Jeff Berlin Discussing Music Ed

[BassyBill]

I agree completely. But, I might do away with the word "clown". "Inexperienced" is probably a better term.

Fair enough, good point.

I was just reacting to what I sometimes see from a few contributors who mention "groove" as if it's some sort of undefinable, almost supernatural quality rather than just one (albeit very important) aspect of playing your instrument well.

In the same way, you occasionally read remarks here and elsewhere along the lines of "X is a great player technically, but can't groove imo", and this always seems to me like quite a fundamental contradiction.

 

[Billnc]

Jeff, thanks for your input. I've been working on the chord tone concept since April, with all the different approaches, and substitute triads etc I see your point on not regarding scales to start. Of course scale passages may result from this approach. If you approach thinking scales you leave out or are not using so much other material available.

If memory serves, I used the Sax version of the studies (this would have been 1984). They were looked at more as something you could do to help spice up solos. With your online access and answers to our questions lately the more detailed study of this is quite revealing and a lot of fun.

So thanks and Happy New Year.

 

[SuperFunkyPete]

A quick heads up to all using the Chord Studies for Electric Bass book.

Up until F minor, there are usually 5 exercises, with the last two being 64th note etudes using the chord tones/tensions/passing notes.

i.e. what each chapter usually looks like is something like this:

1. chord tone exercise, passing tone from below
2. chord tone exercise, passing tone from above
3. chord tone exercise, passing tones from above and below
4. chord tone etude, with passing tones and tensions
5. chord tone etude, with passing tones and tensions

After you finish with the F minor chapter, each 'chapter' changes to having only 4 exercises; they chop out exercise #5.

I've has a quick look at the same book, which is written by the same author, which is for sax - called 'Technique of the Saxaphone; Part 2: Chord Studies' - and it has all 5 exercises for every chord type, as in the original Trombone Studies book.

I'm not sure why they cut the number of exercises for each chord type from 5 to 4 for the Electric Bass book, but it surely is annoying. The exercises they cut are really good!

I see from the Saxaphone book that all the exercises are exactly the same as in the Electric Bass book. Perhaps I need to write out the missing exercises and stick them in the back of the Electric Bass book.

Jeff, do you have any comments? Do you think people need to practice both exercises #4 and #5 for every chord type, or will #4 suffice?

Pete

 

[Fergie Fulton]

In the same way, you occasionally read remarks here and elsewhere along the lines of "X is a great player technically, but can't groove imo", and this always seems to me like quite a fundamental contradiction.

LOL... no contradiction its more of relating to music in their playing. I have friends who are fantastic players, but could not get a Chuck Berry song if they spend all night on it.
Its like their intellect gets in the way, can't see the woods for the tree senario.
There is a line to be crossed where feel and technical ability meet.
People who define that line to their audience intellect( including other players ) do well, those who go way over it tend to be refered as to "no groove", because the understanding of what they are doing is not known. Now maybe those players have such great talent that it is not their fault that other are not clever enough to "get them", but it is their responsibility to keep an eye on that line.

Many years ago (20) i saw a three piece band nail Mamsteen, Vai and Satriani covers perfect to no real reaction but disgruntlment. The next song "All right now" by Free brought the house down, as did "Sharp dressed man" by ZZ Top.

There is that line again....but this time moved to suit the audience. Having great musical knowledge and ability is nothing if it does not relate to the audience in style, genre, and intellect.

 

[BassyBill]

LOL... no contradiction its more of relating to music in their playing. I have friends who are fantastic players, but could not get a Chuck Berry song if they spend all night on it.

Again - in my opinion - that does sound like a contradiction. Maybe I have a different view on this. But if I had trouble nailing a Chuck Berry song, I would NOT regard myself as a fantastic player, regardless of what else I might be able to do. To me, "fantastic player" is not a phrase that springs quickly to mind when describing someone with what can only be described as fairly basic musical deficiencies.

All hypothetically speaking, of course.

YMMV et cetera.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Again - in my opinion - that does sound like a contradiction. Maybe I have a different view on this. But if I had trouble nailing a Chuck Berry song, I would NOT regard myself as a fantastic player, regardless of what else I might be able to do. To me, "fantastic player" is not a phrase that springs quickly to mind when describing someone with what can only be described as fairly basic musical deficiencies.

All hypothetically speaking, of course.

YMMV et cetera.

LOL its as i said they complicate the situation by the fact it is a simple one. Just because they don't get the simple premise does not diminish their ability, just their thinking on that situation.

 

[MikeyP23]

Fair enough, good point.

I was just reacting to what I sometimes see from a few contributors who mention "groove" as if it's some sort of undefinable, almost supernatural quality rather than just one (albeit very important) aspect of playing your instrument well.

