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

[FantasticFour]

Well, my lessons have been out since, I think, October. They took me over a year of writing and very often rewriting the music, upgrading and changing it for the better. If these new etudes just came out the other day, I'd be careful in thinking that they were written with thought to harmony or sequence. I'm not saying that they NOT, but preparing exercises for people is serious stuff.

Sight reading is taught by Phil Mann, whom I believe you know, Jeff.

 

[FantasticFour]

I believe the "audience" is the only true judge of one's music, and for one reason. It's near, if not entirely, impossible to have a objective view towards something you've had a hand in creating.

That in my opinion is an open door to artistic compromise of the worst kind. Plus there's a time dimension to audiences. What will people say in 10 years time? In 50? Taking opinion for informed judgement gives birth to all the "underrated this" and "overrated that" that articles which always exasperate me slightly. How about we had been more analytical and less jugemental about someone's work in the first place? I'm exaggerating a bit but you get my meaning. As musicians we certainly should have the means to construct a balanced opinion. Something may seem lame to me, fair enough. We all have those. But why did the artist pick that option? What does that teach us about music?

 

[Quinn Roberts]

Eric Clapton once said that "Cream had a healthy disregard for the audience. It was all about the music." Now, he didn't say that they looked at the audience with distain, but that their opinion didn't count. What they played was for them. All great musicians do this; they play for themselves, not the audience. But they invite the audience to share in their experience.

That's a very thought provoking quote, I'll have to take that into regard. Great food for thought as always!

 

[Quinn Roberts]

There is no "manner" that golf was "designed to be played"

...and , you absolutely don't have to learn "how to swing the club or putt the ball correctly" - anyone who has spent any amount of time on a low priced public course will tell you that.

See: croquet putting, anchored putting, claw grip putting, crosshanded grip putting, and traditional grip putting.

Don't be golfing at my local PUBLIC course with that attitude.. Didn't work for me and my pals...
Edit: I will add, we don't have a very large course however. Is strictly 18 holes

 

[aborgman]

Don't be golfing at my local PUBLIC course with that attitude.. Didn't work for me and my pals...

Golf courses IME only care about behavior - if you act a fool, they'll toss you... but you can be a horrible golfer with the worst golf swing known to humanity (see: almost every 80+ year old golfer), and no one cares.

...and the scorecard doesn't care one bit about what fashion(within the rules) you use to get the ball in the hole, it just counts how many strokes it takes.

 

[Quinn Roberts]

Golf courses IME only care about behavior - if you act a fool, they'll toss you... but you can be a horrible golfer with the worst golf swing known to humanity (see: almost every 80+ year old golfer), and no one cares.

...and the scorecard doesn't care one bit about what fashion(within the rules) you use to get the ball in the hole, it just counts how many strokes it takes.

And toss you they should. In my case, however, we were just cordial enough to see we were being very rude to those truly trying to enjoy their hobby.

Can't resist..

 

[JeffBerlin]

There is no "manner" that golf was "designed to be played"

Golf is a game designed to hit a ball into a hole using a club. And there are firm methods that are academic solid methods to help golfers to do this. Without learning how to correctly do this, golf is an extremely frustrating experience to people wishing to accomplish this task. It isn't a complicated point.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Golf courses IME only care about behavior - if you act a fool, they'll toss you... but you can be a horrible golfer with the worst golf swing known to humanity (see: almost every 80+ year old golfer), and no one cares.

...and the scorecard doesn't care one bit about what fashion(within the rules) you use to get the ball in the hole, it just counts how many strokes it takes.

Could be. But I was talking about how learning a task requires learning it the right way. It wasn't that complicated a point that I was raising.

 

[bench]

There is no "manner" that golf was "designed to be played"

...and , you absolutely don't have to learn "how to swing the club or putt the ball correctly" - anyone who has spent any amount of time on a low priced public course will tell you that.

See: croquet putting, anchored putting, claw grip putting, crosshanded grip putting, and traditional grip putting.

while you're right it should be obvious that the vast majority of succesful professional golfers share certain technical aspects of their swings that make them succesful. of course you can play like you want, but the result will reflect that. and there is the important analogy to learning the bass or anything else...

 

[aborgman]

while you're right it should be obvious that the vast majority of succesful professional golfers share certain technical aspects of their swings that make them succesful.

