Are we emotionally mature enough to learn?

[Vibrating G String]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1231989' date='May 15 2011, 06:19 AM']I've seen this too.I've spoken to guys who've graduated from certain music schools and can't even read a note.[/quote]
That sounds like the one I went to

[foal30]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1232651' date='May 16 2011, 12:37 PM']And if Fender made sub standard guitars soon people would stop buying them I think it would take decades to take down a reputation like Harvard's. Especially for the general public.[/quote]

assuming the general public has any say in the matter, or an opinion of value.

[Vibrating G String]

[quote name='foal30' post='1232657' date='May 15 2011, 05:58 PM']assuming the general public has any say in the matter, or an opinion of value.[/quote]
I think the general public has a lot to do with public perceptions

[foal30]

not that it matters
most of the general public hate both political flavors offered to them as 'Democracy'
little changes

IME I agree with Mr Marsalis. And yes it's far wider than just music students
Parents of students are often the worst
the $ cost of the lesson is established before any discussion on course content, application, resources etc.

often VGS I think modern life is quite back to front.

[lovetheblues]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1232651' date='May 15 2011, 08:37 PM']And if Fender made sub standard guitars soon people would stop buying them I think it would take decades to take down a reputation like Harvard's. Especially for the general public.[/quote]


If you can even get IN to Harvard - you already have proven you have a lot going for you. Unless of course, you get in only through some connections... which is rarely the case at Harvard.

[TimR]

[quote name='Vibrating G String' post='1232651' date='May 16 2011, 01:37 AM']I think it would take decades to take down a reputation like Harvard's.[/quote]

I agree whch is why later I posted an ammendment.

Maybe this is an Arts and Humanities thing. In Maths, Engineering and most Sciences you have only right and wrong answers.

Maybe that is why students are studing less of those types of subjects?

[Ancient Mariner]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1232095' date='May 15 2011, 03:28 PM']But,if you have chosen to study music and gained a degree from it,I think it's fair to say that there are some things you should be expected to know and/or do.If you can't,then I think there is something wrong.[/quote]

It's not just music. I've interviewed graduates for biochemistry technician jobs over the years, and it's astonishing the number that don't know about the basic stuff.

But as for teaching technique, often people need encouragement to press on when they find things difficult, and it's important that teachers find ways to compliment their students without entering unreality. Likewise it's not helpful to tell someone who has some competency (whether they gig or can run assays) that they know nothing and are incompetent. Never tell someone they suck, but do tell them if they're playing out of time or not grooving with the band.

[fatboyslimfast]

I've been out of the learning field for a couple of decades (apart from tedious computer stuff) so got a bit of a shock when (mentioning to my bass tutor that I'm prone to doing this and that wrong) her face lit up and asked if I was ok with her nitpicking - to which I replied in the positive and that surely that was what she was there for?

Almost as if, as has been mentioned previously, telling students that they are doing something wrong is seen as an insult rather than something constructive. Bizarre...

[BottomE]

Lots of variables in this and assumptions. Is Branford Marsalis a decent teacher? Who knows. Has he had a batch of sh** students? Dunno. Because of his elevated status and undoubted ability has he become a snobby twat too distant from the abilities and foibles of mere mortals? Maybe he was having a bad day.

We live in a world where the destination has become more important than the journey. That much is true.

[risingson]

[quote name='BottomE' post='1233102' date='May 16 2011, 02:42 PM']Lots of variables in this and assumptions. Is Branford Marsalis a decent teacher? Who knows. Has he had a batch of sh** students? Dunno. Because of his elevated status and undoubted ability has he become a snobby twat too distant from the abilities and foibles of mere mortals? Maybe he was having a bad day.

We live in a world where the destination has become more important than the journey. That much is true.[/quote]

+1, like I mentioned just because you're a good player doesn't make you a good teacher, in fact sometimes the opposite.

[algmusic]

[quote name='risingson' post='1233152' date='May 16 2011, 03:27 PM']+1, like I mentioned just because you're a good player doesn't make you a good teacher, in fact sometimes the opposite.[/quote]

+2

I agreed.. I've always said you have

teachers
players
Player than teach

There are some people who are great players who can teach and some who can't.

