Jeff Berlin Discussing Music Ed

[tZer]

Sorry Billnc - I am sure I am partly to blame. But I am still not clear as to whether or not the discussion of brain physiology as it relates to music education or if discussing how being musically educated actually pays off in real world situations factors into this thread or not.

Relating to many of the discussions/arguments in this thread, I can easily see a correlation between early childhood music ed vs. later introduction vs. self-taught and I thought there might be something to gain from exploring such things.

But I (we) digress apparently. Want to put us back on track?

 

[smeet]

I have a question in general Jeff: When studying technical exercises (for instance, Chord Studies for Electric Bass), I am never sure when is the optimal time to move on. Do I stick with a particular exercise until I feel that I have "mastered" some particular aspect of the exercise? Or should I devote a fixed amount of time (say a week) and then move on?

Thanks!

 

[Billnc]

I don't want to speak for Jeff, or be a wanna-be mod, just finally found a thread on track that stayed there, with some real heavy weights chimeing in. The studies may help in teaching kids, so obviously there may be ground, what to teach kids? Ironically it's the same thing! I'm NOT the sing songy guitar teacher (oh to have more bass students) to little kids. Yet I give them the exact same info as adults, the kid must be able to read at a level enough to understand a basic method book.

Any second grader with their mind to it can learn to read music, on a guitar, never needing tabs or short cuts. They can learn a blues scale, and move it to any key on the guitar, and in time learn the entire 1st position, and play duets with me. This is my experience.

This thread, when going well is an inspiration to teach, keep those of us who teach via the academic approach on track and tweak what we do.

Saddly, I cannot talk this shop with most teachers I know, they know the material, but pander or jam with a student for half an hour and call it a day. This is a place to do it.

Jeff, sorry for the loss of your friend. You'll pass his knowledge on.

 

[engedi1]

I have a question in general Jeff: When studying technical exercises (for instance, Chord Studies for Electric Bass), I am never sure when is the optimal time to move on. Do I stick with a particular exercise until I feel that I have "mastered" some particular aspect of the exercise? Or should I devote a fixed amount of time (say a week) and then move on?

Thanks!

I have this exact same question. I am working on some of the Chord Studies exercises and they are a really challenge. Hopefully my teacher will tell me when he thinks they are good enough.

Of course, stuff this deep, should be reviewed from time to time, just like I don't think I'll ever be done studying the Bach Cello suites (chord exercises of another name!) Pablo Casals studied the cello suites for something like 13 years before he performed them in public.
How do you know when enough is enough!

 

[Fergie Fulton]

This is another place where the division between academia and art or 'show' vs. 'go' is clear.

Mentioning Gene Simmons - again, no one (himself included) is holding him up as an example of a scholarly musician but as far as someone who knows how to put on a show, that's quite a different story and has little to nothing to do with being a skilled musician.

If it's $$ you are after, I am sure if you are 1st call in NY or LA, you're earning $$, but as for the rest of us schooled players, probably not so much. But if you have a great look, can hack the part and are in the right place at the right time, you can possibly get rich playing.

It all comes down to your expectation of return on your investment. If you expect to get rich, you need to focus on what pays. If you expect to be enriched, you need to focus on what enriches.

"The Industry" glamorizes musicians and creates what I think is a false expectation of 'riches' if you become a musician. You can probably have a very fulfilling and rich life and career as a musician and never be known by the masses or be seen on MTV. Many scholarly/academic pursuits pay off in enriching lives, not necessarily back accounts.

Of course and that is part of the problem for some they have no depth to them, no one will ever get a job in professional orchestra without a qualified musical education. In orchestras all around the world there are great musicians doing a job without fame and fortune, this is the reality of music for many. But we do not see it as a chore, a down side, it is just us doing a job we love. The great thing about earning money is that you stop struggling and concentrate on what you want to do, not what you need to do.

 

[JimmyM]

I like Jonas Hellborg's take on it...he said something like "Nobody should ever get into music for the money. If you want to make money, go make money." Gene Simmons could have easily gone broke playing in KISS, but they caught on and became one of the lucky handful that actually did it. You can't realistically go into it thinking you'll be super famous and rich. So I think deep down inside, ol' Gene just likes to play music, and if he went broke, he'd still do it.

