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

[JeffBerlin]

There are endless reasons why one might use a tuner.

If your ear is taught how to hear pitch and to recognize the notes to adjust tuning your bass, there is no reason that a tuner is necessary except because people choose to use one. Musicians tuned their instruments by ear because they were taught how to. No one needed a tuner to do it.

It is a device of the times! To me, it is in use and represents the lowered musical skills that musicians tolerate. People don't aim high in music. They aim low and sometimes make excuses for this. I feel that they should stop this.

Not being able to use your own bass means that that musicians are less skilled to perform the most basic task of music, to tune your own instrument. It might be true that players today aren't skilled enough to use their ear, maybe the most fundamental skill necessary to be a musician.

It seems a safe bet to state that people will object to my statement. Nevertheless, I encourage people to aim higher in learning and playing than they do and become representatives of a higher quality of music instead of working to not understand how important this is.

 

[SteveCS]

P.S.: I thought further about that example... and don't understand it.
Do you mean knowing the name of the tone one hears, and it's sharp- or flatness, would have to do with being able to hear and feel that very tone?

I mean all that's needed in order to tune by ear is being able to feel (or hear) a difference between two simultaneously sounding tones - not to determine "This is C, slightly sharp by 10 cents," right? Which, of course, is useful and desirable, agreed Just not needed for tuning, IME. Also not for determining if Amp A sounds warmer but les dynamic than Amp B.

It's about trusting your ear - if you can't determine relative pitch...

 

[Michael Schreiber]

It's about trusting your ear - if you can't determine relative pitch...

I agree and since learning the violin I began to understand to appreciate this very skill; as well as the benefits of playing fretless, allowing the player to change the intonation on the fly. Sorry, I realize my earlier post about "no excuse for fretless players " must have sounded rude to you. I should have emphasized more that it is a key skill of a fretless player that he has to master intonation; which includes being able to determine pitch as acurately as can; a skill of which also fretted bass players surely benefit, without question.

If your ear is taught how to hear pitch and to recognize the notes to adjust tuning your bass, there is no reason that a tuner is necessary except because people choose to use one. Musicians tuned their instruments by ear because they were taught how to. No one needed a tuner to do it.

It is a device of the times! To me, it is in use and represents the lowered musical skills that musicians tolerate. People don't aim high in music. They aim low and sometimes make excuses for this. I feel that they should stop this.

Not being able to use your own bass means that that musicians are less skilled to perform the most basic task of music, to tune your own instrument. It might be true that players today aren't skilled enough to use their ear, maybe the most fundamental skill necessary to be a musician.

I agree with you, you are right. People should aim high in order to fully enjoy playing.
But was that the point? I agreed that it is desireable to learn to tune by ear - as well as to train hearing and determining pitch.

My point was:
Why not asking the student who uses a tuner, why he does - before telling him to quit or making fun of him?
Maybe he has trouble doing that in front of others because he is nervous or shy, or whatever reason.

This is not aimed at you nor at SteveCS or anyone else in this thread - I got aggrevated when this topic came up here, too; because I had read enough high and mighty sounding statements about that topic, here at TB, while I did have problems myself in tuning by ear in front of other people, as explained earlier. To you, @SteveCS and all others: I am sorry, in case my tone was rude, or got too much into off-topic.

Now, since this thread is called "What Is Taught Without Only Teaching the Facts!" - to me teaching:
"If you can't tune by ear, you should quit" or even worse the subliminal message one might get:
"If you can't tune by ear, yet, we are gonna make fun of you!"
...is not only teaching without teaching facts, it is wrong. Yet, this attitude seems to exist; hopefully not in schools/academies, but systematically within the community of players, of which some also do teach.

That is the point I try to make in the range of this thread.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

If the person paying for a particular instruction is getting what they want from it, its of value to them.