It's funny, I am very critical of my teaching and I am always looking at better ways to do what I do. However, there are alot of sh8t students out there, not even by their ability but their willingness to learn and try and get it wrong and try again.. we really have a microwave society.

I had a kid fail their grade and the parent told me they shouldn't have been put up for the exam to failed by two marks.. I told her, he had every chance to pass and even with a distinction, but he failed to practice and I warned both of them repeatedly. I also said I think failing sometimes be a good thing, and there lessons to be learnt from it... She pulled her son from the lessons. I heard he hates lessons with his new teacher, I praise my students when they work hard and tell the truth when they are not trying. On the flip side I have some awful students in terms or natural ability turn into top players at their school, but those kids had the right attitude..

[Bilbo]

I am interested in some of the responses to this as I am alway interested to hear what people are actually playing and in what ways they seek to improve themselves as players. I have always found that there are a lot of players who fill themselves up with clever party tricks that others, players and non-players alike, heap praise upon them for. Like that phase in the 90s where everyone was into Flea and learned all the BSSM tunes in an effort to sound like him. The motivation for doing that was not primarily musical, it was social. 'I want the kudos that Flea has'. 'If I can play Flea parts and he is winnign all of the polls, I must be as good as him and am equally deserving of praise'. We all like a bit of affirmation, me more than most, but I think, for many, it can get in the way of the real learning. I think BM is basically saying, in a way that is completely at odds with his brother's pseudo-intellectual presentation, is that he finds a lot of kids more interested in seeing themselves as the next 'young lion' or prodigy than they are in being the best player that concerted study and hard graft can make them. At each stage in our learning, we are only able to see a portion of what we are and what we have the potential to become. If we are sufficiently deluded, we can easily fall into the trap of believing we are better than we think we are and it takes a teacher to break that delusion, carefully but firmly. BM was being interviewed not giving a lesson or masterclass. A bit of tough love, I accept, but I think he has a point.

[risingson]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1233204' date='May 16 2011, 04:03 PM']I am interested in some of the responses to this as I am alway interested to hear what people are actually playing and in what ways they seek to improve themselves as players. I have always found that there are a lot of players who fill themselves up with clever party tricks that others, players and non-players alike, heap praise upon them for. Like that phase in the 90s where everyone was into Flea and learned all the BSSM tunes in an effort to sound like him. The motivation for doing that was not primarily musical, it was social. 'I want the kudos that Flea has'. 'If I can play Flea parts and he is winnign all of the polls, I must be as good as him and am equally deserving of praise'. We all like a bit of affirmation, me more than most, but I think, for many, it can get in the way of the real learning. I think BM is basically saying, in a way that is completely at odds with his brother's pseudo-intellectual presentation, is that he finds a lot of kids more interested in seeing themselves as the next 'young lion' or prodigy than they are in being the best player that concerted study and hard graft can make them. At each stage in our learning, we are only able to see a portion of what we are and what we have the potential to become. If we are sufficiently deluded, we can easily fall into the trap of believing we are better than we think we are and it takes a teacher to break that delusion, carefully but firmly. BM was being interviewed not giving a lesson or masterclass. A bit of tough love, I accept, but I think he has a point.[/quote]

Branford Marsalis exists in a genre of music that has less and less happening for it in the broadest of senses. Fewer and fewer players are groundbreaking, because there's almost no ground left to break. Maybe he's venting his frustrations over the loss of a time when jazz was the musical renaissance and these sorts of players were coming out of the woodwork. There are plenty of good jazz sax players out there but their talents are derived from people who spearheaded a type of music not heard before, i.e. Parker, Coltrane etc so they are not truly 'remarkable' or 'unique' players, they're simply taking their cues from those who innovated.

[algmusic]

drums was my first instrument, where I learnt to play by ear and then started to play with professionals, I then got my theory and technique with private lessons and worked in the industry, I always learnt bass on the side, just picking things up, but I had the approach of playing what the song required, rather than the 'fashion of the day'. I guess that's why I got gigs quickly. I've now gone back to learning the techniques and theories and it keeps building my playing.. But I think my approach to bass was founded on how I learnt the drums and how you need good ears and groove, but coupled with theory and technique..

