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

[JeffBerlin]

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.

Apology accepted. And I agree that the written word is open for interpretation somethings. I am misunderstood by some here on TB, but this is the manner of communication that is available to me and to us. I'm OK with this as I slowly and steadily try to get people to recognize that a perfect manner of learning exists if available to them. But they have to want to improve and they need to give us being in charge of running their own education when in the midst of musical learning.

I appreciate your comments and I apologize if I appeared short tempered with you. My therapy works, but, I am no milquetoast. I have a little fight in me and my struggle is to not let it get the better of me. But, GOLLY GEE WILLIKERS, people here on TB can sometimes be obstinate!!!

 

[natobasso]

I appreciate the clarification. Here's my view: Any tool or technique, wether taught or self-taught, is valubable; and you can never assume someone knows something because you do. Some know inherently how to play with feeling, some don't.

Sure there's a lot of ways to skin this cat, so to speak, but I don't think it's helpful to say "there's only one way" to do bass, or music instruction in general. For example I think playing with a metronome is really helpful; it can teach you how to play on, behind, and ahead of the beat. Should you only do this? I don't recommend it.

It's all about varied experience, just like life. Maybe we all agree on this?

 

[JeffBerlin]

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.

Yes! My writing style is certainly available for some improvement! And I congratulate you for choosing what to agree with and what not to agree with. This shows that you are thinking and that something might have been changed in your thinking which is always a good sign.

 

[consectaneus]

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.

I agree here. Practicing a physical element within the context of a simple musical example is probably more ideal. An example which comes to mind is the octave playing examples in Ed Freidland's beginning course. Building muscle memory to accurately skip strings to play octave passages must be developed. (Not that this is some hard thing), but the reinforcement of the physical and aural working together is a more powerful experience I think.

I dabble a little in lap steel guitar. There is a well known teacher of pedal steel named Joe Wright. After years of watching would-be players give up in frustration over the complexity of negotiating picking, pushing pedals, and playing music at the same time, he developed a curriculum which deals with each of these component parts separately, only putting it all together musically after the student has gained familiarity with each physical part.

I ordered the picking course which consisted of a series of drills plucking the strings in various groupings and patterns utilizing no left hand involvement. I did find it beneficial when I eventually applied this to music because I had established a level of muscle memory which allowed me to concentrate on playing passages without also fighting physical limitations at the same time. As you say...isolating elements.

 

[Michael Schreiber]

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

Thanks, that makes it very clear to understand. Well explained.
About swimming - I was just thrown into the water DD
Same with learning to ride a bike - was learning by doing without even knowing; my father told me he would hold the bike stable, but that was just placebo effect; I kept riding until I realized I drove away from him
I can't imagine how I could have learned that faster.

But your point is also valid: I remember that when we learned different swimming styles, the first thing indeed was to show us the movements, then practice them ourselves. I also feel that this makes sense, and don't know a better methodology than to Show, Explain, Repeat, Practice. So, partly in the water (read: with musical content), and partly without. Cannot argue with that.

I think it was a very constructive idea of you to come up with sports analogies!

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.

+1 for that!

 

[redstrand]

Apology accepted. And I agree that the written word is open for interpretation somethings. I am misunderstood by some here on TB, but this is the manner of communication that is available to me and to us. I'm OK with this as I slowly and steadily try to get people to recognize that a perfect manner of learning exists if available to them. But they have to want to improve and they need to give us being in charge of running their own education when in the midst of musical learning.

I appreciate your comments and I apologize if I appeared short tempered with you. My therapy works, but, I am no milquetoast. I have a little fight in me and my struggle is to not let it get the better of me. But, GOLLY GEE WILLIKERS, people here on TB can sometimes be obstinate!!!

No such thing as bullheaded folks on here, that for drummers

 

[JeffBerlin]

Sure there's a lot of ways to skin this cat, so to speak, but I don't think it's helpful to say "there's only one way" to do bass, or music instruction in general. It's all about varied experience, just like life. Maybe we all agree on this?

Please be available to understand why my answer to your comment is that I don't agree!

There are lots of ways to skin a cat, but there's only one or two that do the job correctly. I've never quite understood how music educators that expound this philosophy don't understand this and associate this truth to how they teach.

There's a lot of ways to get from New York to Chicago, but there's only a couple of direct routes.

There's a lot of ways to cook a potato, but they all require heat or water.

