Re: What is enough theory for amateur musicians?

reed ( (no email) )
Wed, 11 Dec 1996 06:00:34 +0000

At 08:13 AM 12/11/96 -0500, you wrote:
>GTROATES@aol.com wrote:
>>
>Some Material deleted for space
>
>> As to whether they are conscious of their use of guide tones while soloing,
>> all performing artists (dance,acting, music, etc.) seem to perform their
>> best when it happens at a sub-conscious level.
>
>SNIP
>
>> My point is that practicing is when people think of guide tones, target
>> notes, altered scales, outlines, fragmentation, augmentation,diminution,
and
>> other theoretical concepts. If they are practiced enough they become
muscle
>> memory just like major scales have to in the beginning. When soloing,
>> conscious thoughts of those concepts just tend to get in the way and stop
>> the natural flow of music. I think of guide tone practicing as something
>> which helps me in learning a tune with difficult harmonies so I can get
>> "inside" the chord changes, but I don't imagine they even enter my
thoughts
>> when I am on a gig.
>>
>Many on this list know a lot more than I do aboutthis subject, but it
>does seem to me that there is a valid distinction between drilling to
>learn basic technique and soloing. It is well known that Charlie Parker
>did spend a long period of his early career practising scales after some
>humiliating bandstand experience. He also drilled on the upper chord
>tones while working at an eating establishment in which Art Tatum
>played. Likewise there are things one does in learning a language as an
>adult (grammar drills, vocabulary memorization, etc.) that have to be
>left behind to gain fluency, but there is no avoiding them at the
>learning stage. On the other hand, some language programs focusing on
>usage have shown that it may not be as necessary or helpful to drill
>every point in the traditional way as was thought. Maybe some of the
>"formula" approaches to soloing are like traditional grammar and
>vocabulary drills-training wheels that you start with, but must move
>beyond.
>
>
Lawson,

Different players are going to approach this differently.

For me, I think the "drilling" should be"

1) Transcribing, analyzing the transcriptions, transcribing, transcribing,
....

2) Writing ... writing solos, melodies, etc. I.e. working out
things that sound good.

3) Learning tunes (more melodies)

4) Trying to play melodies while improvising, at first very simple ones.

5) Studying classical music to understand more about thematic development.

6) Playing songs by ear.

I'm sure I'm leaving out things.

For myself, the formula methods never yielded any satisfactory results.
I used formulas like everybody else does because I didnt know any better
and couldnt think of anything better to do myself. Also, I assumed
(incorrecly) that the top players were using them or used them during
their development. In other words I assumed that the people writing
books about them or teaching them in classes had learned them from
these top players instead of just independently making them up.

For me, the way you play is a direct reflection of how you practice.

If you don't practice making melodies , you are not going to play them
later.

People I know that practice running changes or using other automatic
methods of pracice play that way too.

I interviewed and read about (or watched videos of) many top players in an
attempt to try and see common threads of what they did. This is how I
developed the method I use now .

Most players told me they transcribed alot. It became obvious that
many players worked things out to play long before getting
on the bandstand. Most players new alot of tunes without the need
for written music.

In the beginning I was still groping but as I just tried doing these
various things, over time I was able to observe how it changed my
playing and became convinced that it was a valid practice method.

reed

>--
>\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\////////////////////////////
>Lawson G. Stone-Asbury Theological Seminary-Wilmore, KY
>////////////////////////////\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
>Prediction is very difficult, especially of the future.
>--Niels Bohr
>
>
>