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

[Quinn Roberts]

OK, I have not yet arrived at thirteenth chord country
So far, I am glad I can consider third and seventh chords as starting point for quick orientation - then breaking out as I feel it right on occasion. Which, to me affords much more courage than to stick to a "safe" pattern. Since I still lack the theoretic knowledge behind that, it is mostly trial and error. And that is one point I seek to learn to understand. So far, I only used some of my favorite Beethoven's scores to get an idea where and why he broke out of a scale, for example. The way he does it seems random at first, but feels musically right to me. Maybe he did that based on feeling alone - or there is a pattern behind, of which I haven't heard, yet. In terms of theory, I am not even at high school level, because I only kept in my brain what I was using - the rest faded with time. So I wouldn't be surprised if I already had heard about such a pattern and then forgot it

I've been meaning to dive into some classical pieces myself. Mostly have stuck to jazz standards up to this point. I'll say though that a lot of these songs use simple seventh chords, but imply much larger and complex chord sounds through the melody (I imagine the same must be true for Beethoven and them, since they were one of the biggest influences on 20th century music). Start looking at which tones fall on the downbeats (1,2,3,4), these will carry more weight in the overall tonality of the piece of music than say some chromatic note placed on a weak beat (1e&a, 2e&a). The chromatic and scale notes placed on weak beats generally just imply color and motion when moving from chord tone to chord tone. But say the piece is in the key of C and there's a Gb directly on beat 3, this would imply a Cb5 chord.
If you really want to experiment on your bass take a simple song progression you like and play the chords to it on your bass (look into standard, inverted, and drop-two chords, the latter usually the most comfortable for bass players. Also don't voice the fifth in your chords for the time being, it's less to think about). Now when you get comfortable with that, play around with the chords a little bit. Add a flat nine, nine, sharp nine, sixth, or a flat or sharp fifth to the minor or major seven chords (try and turn any normal triads into a seventh chord too, make sure you pay attention to the key of the song though!). The dominant chords a free game, you can do just about anything to them as long as they maintain the original sound of the root, third and seventh (Remember too, chords can be voiced without the root or the fifth. You only need the third and seventh intervals present to sound the chord properly). Try making melodies and rhythms to your progression solely using the chord shape. Thump that bass note with the thumb and hit the higher tones (together or alone) with the fingers. I particularly love this approach when playing a song like "Blue Bossa" for example. You can simulate a real nice bossa/mambo line with chord shapes alone, plus it just sounds too cool when you start to comp and add in some extra chords and bass notes outside the original progression for more movement and color. Pianists step aside!
I refereed to the following pictures when I first started messing with these, though looking back on it I'd recommend going through your arpeggios and forming/altering your chords from these.

These are originally for guitar so make sure you take into account the half step change that occurs between strings G and B, I feel their use serves just as well for us bassists though.

Also I feel now is a good time to share some Steve Bailey for inspiration. And due to the fact that his playing is considered so "controversial" by some, I see him a good fit for this thread.



No you don't need a fretless to sound good!

 

[Michael Schreiber]

I like this statement.

Me too. Even some of the very basics seem to be taught better by, say, violin teachers than bass teachers.
Not just harmony, or other theory. For instance, I did learn where to put the thumb on my bass from a violin teacher.

I appreciate how violin teachers tend to elaborate and explain how to find out positions for the thumb that require least tension and leave as much freedom as can - in each playing situation; which I found works also for bass and guitar, whereas some bass teachers would decree: You have to place the thumb always behind the index finger... or ring finger or whatever might be proclaimed as correct. I don't know how such teachers would teach harmony or phrasing... without explanation but clear commands? Granted though, there are also violin "teachers" of that fashion, but they tend to be the minority, I hope.

Anyway, I wish you a good start and much fun on the bass! \m/

 

[Michael Schreiber]