The point is that learning isn't a subject where variety is of a benefit to people. The variety is the content itself. In music history, Bach learned from a certain methods of musical instruction, but sometime later, Debussy learned what Bach learned plus new musical ideas. But, it was all done in the same way using the same notes done in the same academic atmosphere engaging in the same kind of study and practice (for the most part.)

The roads of life are varied and multiple. But, everyone that drives them got their driver's license in the same way.

This is the point I try to communicate.

 

[bass12]

Regarding the use of metronomes, in the context of learning a piece of music or a pattern (scale, arpeggio, lick, etc.) I can see where Jeff is coming from. After reading his comments on metronomes years ago I reconsidered my use of the devices and stopped using them when I was learning a piece or pattern. This made my practising more effective and less frustrating. However, I have found metronomes useful when it comes to identifying trouble spots where speeding up or slowing down is concerned. I will sometimes play a passage or song along with a metronome to see where I am inclined to either speed up or slow down. I find it much more difficult to identify these areas without the help of a metronome. The metronome might not improve my sense of time but it will let me know what my tendencies are so that, in the future, I can use this awareness to improve my time.

 

[Quinn Roberts]

No such thing as bullheaded folks on here, that for drummers

We're just "bass"headed!

 

[JeffBerlin]

I thought to write a comment thanking people that suggested that I try to communicate in a different way with people. I wish to help folks to regard learning the bass in a way that will give them what they seek. I will pay attention to your suggestions as we continue writing to each other.

Cheers.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

What I understand you and Jeff to be saying is there is only really one valid way of learning to play bass.

Let's take another example.
I as a home owner must know so many things about my house and "how to fix it".
It could be an electrical issue, or "running toilet" problem, or some "dead grass" issue that does not comply with my home owners association's rules. Oh, yes, what about that strange crack in the wall, or some painting job, etc...
There are numerous people who know how to easily replace a ceiling fan or to fix the garage door opener, or fix that annoying running toilet, etc..., but they have never attended any college and/or received any official education papers indicating,
"The holder of this paper has successfully graduated from XXX university with the degree in Home issue "Fixer".

So many of us amateur bass players tend to hire a "bass teacher" to help us to "start a lawnmower", (Tell me!) or help us to replace that kitchen faucet - I hope you understand my metaphoric-speech.

(P.S. Just recently, I've purchased a new kitchen faucet after numerous advises from Home Depot employees as "It's so easy to install, even a child could do it", but...
After one hour of my wasted time and my wife's slightly disparaging comments about my "smartness", I've volunteered my neighbor who replaced that faucet within 10 minutes.)
Do you think that neighbor "save my life", my nerves?
YES, but he has never gone to college.
He has learned it from his Dad, from other friends, plus, he likes to watch a lot of Youtube videos.

My point - the neighbor without any degree is comfortable and happy about being able to fix a few annoying issues at home, and he can easily throw it into my face, "Why do I need to go to college if I can fix those issues myself?".
And he is correct like many of us advising, "nothing special about playing the bass - just pound Roots and fifth.
But...
My neighbor is a self-taught "fixer" without any degree.
What it has to do with Jeff Berlin's thread.
My neighbor was taught by his Dad for FREE!
His friends showed my neighbor some fixing "ideas" for FREE!
He checked some youtube videos for FREE!, but...
We as the bass players tend to pay money(!) for THE SAME KINDS OF things, my neighbor received for FREE.

P.S. In order to replace the kitchen faucet, my neighbor used a "Basin wrench" for those hard-to-reach fasteners, but, please, don't tell anybody about it because I can try to sell that secret "Basin wrench" for some easy money, as your highly-paid bass teacher did in your first lesson by asking you to listen to a few bass players.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

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.

Jeff Berlin is "RAKING"!!! and a lot.
OMG.

 

[natobasso]

I totally understand and disagree with you, and that's ok.

 

[KJMO]

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.

You have your opinion, he has his. Why do you think you can say he is wrong (you just did), and he can't say others are wrong? Why is it you feel your opinion has to prevail? Maybe the same reason Jeff feels his should prevail? I find it ridiculous to expect Jeff (or anyone else) to say "My way of teaching isn't the best way". I should hope he thinks the way he teaches is the right way.

