maxrossell

[quote name='lowdown' post='477521' date='May 2 2009, 08:41 AM']Perhaps he has not been playing so long as you..maybe only a couple of years. His ears might be developing as we speak. Its no big deal to busk them tunes, and if you have been doing them since you where 13.... there is no excuse for not knowing them. Infact every one of them is piss easy, with a trained ear [ reader or not ] Garry[/quote] Exactly. Only two years in, and he's taking the piss out of my qualifications and openly doubting my musical abilities despite the fact that I've got over a decade of musicianship on him, all because he can almost sight-read a handful of pub-rock standards. He's making the assumption, as are many of the other, more experienced people in this discussion, that non-readers are just not capable of some of the things that readers are.

[quote name='stevie' post='476976' date='May 1 2009, 01:18 PM']I wonder how many of you non-readers realize how much music is available for free on the web. There are literally thousands of midi and Guitar Pro arrangements all over the place with a full bass line. For example, following the recent thread here on Blues tunes, I downloaded the following midi files earlier today for a practice session tonight – me and my trusty laptop orchestra. Crossroads Born under a Bad Sign Thrill is Gone Into the Night Cocaine I Shot the Sheriff Lay Down Sally Tears in Heaven Wonderful Tonight Need Your Love So Bad Pride and Joy Texas Flood And while I was at it, I picked up a few others that I fancy playing. Jessica Walking in Memphis Don’t Let Me Be Lonely Tonight Birdland And some some others including a few jazz standards and Air on a G String for string quartet. I’ve only played two or three of these before but I will probably get most of them 90 percent down this evening. [b]I certainly couldn't do it without the dots.[/b] It takes longer to actually memorize them, of course. I’ve only been playing for two years but I decided right from the start that I was going to learn to read. It’s made all the difference. I suspect that reading from the very outset is the way to do it, rather than learning to read once you can already play. As this thread makes only too clear, it is easy to find a perfectly reasonable excuse why you need not bother.[/quote] Bingo. I could figure out the parts to all of these tracks 100% in one evening by ear. Because when you do it the way I've been doing it since I was about thirteen, you don't need to either find some sheet music or feel crippled without it. So what's your excuse for not having bothered to train your ear to the same standard I have?

[quote name='stevie' post='477054' date='May 1 2009, 02:31 PM']I'm trying to imagine how you got a 25-piece orchestra to play together without any written music, although the fact that you were able to do this at all is a tribute to your abilities. But my question is - wouldn't it have been easier to have arranged the music in standard notation and printed out parts for everyone to read?[/quote] Actually no, because not all of the performers could read music either. For everyone a few pieces of paper with instructions written in plain English, including the structures of the pieces, the chord changes, the beats and bars and the names of the notes they'd'd be playing were sufficient to guide them through rehearsals, everyone understood perfectly what was going on, and at no point did anyone - readers and non-readers alike - express that they'd rather have had classical notation to follow.

[quote name='OldGit' post='476934' date='May 1 2009, 12:37 PM']How about giving bands some guidance when they book - back to the leaflet idea again, or a web page - say a list of "things you can do to mak ethe session go better, to end up with a better end result and to save time and money" That shoudl encourage them to read it Sad an FAQ with "What can I do to help the producer" as one of the questions .. Then they can think about bvs, effect chains, arrangements, etc before they turn up and at least you could say "did you RTFL?" (read the f'n leaflet)[/quote] I try wherever possible to go see the bands I'm working with playing live or in rehearsal a couple of times, and have at least one round-table discussion about what they want to achieve before we get there. Usually have a set of prepared questions for them to answer or think about, and I can answer ny of their questions too. Makes things run smoother on the day.

