This is fair! Can you correct my view and tell me what other reason one uses a metronome if improving their time isn't their goal?
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.
Jeff Berlin asks - What Is Taught Without Only Teaching the Facts!
- Thread starter JeffBerlin
- Start date
-
- Tags
- berlin groove jeff berlin teaching
- Status
- Oct 7, 2000
- 18,619
- 38,939
- Disclosures
- Endorsing artist: Musicman basses
The bolded part from my earlier post...
I've got a few minutes, so I want to tell my metronome story. What better place to do it. For those who might be interested...
I started out on guitar, not bass. My first serious band was a progressive type punk band that jammed - a lot. That taught me a great deal about harmony, notes, melodies, scales, what works and what doesn't. I got some excellent training there, and learned a lot, by ear and a few basics the bassist would point out. Future cover bands and learning tunes to back up other original artists added to that, but yeah... the metronome...
Somewhere around 1990 I was asked to join an alternative group some friends had formed. But they wanted me to play bass. I liked the guys and the music, so I was up for the challenge. The guitarist in that band was an educated musician, and HUGE Rush fan. I was a punk. We clashed, a lot. But we felt some sort of magic between us, so we started having these flash and smash weekly meetings. He would teach me some theory and technique, I'd teach him about playing with emotion. Strangely enough, HE was the one who suggested using a metronome to me. We jammed a lot in this band, too, and I wasn't the tightest bass player at that time. I took the suggestion. I started doing a variety of exercises with a metronome.
I think part of the reason I feel so strongly about this has to do with coincidence. When I started practicing with the clicks, we also had a bit of a band hiatus. I got to work with this for about a month before hitting the studio again, and when we did, I was blown away. I had a very clear sense of my fingers now being on auto pilot. We were fortunate to have a drummer who had excellent timing, and now everything I did was locking in perfectly with him. I was able to jam, do what I wanted, and have it fit in effortlessly! That made me a fan. I spent the next several months doing lots of different metronome exercises, and I feel it's had an enormous effect on my playing. Especially on my improvising. It seems to have trained my brain to function more accurately under pressure. I believe completely that it helped me to think faster, as well as improve my timing and listening.
And then there's this. Prior to working with a metronome I couldn't count off the seconds to a minute. Tried and failed. When I was actively practicing with a metronome I had little problem doing that. Perhaps that could be a test for people who are on the fence about what to believe here. See how well you can count off a minute without using a clock (you can use it to get the tempo, but then look away), and then practice consistently for a month with a metronome and give it a go again. That might supply the "scientific proof" some people need in order to believe something is true.
I don't use a metronome any more for the above purposes, though I do still use one from time to time. Gonna guess that keeps me in tune. But I think there is another great use for metronomes that hasn't been brought up. I am often confronted with bass lines that are out of my playing ability. Once I learn the notes, VERY MUCH OUT OF TIME, I practice them super slowly to a click. I raise the click a notch every few minutes, do it until I start flubbing, and then give it a rest. When I return I repeat the process. What happens by doing that is my muscle memory kicks and then suddenly I wake up one morning playing whatever it was I was struggling with as though I was playing it my entire life. While there are probably other methods of achieving the same goal, I don't know of any that are more efficient.
Back to the real world.
Michael Schreiber
Commercial User
With all respect, but I guess this might cause yet another misunderstanding.
I thought your point was not about the "same book" (method) but rather the same way of learning (methodology) - at least that is how I understood your link to how other classical instruments were and are taught; unargueably with different methods, but based on the same methodology, e.g.: learning along musical content (not the same content).
Or did I misunderstand that point?
I doubt the tempo increase in and of itself adds anything for the listener but the fact that the musicians were allowed to "go with their gut" while playing (rather than having to conform to the the time laid out by a click) no doubt made for a livelier performance.
I doubt the vast majority of people know that Chameleon even goes on for 15 minutes. A surprising number of people recognize the song, but most folks who have heard it only know the short radio version which is probably not enough time for the train to get a full head of steam, lol.
True. Just last night I played it with a pianist who was reading from a fake book chart. None of the charts I've seen cover more than the main section. This pianist had never even heard the other two sections (which are actually my favourite parts of the recording). Most of the times I've played Chameleon on the bandstand the other musicians want to stop after the first movement, as if there's no more to the piece than that, and that always frustrates me.
Sure! You use the click to play a line in time. Slow or fast, one click at a time or many, you are using a metronome for one purpose, to play a line in the time spelled out by a mathematical click or you would not be using one. True?
Here's an experiment to try.
Do you know the bass line to Teen Town? If you do, play it in 3/4. This means that you have to alter or maybe remove the notes and rhythm of the melody. It is a full-on arranging job.
Once you've come up with a comfortable interpretation of the song, put your metronome on at a slow tempo such as 80. Now play your arrangement. You will quickly lose the click.