Metronomes: Just because people say it's helpful doesn't mean it is. There was a time when everyone agreed cutting a hole in someone's skull to let the evil spirits out was helpful (and on and on, ad nauseam). The question could actually be answered using some pretty basic science, but I can't find anything like a real study (I bet it's out there, if someone can point me in that direction). But the fact I haven't seen it makes me wonder...I would be very surprised to find that using a metronome the way most people do helps people keep better time. And I could cite general studies on learning that would suggest it shouldn't. On the other hand I think, for example, it's possible using a metronome that cuts out for progressively longer periods of time might be useful. Would it work better than other methods? Would it help some people with specific time-keeping problems, but be useless for most? These are all empirical questions, and I don't know if they've been answered, but I do know no one has ever cited a study that speaks to that effectiveness in my "presence". "Millions agree" is not good enough though. So whatever opinions people have, I'm going to let them be unless I see the studies.

I also have to add that it's an absolute fact that most of the things people are stating as "facts" about education and psychology are not facts. Marzano is a trend, before him it was somebody else, and in a few years no one will care about Marzano. Piaget, meet Skinner. Skinner, meet David Rumelhart, Posner, etc. Education and Psychology are VERY immature fields. There's still an awful lot of room for "opinion".

 

[Rhythmace]

So many guitar players, including me, hit the wall when it comes to modes. We learn the minor pentatonic scale and get stuck after that. Bass seems worse to me. I welcome learning bass the way Jeff says is 500 years old. LOL!

 

[Joe Nerve]

You have your opinion, he has his. Why do you think you can say he is wrong (you just did), and he can't say others are wrong? Why is it you feel your opinion has to prevail? Maybe the same reason Jeff feels his should prevail? I find it ridiculous to expect Jeff (or anyone else) to say "My way of teaching isn't the best way". I should hope he thinks the way he teaches is the right way.

Metronomes: Just because people say it's helpful doesn't mean it is. There was a time when everyone agreed cutting a hole in someone's skull to let the evil spirits out was helpful (and on and on, ad nauseam). The question could actually be answered using some pretty basic science, but I can't find anything like a real study (I bet it's out there, if someone can point me in that direction). But the fact I haven't seen it makes me wonder...I would be very surprised to find that using a metronome the way most people do helps people keep better time. And I could cite general studies on learning that would suggest it shouldn't. On the other hand I think, for example, it's possible using a metronome that cuts out for progressively longer periods of time might be useful. Would it work better than other methods? Would it help some people with specific time-keeping problems, but be useless for most? These are all empirical questions, and I don't know if they've been answered, but I do know no one has ever cited a study that speaks to that effectiveness in my "presence". "Millions agree" is not good enough though. So whatever opinions people have, I'm going to let them be unless I see the studies.

I also have to add that it's an absolute fact that most of the things people are stating as "facts" about education and psychology are not facts. Marzano is a trend, before him it was somebody else, and in a few years no one will care about Marzano. Piaget, meet Skinner. Skinner, meet David Rumelhart, Posner, etc. Education and Psychology are VERY immature fields. There's still an awful lot of room for "opinion".

In short, Jeff states that metronome use for helping people’s timing is a myth. Using a metronome has helped my timing. That makes only 2 things possible. Either Jeff is wrong, or I’m a liar.

I’m not a liar.

PS. I didn’t read the rest of your post because I don’t have time right now.

 

[KJMO]

In short, Jeff states that metronome use helpingfor people’s timing is a myth. Using a metronome has helped my timing. That makes only 2 things possible. Either Jeff is wrong, or I’m a liar.

I’m not a liar.

PS. I didn’t read the rest of your post because I don’t have time right now.

If you think it helped, you're not a liar. You might just be wrong. Note that I'm not saying you are wrong, but rather that just because you think it, doesn't make it true. That's why there is science. Just for kicks, I'll footnote that there are questions science absolutely can't answer, but this isn't one of them. I practiced drums to a click for 5 yrs., and when I played in a band, I actually measured my tempo at the beginning of a song, and at the end, and I was 20 some bpm faster at the end. I can say with relative certainty that what I did with a metronome, was not helpful in my case. It may have actually been harmful (I feel I relied on the click, not my internal clock). Beyond that, I don't know, but I have thoughts

edit: I realized I should have asked you what you did with the metronome, and how you know it helped.

