6 ms·
Absolutely. I'm a guitarist, and have been for over 30 years. I'm good, but not REALLY good, and I hit a wall in terms of technical ability / speed a long time
by djaychela 10y ago
Absolutely. I'm a guitarist, and have been for over 30 years. I'm good, but not REALLY good, and I hit a wall in terms of technical ability / speed a long time ago - after about 5 years of playing. Nothing I did improved my speed and I didn't have the accuracy of a Malmsteen or MacAlpine, despite practicing religiously for hours at a time. I thought I had a speed limit and that was that - everyone I consulted felt the same.
It's only been in the last few months and via complete luck on YouTube that I appear to have discovered the missing piece of the jigsaw (two way pick slanting) - had I known this when I was 18 I would have been of a much higher level. Being 45, having old bad habits to overcome and the demands of a family with 4 kids and a chronic bad back means I don't have the time to devote to the improvements I'd love to make, but from my experience, I know that "practice" is not enough, it needs to be the right practice, and sometimes that means a subtle nuance which is not apparent to some, maybe for years. I've helped some of the kids I teach in a similar way, with them then "getting" an idea they've not understood for a long time, so there needs to be more analysis than simply "practice", in my opinion.
- AstralStorm 10y agoWas it just luck, or are you actually not creative enough to figure out new and useful things in your own? (say, extended guitar playing techniques) An open question so far.
- gknoy 10y agoIn the history of skills (guitar playing, mastery of swordplay, music composition, etc), it's not inconceivable that someone could go a long time and not happen to notice the same things that masters of the discipline have been taught. Most human endeavors and learning comes not by independent discovery of everything, but by building on what the people before us have learned. It's a rare genius who can skip that. Swordmasters in the renaissance studied each others' books and teachings, much as physics students might study the publications of others in their discipline. The insights they each made might not have all been in technique itself, but sometimes in new ways of teaching it, or describing the nuances of what their masters ("no, do it THIS way ...") had told them in a different way which made it easier to teach. For many physical endeavors, it seems like there are often a few Good ways to do something Right -- shoot a bow, hold a calligraphy pen, etc. You MIGHT stumble upon the best way to do it on your own, but it seems a little ridiculous to scoff that someone is "not creative enough" to figure out what nuance of technique they have been missing.
- hal9000xp 10y ago> Most human endeavors and learning comes not by independent discovery of everything, but by building on what the people before us have learned. That's correct! Like Isaac Newton said - if I have seen further, it is by standing on ye shoulders of giants. Link: http://digitallibrary.hsp.org/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/object_id/9285 http://digitallibrary.hsp.org/index.php/Detail/Object/Show/o...
- djaychela 10y agoNo, I've figured out LOADS of stuff on my own and then found others had done so, or had different names for it. I started doing hybrid picking when no-one I knew was doing it, and other techniques. Remember as well, this was in the 80s - there just wasn't the access to information that is available today; the kids I teach now say "how are you so good at working things out?", but it was the only way to play most of the music I liked when I was a kid; good transcriptions were like hen's teeth, and I remember having to negotiate with the guy who owned the paper shop (where I had a paper round - remember I was 14-15 at the time!) to speak to his distributor to order american guitar magazines so I could get the good stuff. I'd go to London once every couple of months and buy a VHS instructional tape. It wasn't like today when you can find an in-depth lesson from a world master within 5 minutes. But the point is that it was one specific (and subtle) technique that I missed, and everyone else missed, or didn't instruct people to do - that completely stalled my playing. And I know I'm not the only one!
- analog31 10y agoI play double bass, not guitar, but I suspect there are parallels. My answer is: No, I'm not creative enough, or maybe too creative. In my view, most technical experiments are blind alleys. And a problem with musical instruments, perhaps with double bass as an extreme case, is that some experiments can lead to permanent injury. I have met two fine young bassists who were both crippled by trying unorthodox techniques, to the point where it interfered with their careers: For instance they had to curtail preparation for critical auditions. Meanwhile, I have consciously stuck with the stodgy classical technique that I learned as a kid, and at age 52, can still play a four hour gig on the one instrument in the band that never gets a break.
- WalterBright 10y agoThis is why having a good coach can make all the difference. It does no good practicing the wrong techniques.