[quote name='stevie' post='476947' date='May 1 2009, 12:46 PM']There are plenty of fine musicians who can't read but I suspect that a first-class degree in busking isn't worth the paper it's written on. What college is it from? And what do you mean by 'scored' - written out the chord charts? Nothing wrong with that, but if you wanted to arrange music for a full orchestra you'd be a bit stuck not being able to read. Unless you were Paul McCartney, of course.[/quote] Ah aha ha. Very funny. University of Central Lancashire. Joint Honours, Bachelor of Arts in Music & The Creative Arts and Performance Technology. And you can save whatever Mickey Mouse comments I'm sure you have in store, because I'd rather you didn't unwittingly insult the former tutors and now close friends of mine who wrote the course. And scored as in written the music for. Variously, horns, strings, percussion, keys and vocals. On a couple of occasions for an orchestra, although if by "full" you mean 100+, not really. more like 25 at most. However we made it just fine without a single piece of written classical notation.

[quote name='The Funk' post='476895' date='May 1 2009, 12:13 PM']I've lost track of how many times I've heard that advice. It's common sense and I thought it was common advice.[/quote] Heh - I just got an email from their keyboard player, who says that she can't really think of anything that she would like to sound like, but she wants her parts to sound full, crisp and clear. I'm kind of wondering what the alternative would be?

[quote name='51m0n' post='476878' date='May 1 2009, 11:59 AM']I wish vocalists and bands would consider bvs as important as lead - they really are....[/quote] If I had a penny for every vocalist who thought they'd finished when they'd laid down the lead vocal track... I'm sometimes unduly harsh on people though. It's unfair of me to assume that a guitarist should instinctively know that sometimes we'll need to double up his parts for thickness or stereo spread, for instance, or that every drummer understands that when you're guide-tracking without a click they need to keep time even when they're not playing. My personal ruse to get around most of this is that I work as a team with another guy, I come as "producer" and he's the "engineer" (although we're really both and neither), so rather than thinking I'm interfering with their stuff, bands usually enjoy the fact that they've got a "producer" working on their record and give me more freedom to boss them around - Sometimes the only way to deal with the egos in a band is to find a way to convince them that you know far better than them. Doesn't always work, but when it does everything is so much easier.

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='476861' date='May 1 2009, 11:47 AM']Clever? Interesting. provocative, engaging, innovative, stimulating, moving, satisfying, shocking, emotional, profound, exceptional, important, worthy, intriguing, absorbing, appealing or maybe just plain entertaining. 'Clever' just won't cut it, dots or no dots. PS changing keys on a bass or guitar is a lot easier than doing it on keyboards (she could, of course, have used her 'transpose' key). Either way, preperation is the key as much as 'having a good ear' and this is more the case the more sophisticated the music becomes. Whilst I applaud (and value) people that have 'good ears' (I have a good ear. Just the one, the other is tiny and ineffectual), these are only going to work if you remain in your comfort zone. If someone starts throwing in unusual harmonies or chord movements, unexpected rhythms or idiomatic details you are not familiar with, the ear is quickly tested to breaking point. I have done whole gigs 'by ear', starting songs where the only information I have is the first chord (so has pete.young when he depped for me!!). I can get away with it (have done loads of times) but the results are shallow and superficial, uninspired, even crass. Just because the punters or bookers don't complain doesn't make it right. If you play for applause, that's all you'll ever get. Reading is a valuable resource. If you can't do it, its no worse than not being able to read the English language. You'll get by and function perfectly well in your comfort zone. But try driving through a city you don't know if you are unable to read road signs [/quote] I have to disagree. If the piece is worth listening to, as in has a recurring motif, explores a good theme and so on (i.e. isn't noodly directionless lounge jazz or woeful masturbatory prog bollocks) then any decent musician with good ears and enough experience will pick up on the key and feel within a couple of bars and be able to provide workable and (depending on his level) creative contributions to it, following the song by watching and listening to the other instrumentists. Many of us ignoramuses have developed that to the extent that it's well within our comfort zones, fast adaptability being one of the skills that any performing musician who regularly works with others absolutely needs. Of course no matter what I do in those circumstances, there will always be someone who will think it's shallow, superficial, uninspired and crass, but then I don't play for those people.