 

[engedi1]

Or, as my former DB teacher once told me, "Get the $%&* out of music, unless you can be happy no other way" He struggled for years and years until he got a great job with Phoenix symphony, and he was a monster player, with a PHD in double bass performance. He almost quit many times and went back to being a carpenter, but couldn't really be happy doing anything else
His other memorable quote was " playing in a symphony sure beats a 9-5 job any day of the week"

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Or, as my former DB teacher once told me, "Get the $%&* out of music, unless you can be happy no other way" He struggled for years and years until he got a great job with Phoenix symphony, and he was a monster player, with a PHD in double bass performance. He almost quit many times and went back to being a carpenter, but couldn't really be happy doing anything else
His other memorable quote was " playing in a symphony sure beats a 9-5 job any day of the week"

LOL playing sure does beat a 9-5.

 

[AltGrendel]

I like Jonas Hellborg's take on it...he said something like "Nobody should ever get into music for the money. If you want to make money, go make money." Gene Simmons could have easily gone broke playing in KISS, but they caught on and became one of the lucky handful that actually did it. You can't realistically go into it thinking you'll be super famous and rich. So I think deep down inside, ol' Gene just likes to play music, and if he went broke, he'd still do it.

Totally off topic

Gene Simmons was only in it for the money. Period. Invalid Link Removed

 

[tZer]

Fergie Fulton - not quite sure why the thumbs down (re; Gene Simmons/musician vs. performer) - It seems like we agree.

I've tried my hand at teaching and feel very much like I failed. I'd suspected that I am not qualified to be a teacher of very young, first-time players who have no formal training and after taking on a friend's son as a student, confirmed that.

The problem I faced was that I too believe anyone delving into music - whether it be through bass, guitar, piano or pan flute needs to learn all aspects of music - not just how to play tunes on their instrument of choice. Teaching those things from the ground up is just something I don't have the skill or patience for.

So both of my kids are taking piano lessons from a skilled teacher - not me - who is introducing them to treble and bass clef, the notes, dynamic expression, and so on.

But you can't always get students pre-loaded with all that fundamental knowledge but who still want to be taught to play bass. For those teachers out there who do take on beginning students, how to you handle teaching entry-level, beginning music? Along side teaching the mechanics of playing the instrument, do you also teach music in general or do you require your students already have that knowledge before you will take them on?

 

[Yenko]

I have this exact same question. I am working on some of the Chord Studies exercises and they are a really challenge. Hopefully my teacher will tell me when he thinks they are good enough.

Of course, stuff this deep, should be reviewed from time to time, just like I don't think I'll ever be done studying the Bach Cello suites (chord exercises of another name!) Pablo Casals studied the cello suites for something like 13 years before he performed them in public.
How do you know when enough is enough!

My bass teacher recommended a practice organization method that really works well for me, so I figured this might be a good place to share it:

1. Acquire 5-7 school folders, binders, whatever - one for each day of the week you're going to practice
2. Label each folder with the day of the week, and choose a topic for each day of practice. For instance, Monday might be chords and arpeggios, Tuesday is scales and modes, Wednesday you work on learning and refining songs, Thursday you work on sight reading, Friday is "play along with Pandora day", etc. Customize it to the broad topics you're studying at the time.
3. Each day you practice, work on only the topic listed in that folder for that day, and divide up your practice time into "Review", "New", and "Remediate" periods. "Review" is as it sounds...reviewing things you already "know". "New" is for new items within the topic...such as arpeggios in a new key. Finally, during "remediate" you go back over the things you worked on that day and write down what went well and what didn't go so well, then spend a few extra minutes working on the things that didn't go so well.
4. Update your folders with new information as needed. The broad topics shouldn't change very often, but the specifics will change all the time.

The beauty of this method is that it frees you from having to decide what to practice during each session, and it keeps you organized so that you give each topic sufficient treatment. I've been doing this for a while now, and it's worked out very well. I keep the notes I make while I'm practicing so I can go back and review as necessary.