I've been meaning to dive into some classical pieces myself. Mostly have stuck to jazz standards up to this point. I'll say though that a lot of these songs use simple seventh chords, but imply much larger and complex chord sounds through the melody (I imagine the same must be true for Beethoven and them, since they were one of the biggest influences on 20th century music). Start looking at which tones fall on the downbeats (1,2,3,4), these will carry more weight in the overall tonality of the piece of music than say some chromatic note placed on a weak beat (1e&a, 2e&a). The chromatic and scale notes placed on weak beats generally just imply color and motion when moving from chord tone to chord tone. But say the piece is in the key of C and there's a Gb directly on beat 3, this would imply a Cb5 chord.
If you really want to experiment on your bass take a simple song progression you like and play the chords to it on your bass (look into standard, inverted, and drop-two chords, the latter usually the most comfortable for bass players. Also don't voice the fifth in your chords for the time being, it's less to think about). Now when you get comfortable with that, play around with the chords a little bit. Add a flat nine, nine, sharp nine, sixth, or a flat or sharp fifth to the minor or major seven chords (try and turn any normal triads into a seventh chord too, make sure you pay attention to the key of the song though!). The dominant chords a free game, you can do just about anything to them as long as they maintain the original sound of the root, third and seventh (Remember too, chords can be voiced without the root or the fifth. You only need the third and seventh intervals present to sound the chord properly). Try making melodies and rhythms to your progression solely using the chord shape. Thump that bass note with the thumb and hit the higher tones (together or alone) with the fingers. I particularly love this approach when playing a song like "Blue Bossa" for example. You can simulate a real nice bossa/mambo line with chord shapes alone, plus it just sounds too cool when you start to comp and add in some extra chords and bass notes outside the original progression for more movement and color. Pianists step aside!
I refereed to the following pictures when I first started messing with these, though looking back on it I'd recommend going through your arpeggios and forming/altering your chords from these.
View attachment 2865890
View attachment 2865889

These are originally for guitar so make sure you take into account the half step change that occurs between strings G and B, I feel their use serves just as well for us bassists though.

Also I feel now is a good time to share some Steve Bailey for inspiration. And due to the fact that his playing is considered so "controversial" by some, I see him a good fit for this thread.



No you don't need a fretless to sound good!

Thank you very much, very cool of you, much appreciated!
Haha, glad to read I don't need a fretless. I started G.A.S.ing for a 4001FL, then saw the price... and decided that my fretted bass is way better than I am, so I better invest in learning, first, before worrying about a fretless bass

 

[BBQisgood]

Remember the phrase "The proof is in the pudding? The original phrase was: "The proof of the pudding is in the eating." It means something very different from the modern version.

Please look for a few good, recent videos of Jeff teaching folks online. In other words, try the pudding. He does such a better job communicating verbally while teaching.

Why? We shouldn't torch his ideas without researching them. He's put enough out there to help us understand where he's coming from and he seems to do a better job illustrating his ideas in the videos. He's a world-class musician and prolific teacher. He's a bass player and excellent performer.

Jeff has made enough pudding outside this particular thread that we should probably try some.

Much respect to all--bbq

 

[Quinn Roberts]

Thank you very much, very cool of you, much appreciated!
Haha, glad to read I don't need a fretless. I started G.A.S.ing for a 4001FL, then saw the price... and decided that my fretted bass is way better than I am, so I better invest in learning, first, before worrying about a fretless bass

You're welcome, always happy to share what I know! (As little as that may be!) And I just googled that, I've never seen a fretless Ric before. That's pretty sweet honestly. I was gonna do what the cool cats do and just rip the frets out of a junker bass. Realized you might wanna have a guitar you can intonate though!

 

[Michael Schreiber]

You're welcome, always happy to share what I know! (As little as that may be!) And I just googled that, I've never seen a fretless Ric before. That's pretty sweet honestly. I was gonna do what the cool cats do and just rip the frets out of a junker bass. Realized you might wanna have a guitar you can intonate though!

Made me very happy; already have saved the content in case the internet connection breaks up
Thank you again!

Oh yes, a junker bass that needs a fret job would be a good excuse to try and rip out the frets... and leave the holes in the fingerboard as haptic guidance for the fingers, for starters

 

[JeffBerlin]

I'll have to check them out. I guess that trying to articulate the complexities of bass instruction isn't best served forum-style.

THIS I have to agree with, although it can't be a coincidence that so many people do understand my comments. I tend to think that telling people that seek a teacher to only pay money to study musical content is a difficult idea to accept. Again, because so many people here have stated that they get my point completely, I can't explain why others seem not to. It's simple:

Be self taught or, at least entirely in charge of every single decision of what you choose to use to play and learn. I will add Jimi Hendrix as an example of this to follow.

Be taught how to read music based in the stuff that contemporary music is made up of. In a nutshell, these would be the practice of harmonic, melodic, and rhythmical principles. If you still can't fathom what I am trying to share, then find a capable jazz teacher. He/she will teach you these things.