Never having used one, this is a subject I know very little about. So say I'm playing through a pretty clean amp but I want to break up the sound into a bit of a grindy growl, but without losing any of the definition or the bass end (I want it to feel like I've just turned up the gain, basically, not kicked on a noise box) - what would be the best candidates for this kind of effect?

[quote name='cheddatom' post='476837' date='May 1 2009, 11:22 AM']I'm not worried about it breaking, i'm just wondering about the sound of it. To my ears, it's getting miles more out of the peavey than when it's on it's own. Is there another extension cab in the same price range that would suit the peavey even more? Or "get more out of it"? Basically just make the amp louder.[/quote] If I were you I'd be worried about it breaking. Behringer have a habit of being overly generous with their wattage handling claims, so chances are that, depending on how powerful your Peavey combo is, you're slowly destroying the weedy speakers in the cab. For a bit more you could get yourself an Ashdown deep 210 cab with inbuilt tweeter. Way better, and will handle what it claims to.

Sucks dude. Sorry to hear about all this.

Ah, c'mon man. There's thousands upon thousands of musicians out there who can't read a note and yet consistently churn out unlistenable bulls**t. Similarly, I reckon if I went through your record collecton I'd discover that more than half your favourite musos are more or less competent at reading classical notation.

[quote name='51m0n' post='476718' date='May 1 2009, 09:38 AM']+1 Getting a band to bring in stuff they want to sound 'like' as a starting point is so useful, yet you're the only person other than Bob Birthright who I've ever heard suggest or do this. It save hours of arguments I find. Top tip for all of you lot next time you are going to track or mix a demo.....[/quote] Really? That's [i]insane.[/i] I would have thought it would be common sense. Like I'm doing four tracks in a day today (hardly a rare occurrence for any studio bod) and accordingly I don't want to spend hours and hours beard-stroking over the sound of a kick or a snare or what have you. Just tell me you wanna sound like Dave Grohl or Buddy Rich and let's get on with it.

[quote name='bilbo230763' post='476702' date='May 1 2009, 09:22 AM']There is a big point being missed here. I am a great advocate of reading but, with the exception of (increasingly rare) big band gigs and shows, rarely read whole charts on gigs. What I do a lot of, however, is reading chord charts that contain simple arrangements that require me to be able to read rhythms at least. Whilst these cannot replace the value of a rehearsal, they can enhance the value of those rehearslas by saving a lot of time and making sure that the end product is that much better than it may otherwise have been. My point is that the benefits of reading are not just about working gigs. It is also about getting the most out of learning, about making the most of rehearsal time (particularly important for those of us who are semi-pro and have to fit playing around work) and about communicating ideas quickly. It makes it possible for those of us who compose to get stuff played quickly and relatively easily without having to find musicians who are willing to dedicate weeks or months to the learning of material by rote. It has the potential to allow us to create more complex and sophisticated musics without having to rely on the staple sets that everyone continues to insist on regurgitating. I also find it makes busy musicians more able to retain details of one piece of music when there are gaps between rehearsals and performances, something that, in my experience, non-readers can struggle with particularly when working on new material.. Of course you can gig every night of the year by learning a 12-bar shuffle in E but that's not enough for me. I need something more aesthetically satisfying and I find that reading improves the potential for that. I also find readers are rarely any less capable of 'grooving' than non-readers. It is their familiarity with the idioms being played that matters, not the presence or otherwise of the dots.[/quote] I don't think anyone (in their right mind) would somehow suggest that knowing how to read music is somehow a [i]hindrance[/i] - I really don't see how learning more about music theory could make you a less good player. I also totally agree with you that it's an extremely practical tool for those who as yourself are pro or semi-pro and need to get through a lot of material without the luxury of much preparation, particularly for ensemble work where everyone has to be tight after only one or to rehearsals. This is the kind of thing where, were I to be involved in it, would lead me to learn how to read and write classical notation.