 

[Billnc]

But you can't always get students pre-loaded with all that fundamental knowledge but who still want to be taught to play bass. For those teachers out there who do take on beginning students, how to you handle teaching entry-level, beginning music? Along side teaching the mechanics of playing the instrument, do you also teach music in general or do you require your students already have that knowledge before you will take them on?

I'll take a young student, no experience. I will cover the parts of the guitar, and tuning. Then cover the notes on the first string and the student is to read the pieces. Simply add a string as they develop. I will have them tap the given rythmns
if needed and have them count. I will them comp to the tunes to be learned, and in time I'll assign some duets. For improvisation it's the blues scale. As the ability to play single notes and reading progresses it's on to some simple standards like Watermelon Man, Summertime etc.

Wonderful thing about young kids, they just do the lessons and progress. Do you know what it's like to play Summertime with a 4th grader? Highly rewarding.

Older kids can be a problem, from me hearing "we don't use chords any more" to telling me a tab is correct, regardless of how it sounds! But I've also got some really bright 15 year olds who are learning to harmonize standards, comp, learn the chord tones etc. We started from scratch. All of my teenage students without exception, who are into learning jazz, do not need me at all for their interest in rock or country, whatever, they get that on their own or have learned to transcribe the stuff.

My lessons are music lessons that happen to involve a guitar or bass.

 

[tZer]

Older kids can be a problem, from me hearing "we don't use chords any more" to telling me a tab is correct, regardless of how it sounds! But I've also got some really bright 15 year olds who are learning to harmonize standards, comp, learn the chord tones etc. We started from scratch. All of my teenage students without exception, who are into learning jazz, do not need me at all for their interest in rock or country, whatever, they get that on their own or have learned to transcribe the stuff.

That's so true. Pre-teens, young teens who didn't get any early music ed are who I am thinking of. They tend to be the ones who show up looking for guitar/bass lessons - the wannabe rock/pop stars.

There seems to be a vast difference between those kids - the potentially self-taught 'players' and the kids who have been playing piano, violin, clarinet, etc... the ones who have been studying music in class and who essentially take for granted that music lessons involve reading.

I learned that teaching the basics is a skill unto itself. Just because I know the basics (and more) doesn't mean I know how to teach it. Very humbling.

But that's precisely why my kids are getting their introduction to music via teachers who specialize in beginners and who teach them MUSIC - not just how to play piano.

 

[JimmyM]

Totally off topic

Gene Simmons was only in it for the money. Period. Invalid Link Removed

Don't care if it's off topic, first of all...

Anyway, yes, the easiest way to become rich is to play music. All you have to do is want to make a lot of money and you will. I don't know any people who have failed at it. And in the time of bands like Sabbath, Zeppelin, and Yes, the quickest and most sure-fire way to become rich was to wear Kabuki makeup and sing simple rock songs. That didn't offend most rock and roll fans in the 70's.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Fergie Fulton - not quite sure why the thumbs down (re; Gene Simmons/musician vs. performer) - It seems like we agree.

Sorry but i don't belive i gave a thumbs down, if it seems that way sorry, but not my meaning or intention.

Billnc has the correct way teach kids music because when they get older prejudice sets in, either as peer pressure or against life as some may see it.

Kids love music you just have to harness it. Kids love melody, rhythm, etc without question in some cases. Simple wind up toys will astound them for ages.
Twinkle twinkle little star, from a Fisher Price toy will give the some much fun and hold there attention as small children, then slightly different sounds an music, normally from a TV character in sing-a-longs or song to do with learning will hold them pre school.
That stuff does not work on teens, that is not cool or what there friends listen to so you now have prejudice to get by. They want the skills now and if after a short time it does not happen they move on.

Like all learning, when you were learning to read a Nursery Rhyme, was it read to you and enjoyed or was it explained to you? When you recited them did you know where the nouns were, what were constanants, what were vowels, what were adjectives, pro-nouns etc or did you just read and enjoy the fun of it? All the other stuff comes later in school so don't push, encourage, and a bit of psychology a well is good LOL.