Teach my students with balance of both and learn in the same way

Have I opened a can of worms again

[Bilbo]

There is some truth in what you say, risingson, although I think the innovations that are happening now are less about individual players and more about form and structure and cross genre boudary breaking. I can't think of a 'young' player who I would say is breaking new ground to the extent that Coltrane et al did but the field is much wider now and the grapevine has all but withered so it is unlikley that we will see those kinds of all-encompassing innovations again.

[BottomE]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1233204' date='May 16 2011, 04:03 PM']I think BM is basically saying, in a way that is completely at odds with his brother's pseudo-intellectual presentation, is that he finds a lot of kids more interested in seeing themselves as the next 'young lion' or prodigy than they are in being the best player that concerted study and hard graft can make them.[/quote]
Nothing new there really. Hasn't it always been like that? We live in a world (huge generalisation) that values style over substance. Maybe his students are a reflection of this?

[Bilbo]

Maybe the fact that music education in the US is 'bought' by people who grow up having things bought for them or who are used to buying their way out of everything. But you can't buy the benefits of years of musical practice. You just have to do it.

[xilddx]

What music teachers try do is give students the tools to express themselves musically and artistically and encourage the students to attempt to master those tools. In varying degrees and at various levels, some can master the tools but not express themselves, some can't master the tools but are able to express themselves, some can do both, some can't do either. Some of all of those people love what they create, some don't love what they create. I remember Steve Vai saying his Berkeley room mate was enormously talented but hated everything he did, and that attitude is the difference between success and failure as a creative musician, summat like that.

f*** knows what Branford is saying. To me, he sounds pissed off and focusing on the negative, which is probably insulting to his really good students. If you study with Branford, you are likely to be quite dedicated. Probably just having a very bad day at the time that interview was conducted and I would take it with a pinch of NaCl.

Edited May 16, 2011 by silddx

[algmusic]

[quote name='silddx' post='1233257' date='May 16 2011, 04:39 PM']What music teachers try do is give students the tools to express themselves musically and artistically and encourage the students to attempt to master those tools. In varying degrees and at various levels, some can master the tools but not express themselves, some can't master the tools but are able to express themselves, some can do both, some can't do either. Some of all of those people love what they create, some don't love what they create. I remember Steve Vai saying his Berkeley room mate was enormously talented but hated everything he did, and that attitude is the difference between success and failure as a creative musician, summat like that.

f*** knows what Branford is saying. To me, he sounds pissed off and focusing on the negative, which is probably insulting to his really good students. If you study with Branford, you are likely to be quite dedicated. Probably just having a very bad day at the time that interview was conducted and I would take it with a pinch of NaCl.[/quote]

I'm with you until the your last statement.. I don't think all of his students will be really good students. I've seen it time and time again where money gets certain musicians in certain areas where other gifted players can't.. let's be blunt he's fees won't be cheap

[xilddx]

[quote name='algmusic' post='1233268' date='May 16 2011, 04:53 PM']I'm with you until the your last statement.. I don't think all of his students will be really good students. I've seen it time and time again where money gets certain musicians in certain areas where other gifted players can't.. let's be blunt he's fees won't be cheap[/quote]
Mmm, you've got me wondering now if he will take on anyone who can pay him and therefore most of his students are sh*t

There may be a video interview out there from one of his students saying the trouble with music teachers is they have no integrity

[Doddy]

[quote name='silddx' post='1233257' date='May 16 2011, 04:39 PM']What music teachers try do is give students the tools to express themselves musically and artistically and encourage the students to attempt to master those.[/quote]
And that is one of the problems,that I've seen. A lot of people don't want the tools to express themselves,they want the fancy music shop lick that will impress their friends and bandmates. It's easy and it's instant.Learning the tools and the language takes time and study,but you can have a Flea(or whoever) lick nailed in a couple if hours.



[quote name='silddx' post='1233278' date='May 16 2011, 05:01 PM']Mmm, you've got me wondering now if he will take on anyone who can pay him and therefore most of his students are sh*t [/quote]
I'm sure,like any other teacher,he gets some guys who want to learn and lots who don't and just want to cop his licks that he played with Sting and not learn anything.