Now, play the arrangement by tapping your foot on the quarter note. As you arrive at certain parts that still require learning, slow down your tapping and play in a more rubato feeling of music. You will discover that it is easier to play Teen Town in 3/4 and learning it so well that eventually you will play it in perfect time without using a metronome to acquire this time.
Anticipating the arguments that this experiment might stimulate, i wish to anticipate people and say that this experiment makes you completely responsible with learning the music and playing it in time. Learn whatever you can from this. As with other comments that I have shared, if this experiment doesn't click with you (Bada Bing) then just ignore it.
Last edited:
Not really, when you consider that the community of scientists come from all over the world and have been trained in very different educational systems. That's considered a good thing since if everyone had a common background, they would tend to approach problems with the the same mindset. Diversity of thought is the breeding ground for true innovation. In my own case, both my research and what I ended up teaching weren't even in the discipline in which I got my doctoral training (not that unusual in academia), so I bring a few different things to the table than my colleagues.
OMG! The vibe you can get in that "B" section can get so intense. Admittedly, in my band we don't do the C section, but I have a recording of us doing that tune for 18 minutes, without it, lol. It was crazy. I've told my drummer and guitarist that they like vamps way too much lol. They'll vamp for 3 days straight if I let them.
I think so! As long as musical content and only musical content is being taught, there isn't much more than practicing it. Some might need to practice it more slowly. Some might learn more quickly. Some might tolerate 30 minutes and some can deal with two hours. But, solid musical content is the only substance of music that literally created the entire world's population of players on all instruments. Self taught players are the exceptions. This is why I don't agree with people that there are a variety of ways to learn how to play. Music history shows that this isn't true.
You too learned your craft through commonly taught academic principles. Once learned, only then, having the background that you acquired could you branch off into areas of speciality. Did I get this right?
Last edited:
I see your point! Then allow me to ask this question. Is the information that has been taught common mathematical and scientific content familiar to people in lots of places? Or do people learn different content from everyone else depending on where they live?
I think that the point that needs more clarification is that bass players generally aren't at the musical level that you are at as a scientist. There's basic and valuable information for them to first learn. I assume that before you acquired your high ability in your profession, you learned principles common to your field and are similarly taught in nearly the same manner and with nearly the same study materials, a common beginning of learning. Would you say that this is true?
Last edited:
Yes, but the entire body benefits, strength and balance are both affected.
Music is more like growing up or love than the shortest way to get from Chicago to New York. A constant process, with many factors involved, not just one exact series of steps; with constant adjustments and learning along the way.
Music is more like growing up or love than the shortest way to get from Chicago to New York. A constant process, with many factors involved, not just one exact series of steps; with constant adjustments and learning along the way.
Your view is not incorrect, nor is there only a singular reason one lifts weights or uses a metronome. @Joe Nerve provided an example.
Michael Schreiber
Commercial User
@JeffBerlin :
I just started to discover some of the free content you are sharing on the internet, and want to say: Thank you for the effort you took and still do take to share your thoughts, experience and tips and hints - much appreciated!
To all others: Sorry for the off-topic
Not trying to be a "fanboy" - just couldn't do it via PM, but wanted to say Thanks, nonetheless.
I just started to discover some of the free content you are sharing on the internet, and want to say: Thank you for the effort you took and still do take to share your thoughts, experience and tips and hints - much appreciated!
To all others: Sorry for the off-topic
Not trying to be a "fanboy" - just couldn't do it via PM, but wanted to say Thanks, nonetheless.
Well just be aware that in a back-and-forth between a top teacher and me, one of the explanations that he shared why he teachers lessons that people normally learn by being self taught was to try to get his students to become improved bass players as fast as he could. I won't refer anymore about this as I don't wish to cause any individual issues.
Regarding the body benefits that you mentioned, this sounds silly to me. Can you share with me any information of any kind where using a metronome is attributable to a benefit in one's body? What information indicates that your balance is improved as if your balance needs work in the first place? I really would like to see any literature that supports your thoughts. Thanks!
I've posted a few tempo variation diagrams in the past.
(From other TB threads.)
One more.
To me it depends on what you consider falls under the category of "improving time". When learning to read more complex rhythms I have found the metronome useful for counting quarter notes while trying to dissect where the subdivisions fall. This is more in the interest of music reading than improving the accuracy of my tempo.
Let's borrow from NoTreble a podcast - Groove - The No Treble podcast#14 Jeff Berlin.
It's a long conversation but interesting.
The very basics for a career in serious science, say math through basic calculus, classical physics, general chemistry and fundamental biological structure and function might be seen as the equivalent of the musical theory elements of harmony and rhythm. Everybody should learn this stuff, but they do not necessarily do it in the same manner or to the same extent.
For example, my kids learned basic math via a very different methodology than I did in the 60's. We can all solve math problems, but they go about it differently than I do. As far as science ed at the high school, college or professional school level, the same content might be taught using traditional lectures and homework or by a variety of independent or group learning strategies. Are any of these methods better than others? Probably some are better for some students and not for others. Depends on the student's learning style, level of motivation and goals.
- Status