 

[Quinn Roberts]

So here's a little food for thought I came up with over making my lunch. Just curious what you all will think!
It's clearly been stated multiple times that many people here believe there to be multiple methods of which to learn the instrument of bass guitar. There's also many here that believe a solely academic approach to learning isn't what is best for every individual. These views mean nothing to this post, just to help me as a sort of segue. With that all being said (and here's where I believe a few people may have disconnected with some of what's been said in this thread and others), I'm speaking only to those that wish to have a career as a musician or bassist.
Take three bass players; one an academic student with a master's in jazz, and the second, a player whose spent time studying concepts of theory on his own and has been trained by a college graduate or someone of equal knowledge, haven taken the student through the musical concepts and at the same time giving them pieces of music that relate. Now, the third player too has been trained, but by a bassist whom is teaching them to only play various bass riffs to songs and standard rhythms that appear in song types (Like a Root to fifth bluegrass line, or a simple bossa). This trainer however doesn't go over reading chord charts, notation, or even much transcribing by ear. Just the "standard skills" a bassist "should" have to fill their role on stage in a (and this is important) small band setting (genre is irrelevant, it could be; pop, rock, country, jazz, or what have you).
Now with these three examples laid out, I'd agree that they all have equal chances of being considered great bassists, and being able to make a living in playing music (considering this realistically to be a rare feat for anyone). So, what if all three of our examples "fail to make it". What options would this leave each individual with?
Well, individual one, being arguably the most well off education-wise, could find many jobs that still involve music and still make a fair living too (probably a better living even). With the knowledge one acquired with their degree, they could; find an orchestral part, teach at a school, teach at a store, teach privately, find jobs as a temporary sub for local acts (I'm also not speaking about the local rock band here. More like a theater gig and the lead bassist got sick last minute type of deal), and much more.
Individual two, arguably the "better educated" of the last two individuals, could; find an orchestral part as well (knowing to read charts and notation), teach privately or, with good recommendation, at a store, as with the orchestral job he could still sub for many local acts temporarily (again, given the right recommendations and reputation though), and I'm sure there's other's that people could think of (session musician for example).
Now, where does that leave individual three? Well he certainly could not play in any orchestral environment (not reading music or charts anyways). He could teach privately, but the number of students will be more limited than that of the first two individuals. He might be able to teach at a store if they offer classes like "rock bass" (or whichever genre he may have performed in) or some courses involving rhythms that they've acquainted themselves with, but these opportunities, like others, are limited due to his prior education background. And as far as being a sub for a local gig, well it better be a local "insert genre here" gig or they're out of luck. They could learn the songs, but not reading charts or music doing this last minute, as is the case in most sub situations, is a near impossibility. And session musician, well that's very limited in scope as well. (And, just to add, when I say that number three's possibilities or scope are limited, I'm not disparaging this player's ability, just his opportunity to be able to accept any gig that may come their way, no matter the genre, style of music, or setting. (Could you imagine someone who's only ever played punk rock covers trying to do a gig that covers Vangelis or Enya? Not only will they be staring mortality in the eyes (no offense Enya and Vangelis fans, I love 'em too!), the music, crowd, and entire atmosphere is quite dissimilar to anything they've played or probably have experienced professionally before.)) I'm sure once again I'm missing more possibilities career-wise, but I think this is a fairly balanced and objective statement.
I'll add again, that this is simply some food for thought that I found to be interesting, and is in now way intended to disparage anyone or their ideas!

I'd love to hear any thoughts you all might have on this!

 

[Quinn Roberts]

If you think it helped, you're not a liar. You might just be wrong. Note that I'm not saying you are wrong, but rather that just because you think it, doesn't make it true. That's why there is science. Just for kicks, I'll footnote that there are questions science absolutely can't answer, but this isn't one of them. I practiced drums to a click for 5 yrs., and when I played in a band, I actually measured my tempo at the beginning of a song, and at the end, and I was 20 some bpm faster at the end. I can say with relative certainty that what I did with a metronome, was not helpful in my case. It may have actually been harmful (I feel I relied on the click, not my internal clock). Beyond that, I don't know, but I have thoughts

edit: I realized I should have asked you what you did with the metronome, and how you know it helped.

I love the fact that the original recording of "Chameleon" ends 30bpm faster than it started. We gonna say the Herb man had not time or groove?

 

[natobasso]

Playing with a metronome doesn't need to make you metronomic. You can play with the exact tempo, learn the rules, and then break those rules when you play live. Do both, they aren't mutually exclusive. I don't think it's a question of either or.