Yes, and that person becomes a purchaser/consumer of that particular instruction (ONLY!)
I totally agree with you about becoming a "purchaser" (and a happy one) of that one particular instruction.
Ex.: from our current TB question,
"What note should I play when the D chord changes to the D7 chord before going to G7".
(Please don't worry, MalcolmAmos is always ready to help. Thank you MalcolmAmos.)
And here is where our agreement separates.
To me - it's NOT some kind of LEARNING PROCESS. To me, it's a sign of numerous "holes" in the OP's knowledge,
then,
Why, a person who has OFFICIALLY ACKNOWLEDGED, "I don't want to LEARN", is participating in a dialog called, "I want to LEARN"?

 

[Whousedtoplay]

It's about trusting your ear - if you can't determine relative pitch

I would recommend to have a good teacher who would help you to develop that "trusting ear".

 

[gln1955]

Yes, and that person becomes a purchaser/consumer of that particular instruction (ONLY!)
I totally agree with you about becoming a "purchaser" (and a happy one) of that one particular instruction.
Ex.: from our current TB question,
"What note should I play when the D chord changes to the D7 chord before going to G7".
(Please don't worry, MalcolmAmos is always ready to help. Thank you MalcolmAmos.)
And here is where our agreement separates.
To me - it's NOT some kind of LEARNING PROCESS. To me, it's a sign of numerous "holes" in the OP's knowledge,
then,
Why, a person who has OFFICIALLY ACKNOWLEDGED, "I don't want to LEARN", is participating in a dialog called, "I want to LEARN"?

Somewhere in that I totally lost you. Are you referring to another thread?

 

[SteveCS]

I would recommend to have a good teacher who would help you to develop that "trusting ear".

It's not my ear we're talking about...

 

[Michael Schreiber]

I would recommend to have a good teacher who would help you to develop that "trusting ear".

Though, I have to say, among any professional fretless instrument players, there are some who have developed really precise ears; being able to tell if an interval is sharp or flat by cents, reliably. Incredible. It's their job, it's what they do everyday, whether they want or not. And I guess the passionate (and physically able) ones are able to perfect that skill like machines

So, I do see a relation to the topic; a professional player who doesn't have fun still might sound professional.
A professional player who likes what he does is likely to excel. So, even I as non-professional amateur violinist can train my ears more and faster if I just realize that this is what I want to do, not finding excuses why I don't want to keep my eyes away from the fingerboard and having to trust my own ears. I guess, that is what @SteveCS meant, right?

 

[Whousedtoplay]

Somewhere in that I totally lost you. Are you referring to another thread?

It’s an example of your “special instruction” that has some value to someone.

 

[FantasticFour]

I don't know if it's just me but I feel like bass instruction reaaaally comes short when it comes to fretless.
When you see what it takes a classical cello player to eventually play in tune... just buy a fretless and get down to it? Seriously?

 

[gln1955]

It’s an example of your “special instruction” that has some value to someone.

Well whatever. Still don't know what the reference is, but if it makes you feel superior, good for you.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

It's not my ear we're talking about...

And I have not even remotely intended to say anything about your solidly pro hearing/ear.

 

[fdeck]

I don't know if it's just me but I feel like bass instruction reaaaally comes short when it comes to fretless.
When you see what it takes a classical cello player to eventually play in tune... just buy a fretless and get down to it? Seriously?

I played cello before teaching myself electric bass. I applied the techniques of developing intonation that I had learned on the cello. (Same when I started playing upright bass). So I don't know what it's really like to learn intonation from square one on the fretless electric bass. And I seriously wish that I had learned fretted bass, rather than giving up on frets and going with what was easy due to my cello background.

There are a couple of differences that I can think of. The first is that the electric bass is usually expected to play fewer notes, in a lower register. The second is that a lot of bass lines are effectively improvised, so the bassist can choose their battles in terms of what intervals they can reliably play in tune. Cello is more likely to be playing from a chart where somebody else has chosen those intervals for you.

Amusingly, I'm working on learning to play jazz on cello right now. The main hurdle is that I no longer "think" in fifths tuning, at the level that I do on the bass. I sound like a jazz player trying to play cello, rather than a cello player trying to play jazz.