- jacobolus 10y agoThere is an enormous benefit to having a really good teacher or coach to help the students who got something subtle a bit wrong way back up the chain. You need someone who doesn’t only deeply understand how to do the task perfectly, but also has a deep understanding of all the different ways the task can be done improperly, and what the underlying misunderstandings or problems are which cause those mistakes, who knows the best way to nudge the learner back on track, and who has endless empathy and good will and enough time to make sure the correction happens. I recommend Shinichi Suzuki’s lovely little 1969 book about “talent education”, Nurtured by Love, https://amzn.com/0874875846 https://amzn.com/0874875846
- kavalg 10y agoIndeed. I've been playing the kaval (an end blown flute) for more than 10 years and there have been many times when I'd hit the wall. I also play a bit of guitar, but kaval has been much harder to master. I think that this is because, when compared to guitar, kaval has a lot more independent variables, such as breathing, embouchure(lip shape), throat, how hard you push the instrument to your lips, how your hands take turns pushing the instrument to your lips and also some special kinds of vibrato and articulation. With so many independent variables to control it is really inevitable that you fall victim into this "unspoken context". I realized this a couple of years ago when I had the chance to spend time with some of the greatest masters of the instrument. Since I already had some practice and skills behind me, I asked a lot of questions and tried to get as deep as possible in every single nuance of the techniques. I was really surprised to find out that those great masters can't actually explain a lot of things that they do. As you guys said, maybe they just got it right early enough (e.g. by chance). In the beginning I did not believe it, but when I encountered this with several great performers I changed my approach radically. First, I stopped playing for a few months in order to get rid of some bad baggage that I may have accumulated and to start fresh. Then I started watching videos of these masters with the audio turned off and I would then practice in front of a mirror. At some point I discovered that some of the movements that I do are the same as the ones I've seen on the video and focused on them (recording your sessions also helps). This has helped me progress much better. So how do you get as much of this "unspoken context"? Well it depends on your own strengths and abilities. I'd say that it is crucial to seek close contact with great performers that are way ahead of you. E.g. go to live performances, seminars or if that's not possible, just watch videos of these. I must admit that one of these masters, who is also a teacher has given me some really great advice on things I have to improve. This is because he not only got those unspoken things right, but also fully realized them mentally, so he can turn them into advice. But those teachers are really rare to find.
- agumonkey 10y agoI loved drumming, after 6 years of banging into walls, this was my most precious lesson: be smart in what you do. Practice slow and simple, but deeply and patiently. Everytime I was hitting a wall, it's because I was blinded by my own false assumptions. It was mostly a journey into the self as much as in music (after that I called her the fair bitch).
- cocoflunchy 10y agoIs this the pick slanting technique you're talking about? http://troygrady.com/2015/01/08/the-difference-between-pickslanting-and-edge-picking/ http://troygrady.com/2015/01/08/the-difference-between-picks... Do you remember which video it was that made you "get it"? I'd like to watch it too!
- djaychela 10y agoYeah, it's all Troy Grady; If you've watched "Cracking The Code" - the entire series, then basically, that was me, aside from me not getting the idea. I'm about the same age as Troy, FTR. The problems I had (particularly playing things such as from Tony MacAlpine's first album) all stem from not being able to get out from "beneath" the strings, and Troy's clear marshalling of all those ideas into a coherent method have opened the door to at least having another go. When I get time to practice - and that shouldn't be underestimated in terms of time - I can make progress, having already been able to play things I couldn't manage in the last 30 despite my lack of time and physical ability to play for long periods now.
- e40 10y agoI'm curious what the new technique did to your speed. Can you quantify?
- kazinator 10y agoMalmsteen plays mostly a single pattern of triplets that he moves around the fretboard. It's a very well-rehearsed parlour trick, that he can use for good effect in real tunes (in combination with his good tone and confident presentation), but that's all it is in the end. It doesn't compare to the labyrinthine gymnastics demanded by actual classical pieces, many of which have passages with unique fingering challenges: no one-size-fits-all fits all shred pattern. Malmsteen himself is better when he slows down; he really should keep the triplet cheese grating to a minimum. Its effectiveness is inversely proportional to the size. A good example is the "I'm a Viking" guitar solo; there is heap of shred notes at the beginning as an intro, but then it goes slow, with just some connecting speedy bits here and there.
- zwieback 10y agoI've been playing mandolin for a few years and discovered the importance of pick angles while improving my tremolo. I realized that you cannot just keep the pick in the same orientation all the time so, nerd that I am, I started thinking about each stroke as a vector in six dimensional space (position and orientation in 3D). The trick for me is to simplify that to the point where I get the results I need. Most of the material I saw online just had some basic recipes to improve right hand technique, there are very few systematic and rigorous explanations. I think that's where a good teacher can make a massive difference. On the other hand I also have first-hand experience with nature vs. nurture - I play music with my wife and kids and I'm clearly the least talented although everyone brings something unique to the family band. As always, the truth is a combination x * talent + y * nurture so I'm glad to see the discussion turning that direction.