 

[JeffBerlin]

As a high school English teacher, I can say with 100% certainty that you can speed up learning with the right techniques.
You mention "quality" teaching. Can you elaborate?
Also, pushing playing "in time" with a metronome may not be helpful in learning a fast line more quickly, but it's certainly helpful in learning a fast line correctly, which ought to be the goal.

Listen, I'm not trying to argue with anyone here, but between the vague educational claims, flawed and contradictory instructional "philosophy," and opinion disguised as fact, it is completely understandable that so many TBers appear confused, argumentative, and skeptical. JeffBerlin, you have a method. Your method works. I'd stick to the "meat and potatoes" of your method and leave behind the parable-esque and sometimes incomprehensible claims and instructional philosophy. I want to value what you have to say, but the "bass guru" speak is off-putting.

Specializing in the teaching of English in school, I assume, is a regulated service. You have to teach methods approved by the Board of Regents who determine the kid of instruction that teachers can use to teach with. True? I assume that the approved methods include the teaching of the substance and function of English which makes it possible for students to eventually pass their SAT tests. If some learn more quickly than others do, the methods are still taught across toe board to all students, exceptions aside. Am I wrong?

 

[Quinn Roberts]

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.

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.

I love this idea! Not sure if I'll jump into it with Teen Town right off the bat, but this certainly will be keeping me busy!

 

[fdeck]

Specializing in the teaching English in school, I assume, is a regulated service. You have to teach methods approved by the Board of Regents who determine the kid of instruction that teachers can use to teach with. True? I assume that the approved methods include the teaching of the substance and function of English which makes it possible for students to eventually pass their SAT tests. If some learn more quickly than others do, the methods are still taught across toe board to all students, exceptions aside. Am I wrong?

You'd be shocked.

The degree to which curricula are standardized is hugely variable, depending on which school district you're in. Most districts in the US are what I would consider to be loosely regulated. States set some standards (e.g., so called Common Core and standardized tests) but they don't call for specific methods. States and school districts make bulk purchasing decisions that obviously have an influence on curriculum. Teachers within a given subject at a school will team up to coordinate curriculum, so that it flows from one year to the next, and so they can share materials. But "in the trenches," teachers actually have a fair amount of autonomy. The apparent level of standardization may simply be due to shared information and culture, rather than being told what to do.

Outside the US, different story. There tends to be more standardization, but also more professionalism (better training, pay, working conditions, respect) of teachers.

The emphasis on standardized tests within the K-12 school system is a matter of intense controversy.

My kids learned to read at home, as I did, and as my parents did, similar to how you describe learning the bass: Reading books. Lots of them.

 

[KJMO]

You'd be shocked.

The degree to which curricula are standardized is hugely variable, depending on which school district you're in. Most districts in the US are what I would consider to be loosely regulated. States set some standards (e.g., so called Common Core and standardized tests) but they don't call for specific methods. States and school districts make bulk purchasing decisions that obviously have an influence on curriculum. Teachers within a given subject at a school will team up to coordinate curriculum, so that it flows from one year to the next, and so they can share materials. But "in the trenches," teachers actually have a fair amount of autonomy. The apparent level of standardization may simply be due to shared information and culture, rather than being told what to do.

Outside the US, different story. There tends to be more standardization, but also more professionalism (better training, pay, working conditions, respect) of teachers.

The emphasis on standardized tests within the K-12 school system is a matter of intense controversy.

My kids learned to read at home, as I did, and as my parents did, similar to how you describe learning the bass: Reading books. Lots of them.

This is all really true. Education has changed immensely in the last 5yrs. or so. Math is taught so differently that parents are unable to help their elementary school children with their "homework". The only nit I would pick is that while there is no standard curriculum, the skills a student must have are the same for nearly the whole country. So a 5th grader in Florida should be able to do the same things a kid in Idaho can (whatever curriculum is used to get them there). That's not ever been the case before. Fwiw, I'm a real fan of the way math is being taught.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I tend to think that telling people that seek a teacher to only pay money to study musical content is a difficult idea to accept. Again, because so many people here have stated that they get my point completely, I can't explain why others seem not to.

The point you appear be missing is that everyone doesn't have the internal drive, intuitiveness or desire to just study by themselves and come to all the musical conclusions that you think are obvious, especially in the beginning stages. To you it seems a clear position. But you are very different than most people in general and most musicians in particular. I suppose that's a good thing considering what you do for a living.