I'd say that is somewhat true if you ignore putting - but putting throws a pretty big wrench into that claim.

...and we aren't talking about pro golfers, but all golfers... and we're defining success as "what the participant wants from the game", not winning the US Open.

of course you can play like you want, but the result will reflect that.

Across a wide swath of amateur golfers - I'd say that probably isn't true.

For amateurs at the bottom end - it's better to have an awful swing that is consistent, than to have a good swing that is inconsistent. If you can hit the same giant slice every time, you're likely to score better by just adjusting your target and living with the slice than attempting to change your swing to fix the slice.

 

[Downsman]

Eric Clapton once said that "Cream had a healthy disregard for the audience. It was all about the music." Now, he didn't say that they looked at the audience with distain, but that their opinion didn't count. What they played was for them. All great musicians do this; they play for themselves, not the audience. But they invite the audience to share in their experience.

I would extend that to pretty much all of the creative industries. If what you create brings you pleasure, and, very importantly, it's also something you would genuinely want to watch, listen to, read, or look at yourself even if it was created by someone else, then there is an audience for it. How big an audience might depend on how out there your personal taste is, but you need to trust there will be an audience that appreciates it, and so nothing should stop you from creating that art.

 

[SteveCS]

There is no "manner" that golf was "designed to be played"

...and , you absolutely don't have to learn "how to swing the club or putt the ball correctly" - anyone who has spent any amount of time on a low priced public course will tell you that.

...

Maybe, maybe not, but I'm guessing most of those 'golfers' are in it more for the hang than the golf... There are plenty of people who own bass guitars, who may even play in pub bands, who are, in reality, no different.
YMMV

 

[JeffBerlin]

Sight reading is taught by Phil Mann, whom I believe you know, Jeff.

I trust Phil's music completely.

 

[JeffBerlin]

I would extend that to pretty much all of the creative industries. If what you create brings you pleasure, and, very importantly, it's also something you would genuinely want to watch, listen to, read, or look at yourself even if it was created by someone else, then there is an audience for it. How big an audience might depend on how out there your personal taste is, but you need to trust there will be an audience that appreciates it, and so nothing should stop you from creating that art.

We;; said, Sir!

 

[aborgman]

Maybe, maybe not, but I'm guessing most of those 'golfers' are in it more for the hang than the golf... There are plenty of people who own bass guitars, who may even play in pub bands, who are, in reality, no different.
YMMV

Yes... and those people are golfers, not 'golfers'. Just like the people you mention are bass players not 'people who own bass guitars'.

Those folks with different aspirations for their playing/golfing aren't better or worse - just different, and thus may have a differing cost-benefit analysis involving instruction and what should come of it.

 

[Whousedtoplay]

A player who could not consistently meet this requirement would not be considered qualified in the group I perform with.

And I respect your opinion.

I assume the qualified player can keep time within a few percentage points.

I'm a metronome supporter but your "metronomic" statement does not fit my personal beliefs and understanding about Music.
And here is why.
Let's assume we have two perfect time-wise musicians. Both have almost or just "mechanically-perfect metronomic" timing.
If we ask them to play a song at 114BPM, both musicians with their mechanically-perfect metronomic timing should be excellent but...
We have a problem.
One musician is playing at almost perfect 113.96BPM while the other is playing at 114.15BPM.
I think you understand what's going to happen after a few measures.
It's all about that organic/integral band's performance, its "tightness".
It's about the musician/s' ability/ies to organically adjust to any possible slight tempo variations.

And it's the same musician/s' ability/ies to organically adjust to the click track/metronome.

 

[aborgman]

Actually the game of golf has defined rules, etiquette, and a performance goal (Par). I would consider these elements the "manner" in which golf was designed to played.

I'd say those all are much more evolved than designed. Golf has been played since ~1500 but the first rules date to 1744.

 

[Rhythmace]

At impact, all good golfers are pretty much in the same position. Putting is a miniature golf swing.

 

[Son of Wobble]

And that's my cue to stop wasting my time on Talkbass...now where's my bass?

Don't go, Man -- you gotta stay and check out the patina on my hippy sandwich!

 

[Son of Wobble]

One musician is playing at almost perfect 113.96BPM while the other is playing at 114.15BPM.
I think you understand what's going to happen after a few measures.

Yes, I know what will happen: I will dust both of these players by finishing in 109.00BPM flat. Winner!