In the same way, you occasionally read remarks here and elsewhere along the lines of "X is a great player technically, but can't groove imo", and this always seems to me like quite a fundamental contradiction.

Well, I disagree with both of you guys then. I (and Fergie apparently, correct me if I'm off base Fergie) still argue that there's knowing the vocabulary (music theory); and there's expressing ones self capably in that vocabulary (groove, tight, feel, muse, use whatever word you want). I prefer to believe it is something almost supernatural in a good musical, or really any type of artistic performance.

You do mention that the ability to "groove" is one aspect of playing your instrument well. How do you teach that? From your opinion, is it just experience playing with other people? Listening to different people? I'm curious.

Thanks.

 

[PhatBasstard]

I...still argue that there's knowing the vocabulary (music theory); and there's expressing ones self capably in that vocabulary (groove, tight, feel, muse, use whatever word you want). I prefer to believe it is something almost supernatural...

I think we can all learn to improve our time and groove to a certain point. But I'm a firm believer that some are just born with it naturally, while others will never be as natural or never get it at all.

All you have to do is watch a crowded dance floor of (assumingly) non-musicians and you can easily see who "get's it" and who...uh...doesn't ("What song is he dancing to?!?").

I too have played with others who seemed to be technically brilliant players, but were mechanical and cold when trying to play a funky RnB groove (if they could play it at all).

Actually, I've been stunned be how many players that I've run into over the years that, despite being reasonably (sometimes very) proficient players, cannot feel nor play a triplet properly to save their lives. Especially if that triplet was to have a swing feel.

 

[BassyBill]

Well, I disagree with both of you guys then. I (and Fergie apparently, correct me if I'm off base Fergie) still argue that there's knowing the vocabulary (music theory); and there's expressing ones self capably in that vocabulary (groove, tight, feel, muse, use whatever word you want). I prefer to believe it is something almost supernatural in a good musical, or really any type of artistic performance.

You do mention that the ability to "groove" is one aspect of playing your instrument well. How do you teach that? From your opinion, is it just experience playing with other people? Listening to different people? I'm curious.

Thanks.

Well, okay, at the risk of overcomplicating things...

I see musicianship as something more than "theory" or "vocabulary". If I may extend your analogy a bit further, I'd say musicianship is more akin to language than vocabulary. Yes, there's a difference there, if you think about it. Learn a language well, including at least some of the theory and vocabulary aspects, and eloquence will follow. After all, isn't eloquence just another term for fluency with a language? You will also be able to speak simply when the context demands it, I think.

Likewise, a musical performance is about what notes you play, when and how. That's it. This may be subtle, yes, but it's not supernatural. Learn to play your instrument in a musical way (notes, timing, expression) and you'll be able to communicate the performance you want to with your instrument. I try, anyway.

But please - don't think I'm trying to reveal any great secrets here (I don't have any). All I'm saying is that if you learn by practice, application, study and so on, then "groove" and feel and other aspects of musicianship will follow when you're ready.

In my view, a "fantastic player" will not have a problem with a Chuck Berry song, because such a player will have acquired what they need to avoid those sort of problems, by definition. Failure to avoid problems like that is what stops many of us being "fantastic".

Just my own point of view, so I've tried to clarify.

'And what is good, Phaedrus, and what is not good— Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?'
Robert Pirsig: Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance

 

[BassyBill]

Actually, I've been stunned be how many players that I've run into over the years that, despite being reasonably (sometimes very) proficient players, cannot feel nor play a triplet properly to save their lives. Especially if that triplet was to have a swing feel.

That's really what I'm saying and it's just down to different ways of using words, I think. I would not - could not - call such a player proficient myself. I mean, in what way are they proficient if they can't do what you describe?

I do agree that with your first point about some people having more natural aptitude for this than others, though. To put it in purely biological terms, almost any trait within a population will be subject to variation.

 

[PhatBasstard]

That's really what I'm saying and it's just down to different ways of using words, I think. I would not - could not - call such a player proficient myself. I mean, in what way are they proficient if they can't do what you describe?

I do agree that with your first point about some people having more natural aptitude for this than others, though. To put it in purely biological terms, almost any trait within a population will be subject to variation.

I agree with your overall definition.
It just is stunning to me how you can be playing with someone (sometimes for weeks), thinking they really "have it", and then all of a sudden hit something that you don't even think about because it is so basic and simple, and they can't feel it at all. And it's not for lack of trying. It's just some kind of missing mental component.

 

[BassyBill]

I agree with your overall definition.
It just is stunning to me how you can be playing with someone (sometimes for weeks), thinking they really "have it", and then all of a sudden hit something that you don't even think about because it is so basic and simple, and they can't feel it at all. And it's not for lack of trying. It's just some kind of missing mental component.

