physical brain difference involved in the mechanics of learning.

That doesn't mean methods used to teach children won't work for adults - it means they will work more slowly, but that is true of ALL methods.

 

[Michael Schreiber]

I suppose the question is whether what you pick up on the bandstand is really teaching or are you just hearing the music differently and now understanding it better because of things you had previously learned?

Good point!
When I was writing, I had one of Larry Graham's video lessons in mind where he and his drummer showed how and why they attempt to leave each other "space;" playing around the drums when needed. That I reckon could be learned better together with a drummer (and a bass playing teacher) than from a book or from a teacher alone playing to a back track.

I also don't think I would be able to learn this from the video lesson nor from once trying it - it's an impulse to get me up and learning that together with a drummer. I don't say that would be mere practice, yet, because at first it is learning; figuring out what it means playing around drums, trying it out, coming up with own patterns or schemes that feel right.

And for such things, I feel learning works better together with more people than just one teacher / youtube, whatever.
Of course, for others different approaches might work better. I am not trying to say what would be good and bad in general. Just that there are more ways and means to learn than teacher, book, youtube, school, or figuring it out on one's own alone.

Aren't everyone's needs are as individual as one's ambitions, dreams, visions? Then, chosing the method of learning based on what one wants to learn feels reasonable to me.

 

[JeffBerlin]

This post includes what is known as reductionism. This approach ignores the fact that the experience of music is subjective, and depends on what each listener brings in the way of inherited ability and accumulated experience. I recommend that Mr. Berlin take a few more courses in psychology before he continues spouting his views on learning.

Music experience is certainly subjective. The learning of it in an academic manner isn't. This is the point that I feel that you are missing.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Because adults don't have the same capacity of learning as a child does, learning via ANY method isn't going to produce the same results.

No matter the method - learning will always be easier for a child due to the physical brain difference involved in the mechanics of learning.

That doesn't mean methods used to teach children won't work for adults - it means they will work more slowly, but that is true of ALL methods.

Well, everybody learns by ear. We all listen to CD's and imitate what we hear. It's a standard philosophy of music itself. What's the need to emphasize this point if everyone does it anyway. Look at it this way: If adults don't learn as kids do, and if we all learn as kids do anyway, then what's the need to make a video about it?

 

[JeffBerlin]

If you teach both a child an adult using the Suzuki method, and the adult learns by repurposing existing neural pathways and the child learns by creating new neural pathways... is that a different manner?

Identical teaching methodologies to me is "learning in the same manner"

Well, Suzuki depends upon musical content being the core of its teaching the instrument. I like any method where music is first.

 

[JeffBerlin]

EXACTLY THIS! thank you...

Thank you for your support. People are entwined with their beliefs. I was as well for a long time until I went for help, so I understand the experience intimately.

 

[JeffBerlin]

I may get flamed for my response, especially from the self-taught crowd. I agree with Mr. Berlin.

Check's in the mail............