Something that hasn't been mentioned,is what happens once the lesson is over.The student might be able to get through the exercises by the time the lesson is over,but then it's up to them to keep working on it and improve-but that won't happen if they only practice for 30-60 minutes a week. You can be the best,most encouraging teacher in the world,but if the student won't practise outside of their lesson they won't improve.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1233306' date='May 16 2011, 05:25 PM']And that is one of the problems,that I've seen. A lot of people don't want the tools to express themselves,they want the fancy music shop lick that will impress their friends and bandmates. It's easy and it's instant.Learning the tools and the language takes time and study,but you can have a Flea(or whoever) lick nailed in a couple if hours.[/quote]
But that's just the way they are expressing themselves at that point. They will grow up or remain the same, that's the difference. I learned a few chords and techniques and had an absolute gas learning to play Hemispheres on guitar when I was 16. That process still informs my musicality now. A massive process of learning by ear some of the fundamentals of technique, dynamics, feel, key changes, time signature changes .. Trying to understand why the chord with Geddy's bass under it sounds different to the chord on its own, etc. ad nauseum.

I have tried to get into more theory over the past six months, I do know a bit already but it's quite rudimentary, and I learned to read a bit too. It's useful, but to be perfectly frank, I think I know what sort of musician I am and it's not one that wants to woodshed day and night anymore. I want to bust some big ass bass, dance and entertain, and compose songs and contribute to other people's songs. I don't really need a high level of theory and reading because I've spent thirty years listening, playing and writing, and for me it's pretty much all I need to play pop, rock and electronica. I'm not a classical or a Jazz head, I only play music to make my soul shine (and hopefully others') and don't need to earn a living teaching, or playing music I have no interest in. I learn by grazing, pick up what I need when I need it.

Everyone is different, because it's art hopefully, and good art is (or probably should be) independent of its source. Teachers should ideally recognise and teach to the student's needs, and not a curriculum. I realise it can't work like that because teachers need to make money and have success measured by how the student performs in a range of tests. But you can't test art. The problem is exacerbated by people who only really appreciate technique and have never learned to hear and therefore often buy into the 'art' of technical prowess. Sorry, a bit OT.

Just to get it back OT, I think emotional maturity to learn anything is dependent on perceived need and desire. That can be fostered but to what end? High pass rates? Remember that most people change as they develop and emotional maturity is not really measurable for any useful purpose. I'm constantly beating myself up about whether what I do is worthy, derivative, good, etc. When I was 16 playing Hemispheres, I was happy.

Edited May 16, 2011 by silddx

[Bilbo]

Your model is fine, silddx, but, if someone goes to BM for a lesson, I would think they would have a more conventional perspective?

[Doddy]

[quote name='silddx' post='1233390' date='May 16 2011, 06:32 PM']Everyone is different, because it's art hopefully, and good art is (or probably should be) independent of its source. Teachers should ideally recognise and teach to the student's needs, and not a curriculum. I realise it can't work like that because teachers need to make money and have success measured by how the student performs in a range of tests. But you can't test art. The problem is exacerbated by people who only really appreciate technique and have never learned to hear and therefore often buy into the 'art' of technical prowess. Sorry, a bit OT.[/quote]
No,you can't test art,but you can test on musical information. It's the separation between the academic side
of music and the 'artistic' side. You don't need lessons or anything to produce art-that's a personal thing.
But,if you go for lessons or to a college or whatever and you are not taught things like chords or reading
and other musical absolutes,then you are being done a disservice.

[xilddx]

[quote name='Bilbo' post='1233417' date='May 16 2011, 06:50 PM']Your model is fine, silddx, but, if someone goes to BM for a lesson, I would think they would have a more conventional perspective?[/quote]
I agree to a point. But to go to someone as exalted as BM maybe one would want more of a philosophical lesson and expand on the artistic expression development side of one's musical nature. Context is king. Inspiration and desire should decide the content of the toolbox at any given point. If you can execute the music you hear in your head, and what you hear in your head gives you satisfaction and enjoyment to yourself and others, then you are a good musician. The trick to expressing yourself is to educate your musical self and acquire taste, then learning how to play it becomes easier because you have a clear motive. Most people attending music college seem to be taught they must be able to play everything, that's where the laziness sets in.

Edited May 16, 2011 by silddx