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

[Whousedtoplay]

I regularly edit to correct spelling and fix malformed sentences.

How dear (sorry, need a correction - dare) you edit your comments!
It's my idea!

 

[Michael Schreiber]

Because if you think people shouldn't get on him, then yes he should edit his words to communicate better.

Totally agreed.

Just adding a side note: In my humble opinion, there is a difference between getting at someone within a discussion and with arguments - and bashing against someone without arguments, and/or unrelated to the topic. I don't mean you and I wouldn't name anyone. From my perspective: Yes, OP obviously provoked or polarized; No, it is not OK to getting personal, accusing him without proof nor reason.

While some obviously and understandably complain about OP's language, I have yet to see as many people complaining about getting personal; except at the end of the post of the moderator, which I much appreciated. And the few non-moderating ones who do are in turn regarded as "fanboys," I reckon

Just saying: Even in this thread a discussion is possible - even with "absolute" or provoking tone and polarizing claims.
Aren't they needed sometimes as impulse? To me: Yes. And that is why I feel sorry for anyone who could not learn to cope with that; they seem to miss so much content just because of wording issues. I rather read threads like this than see them banned. Selfish reason, I know

 

[JeffBerlin]

Jeff, I personally am not unhappy with your views at all. In fact, I wish I had taken your advice 20 years ago. I would have become a much better player.
I have been unhappy in the past by the caustic way you had expressed them.
I've been following you for quite a while and have seen the great strides you've made in being more fair, reasonable, understanding and civil.
This does not go unnoticed.
I applaud you for this and congrats.
I've seen you perform several times in several different stylistic situations and I've never seen any player present a higher degree of skill.

Oh, yes! I was a caustic and angry person and had to correct this among many other personal negative attributes. It pleases me that this is noticeable. Thank you for your thoughts!

 

[FantasticFour]

And that is why I feel sorry for anyone who could not learn to cope with that; they seem to miss so much content just because of wording issues. I rather read threads like this than see them banned. Selfish reason, I know

exactly this^

 

[fdeck]

The title of this thread doesn't even make sense to me.

To be fair, the thread title raised an issue that hasn't really been discussed, so don't worry about it. We don't need to understand e.g. math education in order to discuss music education unless someone with experience in math has an insight that bears on the current issue.

A good teacher knows how to communicate well.

True, but once again to be fair, there's communication and there's communication. Also, there's teaching and then there's advocacy. It's one thing to be a good teacher. It's quite another to debate a topic that's guaranteed to be controversial under the best circumstances, much less on a web forum. I'm not sure the latter is even possible.

When you hire a teacher, you tend to give them the benefit of the doubt, because that's why you hire a teacher. I'm willing to extend that same principle to any discussion with an expert or teacher on a web forum.

 

[bass12]

Thanks for posting that Bryan. After watching, I'm crystal clear what Jeff is talking about. Personally, I'm full of remorse for not getting that type of education. And a little peeved I allowed myself to make excuses (e.g. formal education kills creativity, etc.) Here I am at 51, and I feel it's too late. Maybe that's where some of the hostility comes from (well, that and ego)?

At any rate, this thread was timely, in that I had been watching videos and ran across one on chord substitution in Christmas songs. I printed out a chord chart and was playing with different chords under the melodies playing in a loop. Now I look at this video and see chord tones in action. Maybe it's not too late for me? I want to play some jazz before I die, and I think I have a little better idea how to go about that now.

It's definitely not too late to jump in and learn what you need to learn. A good teacher will help a lot, as will a good reference book (such as Mark Levine's "The Jazz Theory Book"). The thing is, once you get past the mental road block that many of us develop with age ("I can't learn that - it's too difficult") and begin learning some basics about harmony as it relates to jazz you'll find that it's not as complicated as you probably think it is. The more time you spend on the material the more things become demystified. Clarity inevitably sets in and you'll say to yourself, "Wow, that wasn't nearly as difficult as I thought it would be". Don't be scared - find a teacher and get started.

 

[Joe Nerve]

Yes.



As a very staunch supporter of the Metronome, here are my memories from my personal experience of that "orthodox" (academic) music school.
Yes, there were old-fashioned metronomes on almost all pianos/fortepianos or on some shelves.
Their purpose was (sometimes) to indicate/approximate a composition's tempo like, Allegro moderato — moderately quick (112–124 bpm).
I have never ever played any composition on the accordion or on the piano with the Metronome.
The metronome was only to approximate - to round up - tempo.

For solfeggio lessons, my right hand was my Metronome.