Music is no different, hold there attention and encourage, for me they have till they leave home to learn and put in place all the Academic side of music, its all the same information as it has been taught in the past.
So why the confussion with Academia? I see none, all the books and music collages are working from the same books and programmes, using tried and tested material that is as relevent today as it was when it was first taught.

Good teachers, bad teachers, maybe as that is the link between the information and the pupil, some inspire a subject, some turn it off in you, their inability to modify and apply their teaching becomes your problem, which someone else has to un-tangle and correct later in life.

I learned more about math and its applications to me after i left school....so what was the point of me sitting in that class if they cannot or do not have the time to teach me? Music was the same, i learned more about its application, not its academia after i left, but it was what i learned in academia that gave me the skills to understand, it was my appliction of them that made me successfull, again academia and art are two different things, but are hand in hand to being a musician and understanding music, so for me they are one under the heading of music.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Jeff:
You mentioned that you transcribe bass lines into the treble clef. How does that work? Do you just put an 8vb on there and go for it?

Just curious.

No I never transcribe bass music and never have. But I have transcribed mostly sax, and piano which goes straight into the treble clef. I just read it there and play in on the bass, even if I have to play it lower than it was played. It doesn't matter as long as I am learning their harmonic principles.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Hey Jeff, please accept my heartfelt condolences. Back on topic. In an effort to try revitalize my creativity i'm searching for music to transcribe or just listen to and have taken to listening to pianists. I bought Brian Bromberg's Upside Downside album and George Duke's playing on that totally blows me away. I've also been enamoured with Herbie Hancock's playing on Jaco's first album. Can anyone suggest any other great pianists who's lines or melodies would translate well to bass? And on the subject of transcribing(i've always just copied things by ear and memorized them in the process) do you make a chord chart in order to analyze the relationships between what you're transcribing and the chord sequence?

One of my earliest transcriptions that Charlie assigned me was Phyneas Newborn's solo Rough House on the Cd of the same name. It is bebop and the language is perfectly represented in this solo. If it is too hard, then try some Paul Desmond because he is a simpler player to transcribe.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Definitely not to argue - but the view you pose is not necessarily 'completely alternate' - or at least it does not have to compete with the scientific or historic views previously stated.

]

Too true TZER and a great sentiment! I think there is much room for these view points to meet in the middle and I greatly appreciate the great dialogue. There is much truth and beauty in the blending of science, art and instinct.

I do think this is not totally OT because much of this thread and the earlier thread, has been about arguments between the "study music academically crowd" and the "instinctual musician" crowd. Jeff is clearly making an argument that everyone should study music academically and many vehemently disagree, which I think is their loss.

This is true, but I will temper this with this caveat. If you decide to take lessons and music is not the absolute center of what it is that you are paying to study, then you have not used your money well and are not going to learn sufficient quality information to justify the tuition that you have paid. In fact, it is closer to wasting money because most lessons that many pay for can be learned at home for free.

 

[JeffBerlin]

I have a question in general Jeff: When studying technical exercises (for instance, Chord Studies for Electric Bass), I am never sure when is the optimal time to move on. Do I stick with a particular exercise until I feel that I have "mastered" some particular aspect of the exercise? Or should I devote a fixed amount of time (say a week) and then move on?

Thanks!

You can move on when you feel comfortable with the exercise you have been practicing for a few days. You don't need to play something note perfect to move on. Just get it so that you are fluid before you take the next exercise head on. Then you can review these exercises in a few months to see how far along you have actually come along.

 

[tZer]

This is true, but I will temper this with this caveat. If you decide to take lessons and music is not the absolute center of what it is that you are paying to study, then you have not used your money well and are not going to learn sufficient quality information to justify the tuition that you have paid. In fact, it is closer to wasting money because most lessons that many pay for can be learned at home for free.

Got it. If you're going to study "MUSIC" - not just learn to play an instrument well enough to perform - you should study it in toto.

My discussion re: Early childhood music ed. and brain development centers around the theory that some people who are exposed early on 'get' music differently that those exposed later.