 

[FantasticFour]

Very interesting!!

I played cello before teaching myself electric bass. I applied the techniques of developing intonation that I had learned on the cello. (Same when I started playing upright bass). So I don't know what it's really like to learn intonation from square one on the fretless electric bass. And I seriously wish that I had learned fretted bass, rather than giving up on frets and going with what was easy due to my cello background.

Wouldn't be switching from fretless to fretted the easiest thing ever?!
I know firsthand that feeling of going down the easy road and not being too pleased with oneself, though.

There are a couple of differences that I can think of. The first is that the electric bass is usually expected to play fewer notes, in a lower register. The second is that a lot of bass lines are effectively improvised, so the bassist can choose their battles in terms of what intervals they can reliably play in tune. Cello is more likely to be playing from a chart where somebody else has chosen those intervals for you.

Amusingly, I'm working on learning to play jazz on cello right now. The main hurdle is that I no longer "think" in fifths tuning, at the level that I do on the bass. I sound like a jazz player trying to play cello, rather than a cello player trying to play jazz.

Makes total sense. I actually decided to not start jazz on the piano, and one of the reasons for it was because the classical conception of the keyboard I felt was kind of 'in the way'. But imagine your bass was tuned in fifths... wouldn't you be recycling along the easy road again?

 

[Whousedtoplay]

Well whatever. Still don't know what the reference is, but if it makes you feel superior, good for you.

You have made a statement about different levels of value for different people, but you have forgotten to include an example of it. I did it for you.
P.S. Any reference to some kind of “superiority” is a Taboo (not a show) for me.
Please, don’t get personal in order to keep our conversation civilized!

 

[fdeck]

Wouldn't be switching from fretless to fretted the easiest thing ever?!
I know firsthand that feeling of going down the easy road and not being too pleased with oneself, though.

I found the frets to be extremely awkward, always buzzing when I tried to shift positions, for instance playing fast passages. And then of course I was an impulsive teenager, and learned about Jaco, so the frets came out. Of course a bit of disciplined effort would have made a big difference, which is why I wish that I had stuck with it. Now I have other interests such as the cello, and not getting killed on upright bass.

 

[Michael Schreiber]

The main hurdle is that I no longer "think" in fifths tuning, at the level that I do on the bass.

Yes, that's the fun part
Just curious: How different does your cello's fingerboard feel in size and shape compared to the one on your bass?
Enough that the fingers can learn to feel "ah we're on the bass, right now"?
I never had a cello in my hand; just my violin, which feels totally different, and helps recalling the different finger movements.
Is that more difficult between cello and bass, since cello is bigger?

 

[Michael Schreiber]

Somewhere in that I totally lost you. Are you referring to another thread?

As far as I understand, @Whousedtoplay meant that in response to your post:
"If the person paying for a particular instruction is getting what they want from it, its of value to them."

Then, he gave an example of a particular instruction that might be counter-productive;
like, when the student is too lazy to learn himself, pays an instructor - who then does the thinking for the student;
while the student might benefit more, if he learned to figure something out himself.

Maybe like this:
Student: "I don't know what the dominant in C is."
Instructor: "It is G , because..."

Now, the student can learn from the instructor how to figure out the dominant in any scale, by himself.
If he does not, and in return continuously consults an instructor for the "particular instruction," in this case "what is the dominant in <insert name here> scale?" - then the student would benefit less from that instruction.

Did I understand that correctly, @Whousedtoplay ?

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

In one of the videos posted earlier (MarkBass clinic in Italy), you mention that it would take 4 months to fix an induvidual not knowing much about music and not knowing much about the bass. With that statement, were you referring to that individual or is that a general statement about the timeframe to learn music well? And, is that working on music full time?

 

[Smallmouth_Bass]

You have learned music since the age of 5 and have learned from the best music teachers over many years. Assuming that learning was (is) based on musical content and your level of mastery of that content, what do you or what did you learn or work on in the later years of your music development?