Once again.
During my music school years with those academic tormentors, I've never ever was asked, forced to play anything with the metronome.
I know what you mean by saying, "A metronome has Helped me tremendously", and here is why.
The classical academic musical education did not require any precise timing!
See Allegro moderato from 112BPM to 124BPM. It's such a big difference!

Here is what, I think, would have been done decades ago about those Metronomes.

Most probably, it would have been some kind of "after-school activity", or some "group of strange musical ideas" with a very strange name, "What is Groove and how to achieve it".

That would have been decades ago.
Now, most probably the Metronomes are required in some "fine musical institutions".

But what about that, "A metronome helped me tremendously?" statement.
When I was playing Schubert or Berlioz, or Haydn, or even Johann Strauss, my teachers required so much of OTHER things/nuances/attributes from my playing that drove me "nuts", but there was NOTHING said, required to play with the Metronome!
But even if you play some easy country music "Root-5th" pattern, you "must" lock with the drummer.
What???
It's never ever been mentioned in any academic education teaching tutorial.
Or maybe you were talking about some "after class" activity where some "strange" solfeggio teacher was "promoting some strange Groove ideas.

Let's take a "strange" example.
A college student is learning how to build a bridge with all those crazy formulas, calculations, etc...
That academic course manual, several required to read books, plus professor's notes have nothing to say about
"what kind of gloves/shoes/coats should the student wear while building a bridge in Alaska winter time".
That academic course does not require the student to know what kind of bullet protection to use while building a bridge in Afghanistan's Helmand province.
BUT IT SO IMPORTANT TO THE STUDENT!!!

In short.
With academic learning, the student does not dictate what the student wants to learn. It's given to the student.
In serious academic school, the student does not notate a chord as C- and doe not use the Nashville chord notation system (but it's SO IMPORTANT for me).
When you told us that beautiful story about a very expensive bass guitar teacher in New York, I sounded like this:
"I don't care about any Cooking knowledge. I just wanted to know how much that Cooking Teacher is making or could make per hour".

Should you have questions, please let me know.

I understand all that, but I don't think the bridge building analogy works. We're not building bridges, we're learning to create art. I'll elaborate...

What I understand you and Jeff to be saying is there is only really one valid way of learning to play bass. Jeff goes further by implying that other ways are BS. I couldn't disagree more.

As stated much earlier in this thread by me and many others, people are wired differently. To a left brain person, learning theoretically is exciting, inspiring, and comes easy! Jeff and that person would be a perfect match as student and teacher. My guess is Keith Richards is more of a right brain person, and my guess is also that he'd tell Jeff to get out of his face . What works best for one person isn't what will work best for another, and I'll repeat now - we're not building bridges. This isn't something you MUST get right. Nobody is going die if a song is created without the knowledge of what is going on behind it.

I've seen many creative people get frustrated with the science of music, and toss their instruments for a video game, socket wrench or whatever. To me that's a shame. There is soooooo much creativity to be expressed, by people who NEED desperately to express it, but the kind of thinking presented here can squelch a lot of that right out. And it seems to me Jeff's opinion is that it should be. I could be wrong on that, but he sure wanted to throw the bass teacher I mentioned under the bus... claiming he was proof of the "the problem."

If someone's goal is to be a bass virtuoso, and they lean toward being a left brain kind of person, I think Jeff can bring out the absolute best in them. It would be criminal for a teacher to have them sit with a metronome for hours a week. It would rob them of their potential. I get that, and it makes complete sense - but that is no reason to work so hard at invalidating the things that work for the other half of the world.

A person with no head for the science of music best be taught with grooves, sounds, melodies, timing, technical skills, etc. Anything else, IME and opinion will kill motivation and hinder their ability to create.

To me a bass is a paintbrush. You can create the simplest most beautiful outlines imaginable with it, ones that can allow the other instruments to color the painting in making it an absolute masterpiece. All one needs to know in order to do that is how to use the instrument, and make it sound good. You don't have to be a genius to do that, and you don't have to have a thorough understanding of harmony, theory and whatever else.

I want to share my experience with a metronome also, but I really have to get to some other things and I'm spending far too much time here.

 

[JeffBerlin]

I know you like sports analogies, so I’ll try one. You decide you want to be a professional boxer. The problem is you don’t know how to box yet. According to your idea there is no benefit to training your punches, blocks, counters, and footwork outside of actually boxing an opponent because you won’t know what movements and punches your opponent will make until you’re boxing them. I can’t think of a single fighter or trainer who would agree with this.