Having said all that, I believe you've been doing this for so long, that the simplicity of the basic goal for most folks (particularly older students) is past you. That being, they want to learn music, maybe play in a band, maybe not. But everyone doesn't want to get to a level where they make recordings or tour the world. They just wanna learn some stuff, and without someone to guide, or even push them, it just won't happen. They might simply want to work with someone so that they can feel they are headed in the right direction.

To me, the goal of having a teacher is to get enough information and tools for you to teach yourself what you want to know. Some of that process is most probably going to involve the teacher teaching you songs. At some point they get weaned off of having a teacher showing them every song they want to know. After that they can study musical content on their own, which to your point, I think, is what usually happens if a person indeed has a genuine interest in music.

However, I'm willing to bet that when you started studying music, somebody, somewhere taught you musical content. Are you willing to state that is not the case? Perhaps you are such a savant that you didn't need that guidance, in which case, almost nothing you speak of will apply to anyone else. If Superman tells me I can stop bullets with my chest, I'm gonna ignore that BS because I don't have his bullet stopping ability. But I can still wear Kevlar. The end result is the same...

Anyway, your point is easy to get and it probably applies in a lot of cases, because of the natural progression of learning.

But why make such a big deal of it? There are people who want that, and people who don't. Why do you care? If people want to pay someone to teach them songs, so what?

 

[fdeck]

Fwiw, I'm a real fan of the way math is being taught.

I think it's better in a lot of ways, especially at the early stages. But there are some things that sadden me, notably a shift from math as an intellectual pursuit, towards math as a problem solving tool. Don't get me wrong, people need to learn how to solve math problems.

But high school geometry has largely abandoned proofs! One of the reasons is standardized testing. It's hard to create a multiple-choice test for proofs. I'd like to see math move towards more use of computation, while also figuring how to bring back things like proofs and set theory.

On the other hand, the way I learned math was hardly a success story, given the level of attrition

 

[JeffBerlin]

I love this idea! Not sure if I'll jump into it with Teen Town right off the bat, but this certainly will be keeping me busy!

It is just an example of one being in a musical experience where only their skills can be used to solve such a simple task as dropping a quarter note out of the time signature. Adjusting a melody is super easy as well. Just re-arrange the melody. Most any properly trained musician on any other instrument can do this.

If some struggles with this easy task, it should reflect on one's true musical skills and inspire people (or not inspire people as they wish) to improve their playing by learning correctly.

All the opinions that people share are just opinions. Here is where the talking stops and one's musical reality is demonstrated for them to regard. It is a good day in their musical lives if they choose to see it this way.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

By that logic very few of us would be allowed to participate in this thread.

I'll be short.
I used to say, "You judge musicians by their performances". "You judge talkers by their talking(s )".
Now.
Let's do an experiment and magically place Jeff Berlin and a TB member (who is ardently arguing(!!!) with Jeff Berlin) on the same stage with a good/very good drum player, a guitar player, etc..., and tell them , "Let's Play."
What should we play?
ANYTHING.
Now, could you predict what would happen?
I think you do!

Next.
Here is a youtube video where a GOOD bass player is trying to keep up with Jeff Berlin while playing along with Groovin' High.
(And here is the poster's comment about it,
"Here's my attempt at this monster solo by Jeff Berlin from the High Standards record. Total bitch to keep up with. Monster."

P.S. Don't you worry. I will NOT(!) ask you to transcribe Jeff's solo ( One of THOUSANDS(!), with his pent-up ability to immediate produce as much/as many (solos) as you want, with any kind of chord changes.
P.S.2. Please continue your arguments about learning to play the bass guitar...

 

[Whousedtoplay]

But why make such a big deal of it? There are people who want that, and people who don't. Why do you care? If people want to pay someone to teach them songs, so what?

In short - Jeff Berlin is very PASSIONATE(!) about the electric bass guitar learning/teaching process!

 

[Whousedtoplay]

To me, the goal of having a teacher is to get enough information and tools for you to teach yourself what you want to know.

When you enter a NEW WORLD of MUSIC, how do you know what YOU WANT if you are just a beginner?
We have SO MANY threads with the samo-samo beginners' question, "What notes should I play with this or that chord?", but, of course,
THE SAME TB MEMBER knows what he/she needs to learn and/or what his/her "teacher" should be teaching...