This is just a bit of a stretch, if you ask me. [url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Fender-Stratocaster-Jazz-neck-plate-scews-1962_W0QQitemZ250404432856QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV?hash=item250404432856&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1688%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A3%7C294%3A50"]Screws - £8.75 each + shipping.[/url]

[url="http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/Fender-Jazz-Fretless-Bass_W0QQitemZ260400319047QQcmdZViewItemQQptZUK_Musical_Instruments_Guitars_CV?hash=item260400319047&_trksid=p3286.c0.m14&_trkparms=72%3A1688%7C66%3A2%7C65%3A12%7C39%3A1%7C240%3A1318%7C301%3A0%7C293%3A1%7C294%3A50"]Fender Fretless Jazz[/url] Not my listing. Looks good though.

[quote name='dlloyd' post='476578' date='May 1 2009, 12:23 AM']You don't need to read proficiently to access theory, even at an advanced level. You just need enough knowledge to decipher it.[/quote] This is also true. I've been looking at modes recently, and all the prior knowledge I needed was the names of the notes and so on.

[quote name='XB26354' post='476572' date='May 1 2009, 12:16 AM']Yeah go on Max, tell us all how it's done! I've got my hand on my (volume) knob as I speak...[/quote] Or you could grow up.

[quote name='XB26354' post='476563' date='May 1 2009, 12:04 AM']How could I be so blind?[/quote] Most likely a combination of fear of the unknown and ignorance. I've enjoyed our little debate.

[quote name='XB26354' post='476555' date='Apr 30 2009, 11:53 PM']No it isn't. You've never learned to read. Whether you made a choice about it or not, how on earth do you think you can make a coherent argument against something you chose not to do? As for being pathetic, well I'm sure resorting to insults is very noble [/quote] Well, forgive me for (re)stating the obvious, but "I'm as a much of a musician as I want to be and yet I can't read music" seems to me like a perfectly coherent argument in favour of making your own decisions instead of following the instructions of people who tell you that you're either afraid or ignorant if you don't learn this or that no matter how irrelevant it is to your purposes. And if you don't want to be called pathetic, as above, don't tell me I'm an ignorant pussy for not joining your club.

[quote name='OldGit' post='476537' date='Apr 30 2009, 11:44 PM']Maxrossell, you should write a leaflet ...[/quote] Ah, man, I have no idea how helpful that would be. Everyone has different gear, everyone wants a different sound. I'm mixing this record tomorrow and the assignment I've given the band is to bring in records that give examples of how they'd like their instruments to sound, just so I have some idea of what they're aiming for. I reckon it would take far better men than me a very very long time to put together a comprehensive guide.

[quote name='XB26354' post='476534' date='Apr 30 2009, 11:42 PM']Until then to me it's just fear of the unknown and ignorance.[/quote] I think that that's a massively arrogant statement. People who choose to not gain expertise in a particular specialist field of their disciplines are not just afraid or ignorant. It's pathetic to look down on people just because you've chosen to learn something they don't consider all that important.

[quote name='XB26354' post='476516' date='Apr 30 2009, 11:34 PM']So what you're saying is you had a bad teacher who told you that you'll never be able to read, and that put you off. If that teacher had been the opposite and you'd learned, who knows? You're basing your opinion on something that happened a long time in the past (and would have been out of your control) and your whole viewpoint to this day is coloured by it. I don't agree with you, but as you said, it is your opinion![/quote] Nah, the thing with the teacher didn't phase me. I'm not one of those people who won't do something just because they had a bad experience one time. I literally just never found a use for it. I never needed to do it. It was never required of me, and I could become a musician and for my uses learn all I needed to know and play all I wanted to play without it, so I just never bothered. My viewpoint is basically that I'm enough of a musician for my standards (and for a lot of other people's) without knowing how to read music that I don't see it as a necessary skill unless you want to do something with music that very specifically requires you to. But beyond a handful of uses as a communicative tool, whether or not someone can read or write classical notation has no real bearing on what kind of a musician they are or how good they are at it. And there are enough people out there who know as little as me about classical notation and yet have accomplished incredible musical things that I feel pretty confident about it.

I always go by what people play on the record I like most. Passive for me, really. Never tried an active bass that didn't do things to the sound I didn't like.