It can be consistent because the human body can be trained in motions and rhythms. Our bodies exist outside of the creation of music and everything we do to create music requires a physical action. The physical aspect of playing music is there whether you choose to focus on it or not- ignoring rather than integrating it just lengthens the time it will take to learn a process.

Interesting thought. I'll use your analogy and try another way to explain this.

The physical elements of boxing are done for a reason. Why did Ali throw his right hand at Liston or Foreman? Because he knew the outcome of executing them exactly when he did.

String crossings don't allow you to know the musical outcome that is possible by practicing them because, like a perfectly thrown right hand, they have no purpose unless it is used for a reason.

Why I criticize bass education (and why some are not pleased that I do so) is because it has created a worldwide attitude where people believe that there are benefits practicing principles where there are very few to none. One sheet of music placed in front of you or anyone will instantly make clear that string crossing are of no benefit because they didn't prepare you to cross those strings for a reason. Even sports people engage in (say) batting practice, running scrimmages, practicing putts, all sports practice events done where specific physical actions are repeated for a reason.

Think about this: If you can practice crossing your strings without a musical reason, isn't it more helpful to cross those strings for a musical reason while learning how music works at the same time? Don't you feel that it is more beneficial to move your fingers and play a major 7 melody instead of moving them for no musical reason?

 

[JeffBerlin]

Ugh, you're missing the point. He did not provide information. He stated something and then in later posts stated something about musical facts without elaborating

I've elaborated, but you aren't seeing it. I've written a number of times that bass players will improve by practicing reading etudes and practicing exercises based in harmony, melody and rhythm. Players will learn if they go to jazz teachers that play instruments other than bass (for the most part.)

 

[JeffBerlin]

Jeff has actually stated them pretty clearly- if you look through the other thread in this forum, his posts explain most of his beliefs about teaching. Nearly all of the disagreements arise from what he believes people shouldn’t learn from a teacher. As far as what he believes people should learn from a teacher, I don’t see anyone disagreeing. He’s clearly a great instructor- for anyone who hasn’t seen it, there’s a full half hour lesson he has with a student online that shows his passion for teaching and personable approach when dealing with students:

It pleases me that more people are seeing this. I feel that I am clear, and I feel that some people choose not to get my message. It isn't that they have to agree with it. But, I see that some people don't even want to grasp the concept of learning that I share.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

Hm... is training outside of boxing an opponent per se out of context?
I thought the "wax & polish" example from Karate Kid *g* would be a more suitable example.
I remember my first Iaido (art of drawing a sword) lesson where we learned from the very beginning to see every move we learn within context. Sure, we did not have an actual opponent, but we imagined him, or the teacher stood in front of us, so we could visualize where the enemy stands, and where his muscles and sinews would be; where the direction of drawing our sword would be directed at.

About consistency; sounds like a valid point; similar to a Wing Tsun or ATK (anti terror kampf) student training his reflexes. Except that they need an external stimulus for that reflex - and consistent counter action in time. I doubt that one could do that by training to punch in time against a metronome. Isn't the stimulus totally different then; trimming the student to punch when the metronome ticks - then, standing baffled in a competition not reacting to his opponent's move because he is not used to that stimulus? At least, that was the first I learned in ATK in the army. Not claiming it would be "the truth" - in contrary. Just throwing it in for discussion.

Back to the bass, that would mean to me: Learning to fret chords cleanly, in my opinion, surely can be praticed without musical content. But to me it feels like a detour. I feel I learn much faster along musical content, since it provides (almost) the same stimuli as when playing live; the beat, the tempo, the mood, et cetera.

Training physical motions without an opponent is within the context of boxing yes, but it is not with in the context of a fight. The fight is the song.

My argument have nothing to do with training with or without a metronome, but an external stimuli to force reaction is not necessary in that. If you pluck against a metronome beat of 60 bpm to try to get a consistent attack with each finger, you aren’t going to stand there dumbfounded when it actually comes time to play a song that’s at 65 bpm. It’s simply a matter of physical exercise; repetition of motion does train the body.

I think playing along with musical content is almost always a better option. But if you are having issues with string skipping or plucking consistency or any other early technique physical action, isolation exercises can improve them faster and can be done when you don’t have access to music or your instrument. You aren’t going to be able to focus properly on learning a song if you don’t have the physical aspects of playing down, and it will just frustrate rather than teach. Swim coaches will show you how to move your arms and legs while out of the water. It’s better to get those movements down before first trying them in the water where you’ll drown if you get them wrong

 

[JeffBerlin]

He still hasn't clearly expressed what his views are, rather what they aren't, and what others shouldn't be doing, based on circular, and oftentimes incorrect examples and allegories. He's done this before, in Bass Player Magazine and gets defensive as a way of never being "wrong", when in fact he can't be wrong because his only point is everyone else is. Anyway, I'll not spend any more time on this thread, it's not very helpful to me.