Oh, yeah, I know that feeling.

To expand a bit further, as it does sound like we're talking about the same thing, I wouldn't agree that someone who can do some things well on the instrument but then fails at some fairly basic aspect is a "proficient" or "fantastic" player, in the same way as I wouldn't call someone who can drive real fast from a standing start but louses up every left turn they make a proficient driver.

 

[Freddels]

Well, what about a great classical player (not to pick on them) that has never played jazz or funk or R&B? They might be great at classical but can't swing or groove. So, the particular feel or groove is relative to the experience of the player in a particular genre.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

You do mention that the ability to "groove" is one aspect of playing your instrument well. How do you teach that? From your opinion, is it just experience playing with other people? Listening to different people? I'm curious.

Thanks.

My experience of it really with the players i meet, see and the artists i play with. Groove is to me is emotion based, like love you can explain it, but can't really explain how it works. You can write about it, talk about it, show it, but you can't really prove you have it, or more importantly... in it. That's why when someone is in the groove they have it. Like love, having it is not the same as being in it, having the ability to groove is not the same as being in the groove.

I think the two are hand in hand in complimenting great players, but not neccesarly needed. Being in the groove is a performance related thing, where as overall performance does not have to be. Its about making the important parts work and letting the rest take care of itself. If i watch actors in love on the stage and they get it right, i believe it, if they don't it looks corny. Its in the performance of that point that will take me in and make me belive they are in love, make me not question that poibt again...i have accepted it and moved on.
The same with anger, rage, pathos, sadness etc. emotions a good actor can show, or better still make you feel so they can move on with their performance.
If a player can make you feel the groove they have done their job, whether they are truly in the groove or not.

As Jeff has said this is the art side of playing, something to learn, a seperate thing from music academia, and i agree it is...if you don't have it. But if you do have it, it will get in your way because it is not a choice to turn it on and off. If you don't have it you may look corny trying to learn it or show it. If in front of the wrong people you show this lacking, you may spend a lot of a career trying to put that one performance to right, because you were unfairly judged on it.
So maybe that's what the true greats have regardless of ability, training, talent, or whatever..is just the simple feeling that what they are doing is right, so they give it there all, and in doing so make us all believe.

It's a great question and a very subjective thing and i would have to think long and hard to go further, but hopefully you get the idea of where i come at it from?

 

[BassyBill]

Well, what about a great classical player (not to pick on them) that has never played jazz or funk or R&B? They might be great at classical but can't swing or groove. So, the particular feel or groove is relative to the experience of the player in a particular genre.

I agree that it is context dependent to some extent. To use an extreme example, a great funk player might find it hard to sit in with someone like Ravi Shankar or Cecil Morgan.

I think a great classical player might not struggle too much if called upon to jam along to some Chuck Berry though. I dunno, what do you think?

 

[Fergie Fulton]

I agree that it is context dependent to some extent. To use an extreme example, a great funk player might find it hard to sit in with someone like Ravi Shankar or Cecil Morgan.

I think a great classical player might not struggle too much if called upon to jam along to some Chuck Berry though. I dunno, what do you think?

Trust me they would LOL, i toured with Chuck in the late 80s and saw him fire piano player after piano player. One was even half way through the gig and asked to close the piano lid and sit there till the end.

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Which incidently reminds me of this. In the link Chuck shows Keith Richards a point which is not that important to Keith, but is to Chuck. No big deal you think, would not put a thought in to it just do it...but not to Chuck... for what ever reason.

 

[BassyBill]

Trust me they would LOL, i toured with Chuck in the late 80s and saw him fire piano player after piano player. One was even half way through the gig and asked to close the piano lid and sit there till the end.

Which "great" classical player was that, then?

EDIT Nice clip, btw!

 

[Fergie Fulton]

Which "great" classical player was that, then?

EDIT Nice clip, btw!

Sorry at cross purposes no "great classical player" but trained piano player all of them. As i toured with him and saw first hand the demands ( coming from a orchestral training background) placed on them, i would assume that anyone would have a problem, much in the same way as Chuck would have the problem if the situation was reversed

 

[BassyBill]

Sorry at cross purposes no "great classical player" but trained piano player all of them. As i toured with him and saw first hand the demands ( coming from a orchestral training background) placed on them, i would assume that anyone would have a problem, much in the same way as Chuck would have the problem if the situation was reversed

I gig on occasions with a really well classically trained pianist/pipe organist who just wails on that sort of old school rock and roll stuff all night when the mood takes him! He plays a fantastic funky clav too. Absoutely top guy, musically speaking - I will say, though, that he is definitely the exception rather than the rule in that respect (versatility wise).