 

[Whousedtoplay]

This is all really true. Education has changed immensely in the last 5yrs. or so. Math is taught so differently that parents are unable to help their elementary school children with their "homework". The only nit I would pick is that while there is no standard curriculum, the skills a student must have are the same for nearly the whole country. So a 5th grader in Florida should be able to do the same things a kid in Idaho can (whatever curriculum is used to get them there). That's not ever been the case before. Fwiw, I'm a real fan of the way math is being taught.

Maybe, it's because children, teenagers are allowed to "argue" with a teacher, to tell that teacher what and how to teach, etc...
In short. Check this thread.

 

[Quinn Roberts]

You'd be shocked.

The degree to which curricula are standardized is hugely variable, depending on which school district you're in. Most districts in the US are what I would consider to be loosely regulated. States set some standards (e.g., so called Common Core and standardized tests) but they don't call for specific methods. States and school districts make bulk purchasing decisions that obviously have an influence on curriculum. Teachers within a given subject at a school will team up to coordinate curriculum, so that it flows from one year to the next, and so they can share materials. But "in the trenches," teachers actually have a fair amount of autonomy. The apparent level of standardization may simply be due to shared information and culture, rather than being told what to do.

Outside the US, different story. There tends to be more standardization, but also more professionalism (better training, pay, working conditions, respect) of teachers.

The emphasis on standardized tests within the K-12 school system is a matter of intense controversy.

My kids learned to read at home, as I did, and as my parents did, similar to how you describe learning the bass: Reading books. Lots of them.

Don't feel this truly of any real additive information here, but it does sort of show how schools can vary between their levels of regulation, in a sort of sad way albeit.
My county used to be one of these "loosely regulated" school systems (The county only having one high school and four middle/grade schools for the whole 600 square mile area). Then around a decade ago state officials started coming and sitting in on various classes given in the schools across the county, spectating the various school officials in how they performed. The year after that, after numerous firings of school officials, the state took over the school system entirely and began to rework it (how we ended up with Math I, II, III and so forth). It wasn't until after this we learned that the county system had been embezzling majority of the funding received through taxes, levies, and general support and funding. They truly managed to jeopardize an entire area's next up and coming generation, and I hate to say this, but by the end of my (short-lived) school career the effects of this atrocity were already starting to rear its heads.

Edit: I may add, from my perspective only, this could be looked at as a very rough analogy for the change in bass education. Maybe a change from a method that been used for so long, a method of learning Math (music), with classes like Aglebra, Trig, Pre-Calc. To a focus on learning Math "basics", Math I, II, III (Bass). Both sort of seem like they're similar, both seem like they involve math (music), but in the end they're entirely different. If someone told me they've taken and passed classes in Calculus, I'll bet they've got a solid foundation of mathematical knowledge, and the skills to back this knowledge up. If I wanted a tutor, chances are I'd look for that guy. Now, someone tells me that they've passed Math III, well I might have some questions. My first being, just what the hell is Math III? How does this compare to the original method of learning math that for so long has been proven effective? What actually is the effectiveness of this new method, and has there been any ways to measure it's success up to this point? I might be apt to bet, that like many of the modern classes being to taught to bassists and other musicians, it's at least hard to come up with solid evidence that the new methods of learning math are statistically better. And without hard evidence to support this, well, personally, I'd choose the tried and true method of learning myself.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

eff has made enough pudding outside this particular thread that we should probably try some.

Here is Jeff Berlin live playing from 1984.
Jazz in Concert in Switzerland. Klaus Doldinger (sax), Alphonse Mouzon (dr), Trilok Gurtu (perc) and Peter Ponger (key).
(Jeff's solo is around 0:56.)
Before one starts watching the video, I'd like to ask a question,
"What does it mean the bass-line as a second melody?"
Maybe, let's add another question.
What a TB member knows about Musical Phrases?

Let's check on the Internet.
Read here: Musical Phrases Unleashead | Art of Composing
(It's an interesting description.)
"What is a musical sentence? In its most simplest sense, the musical sentence is an 8 measure theme, that consists of two different phrases. Each phrase accomplishes different formal functions. The overall purpose of a sentence is to help establish a tonality and to present the basic material that a composition is made of. The music sentence is a vehicle for presenting your ideas. It accomplishes the “formal functions” of presentation, continuation and cadential.

The archetypal sentence, consists of two, 4 bar phrases. These are the presentation phrase, and continuation phrase. Contained within the continuation phrase, is the cadence..."

Now, using that impromptu-acquired knowledge, let's try to see/hear/envision Jeff's musical phrasing during his solo from here:



P.S. If anyone is "strong" enough, please check other bass players' musical phrasing.