I've expressed them clearly a number of times, but you seem not to have read my posts well. I'll explain it again.

Bass players will benefit by learning harmony, melody, rhythm, reading etudes all based in jazz. They will benefit by finding a music teacher that teaches jazz not for being a jazz player but for the knowledge and skill you will acquire. The best players to study with aren't bass players for the most part but brass, reeds or piano.

 

[Bryan R. Tyler]

It pleases me that more people are seeing this. I feel that I am clear, and I feel that some people choose not to get my message. It isn't that they have to agree with it. But, I see that some people don't even want to grasp the concept of learning that I share.

Just try to keep in mind that all of those feelings of frustration that you feel are exactly what other people feel when you make your statements about things they shouldn’t learn or don’t help when their own experience has proven to them that they are valid. To them it seems that you don’t even want to grasp the concepts of learning that they share.

This discussion will work better if everyone keeps an open mind and tries to remove their personal emotions or frustrations and stick to rational discourse, even if it is critical.

 

[redstrand]

I've elaborated, but you didn't read it. I've written a number of times that bass players will improve by practicing reading etudes and practicing exercises based in harmony, melody and rhythm. Players will learn if they go to jazz teachers that play instruments other than bass (for the most part.)

If that got lost in the shuffle, I do apologize. And you're right my teacher plays everything(that is what helps me digest the information when he switches instruments to illustrate a point) and we tackle a great deal of material(I write music now that I never thought would be possible). My issue was just how you came out of the gate, clear communication in any field and on any subject is key to understanding. Tone is hard to discern from digital letters on a screen, strive to be clear in the beginning, offer examples then as well. Things can be miscommunication fiasco on the interwebs.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Some people just ain't worth the time Mr. Berlin, I hate seeing someone of your stature constantly being drug down into these nonsensical skirmishes. There's some closed minded people in here (and I'm sure I'm one of 'em), but you certainly aren't one them.

Richard Dawkins once said, "Of course let's keep an open mind, but not so open that our brains fall out."

You are doing find Quinn.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Just try to keep in mind that all of those feelings of frustration that you feel are exactly what other people feel when you make your statements about things they shouldn’t learn or don’t help when their own experience has proven to them that they are valid. To them it seems that you don’t even want to grasp the concepts of learning that they share.

This discussion will work better if everyone keeps an open mind and tries to remove their personal emotions or frustrations and stick to rational discourse, even if it is critical.

Totally true!

I am a veteran of deep therapy. One of the most startling realities of my experience is that recognizing that my old beliefs were not serving me well was some of the most frustrating times during my journey toward inner healing. Adults complaining that they feel frustrated with my stating my views implies that the would be more comfortable staying in their present mindset. I understand! Nothing is shaken up or threatened. As grown men and women however, I suggest that you simply suck it up and either see the logic in what I am say or ignore it.

I don't mean to cause harm! I mean to cause change! And change can be a frustrating thing.

 

[JeffBerlin]

He asked a question and received answers. Probably not the ones he and others liked.

You came to a conclusion and see it as a fact. It isn't!

 

[JeffBerlin]

I’d pay money to see a round table discussion. Berlin, Wooten, Wellington, Friedland and whoever else dare enter. Man, that would be interesting.

Yes it would!

 

[JeffBerlin]

2. There are only two ways to learn; a. being self taught and all that goes with it, and b. learning musical content based in harmony, melody, and rhythm.

first post

Incorrect and poorly communciated.

2. There are many ways to learn; the two I believe work best are a. being self taught and all that goes with it, and b. learning musical content based in harmony, melody, and rhythm.

Lot of grief and miscommunication can be avoided by simply editing.

Well, this is a bass forum, not a classroom. If you want more clarification and a deeper demonstration of things, this isn't the place where this can take place. But, I will say that because others have gotten my points, this means that they were communicated pretty well.

 

[BBQisgood]

Oh, yes! I was a caustic and angry person and had to correct this among many other personal negative attributes. It pleases me that this is noticeable. Thank you for your thoughts!

It takes courage to admit this kind of thing.

Jeff does a good job of verbally explaining his point of view in this video:

I can't timestamp from my phone, so start at 3:21 if you are interested. ****************************

Jeff, I don't agree with you entirely but conceptually I find your philosophy interesting and you have made me think about music education and learning in general. I also think you are a much better verbal communicator than you are a writer.