Writing a guitar method book

[markblues]

Does anyone have any opinions on what is routinely absent from guitar method books? What would you like to see that is never there? What are the weaknesses of method books and what do you enjoy about them. Your advice is appreciated

[JonPR]

Good question!

Essentially "what is routinely absent from guitar method books" is all the stuff in the other method books!

As a teacher, I've never seen any guitar method book that I would want to use with students - and I've looked at lots. It's not that they're bad, it's that they're all limited in some way, and have the author's own perspective on what's important. That's not a problem provided the book is clear about that, ideally in its title.
Of course, if I was to write a method book, no doubt I'd have my own biases too. I mean, I like to think I wouldn't, but I suspect anyone reading it would think I did. They'd probably say "yeah it's good on (a) and (b), but why nothing on (c) or (d)?"

Actually, there is one kind of method book that's pretty much always good, and that's the kind dedicated to classical guitar. That's because classical guitar has a well-recognised pedagogy, going all the way back to Segovia. If I taught classical guitar (and I don't, at least not at the moment), I would happily use something like Noad, at least for reference.

There is no such set of agreed conventions for steel-string guitar, acoustic or electric. That's partly because players of those instruments - even the virtuosos - are largely self-taught. Steel-string guitar (even the amplified kind) is a folk instrument, with a vernacular culture. Method books are only ever going to tinker around the edges, being little more than sets of tips or suggestions, looking in detail at various narrow aspects of technique or theory. There is way too much variety - as well as constant changes in fashion - for any one book to ever be comprehensive.

Maybe there are clear conventions for vintage styles such as ragtime and "Travis" style. Again, one would expect such books to be clear that they are dedicated to those specific techniques, and won't contain anything on "modes" or "lead soloing".

IOW, if you're thinking of writing your own method book (and it's something I've thought about doing for at least 20 years and got nowhere), first pick your audience, your readership. Who is it going to be for? Total beginners? That could work: just covering how to hold the guitar, the basic cowboy chords, basic strumming and picking techniques. How to read tab and (dare I say it) notation. To plan that, I would be looking at a whole collection of existing beginner books and picking out the approaches I liked - and also (of course) using my experience of teaching beginners: what works, and what do they mostly want to know, or find hardest to grasp? (Unfortunately, a lot of that is stuff that would be very hard to explain in a book. It needs to be demonstrated. That's where video wins out.)

Beyond beginner, you need to specialise. Acoustic or electric? Rock, blues, folk, country? Fingerstyle or pick? The more you specialise, the easier and quicker the book would be to write. Of course, you limit your readership (and potential sales). And a smaller book costs less.

[markblues]

Originally Posted by JonPR

Good question!

Essentially "what is routinely absent from guitar method books" is all the stuff in the other method books!

As a teacher, I've never seen any guitar method book that I would want to use with students - and I've looked at lots. It's not that they're bad, it's that they're all limited in some way, and have the author's own perspective on what's important. That's not a problem provided the book is clear about that, ideally in its title.
Of course, if I was to write a method book, no doubt I'd have my own biases too. I mean, I like to think I wouldn't, but I suspect anyone reading it would think I did. They'd probably say "yeah it's good on (a) and (b), but why nothing on (c) or (d)?"

Actually, there is one kind of method book that's pretty much always good, and that's the kind dedicated to classical guitar. That's because classical guitar has a well-recognised pedagogy, going all the way back to Segovia. If I taught classical guitar (and I don't, at least not at the moment), I would happily use something like Noad, at least for reference.

There is no such set of agreed conventions for steel-string guitar, acoustic or electric. That's partly because players of those instruments - even the virtuosos - are largely self-taught. Steel-string guitar (even the amplified kind) is a folk instrument, with a vernacular culture. Method books are only ever going to tinker around the edges, being little more than sets of tips or suggestions, looking in detail at various narrow aspects of technique or theory. There is way too much variety - as well as constant changes in fashion - for any one book to ever be comprehensive.

Maybe there are clear conventions for vintage styles such as ragtime and "Travis" style. Again, one would expect such books to be clear that they are dedicated to those specific techniques, and won't contain anything on "modes" or "lead soloing".

IOW, if you're thinking of writing your own method book (and it's something I've thought about doing for at least 20 years and got nowhere), first pick your audience, your readership. Who is it going to be for? Total beginners? That could work: just covering how to hold the guitar, the basic cowboy chords, basic strumming and picking techniques. How to read tab and (dare I say it) notation. To plan that, I would be looking at a whole collection of existing beginner books and picking out the approaches I liked - and also (of course) using my experience of teaching beginners: what works, and what do they mostly want to know, or find hardest to grasp? (Unfortunately, a lot of that is stuff that would be very hard to explain in a book. It needs to be demonstrated. That's where video wins out.)

Beyond beginner, you need to specialise. Acoustic or electric? Rock, blues, folk, country? Fingerstyle or pick? The more you specialise, the easier and quicker the book would be to write. Of course, you limit your readership (and potential sales). And a smaller book costs less.

This is all really helpful. In fact refreshing to have such a great reply to my post. I posted a similar question on another quite forum only to be met with a little hostility from someone suggesting i wanted to be an author rather than wanted to "write a method book and having something to say".

I think you are 100% on the money here. Given all your time thinking about this, then maybe you are better placed to do this than me

If i do this, i think I will focus on a more general acoustic guitar method, as there is so much crossover between fingerstyle, classical, jazz and so on.

Again thanks for the detailed response.

[charles Tauber]

I agree with JonPR.

Books are not a very effective means of teaching how to play an instrument: video is a much better vehicle.

The classical guitar does have a well established pedagogy dating back further than Segovia. I'm aware of a few other well established pedagogical methods, most notably Tony Braden's method, but it appears the effort required to go through those is well beyond what the average guitar player is willing to do.

That begs the question of what level of effort is an "average" guitar player - the average guitar method book buyer - willing to put into learning to play the instrument? The accompanying question is what do they want to know?

The approach of being well trained in music, and then applying whatever portions or subset of that to one or more styles of music one wants to play doesn't seem to be the approach most guitarists are interested in. For many, it would be similar to spending years formally studying art - color theory, light and shade, form, composition, technique, etc. - so that one could finger paint. So, as JonPR stated, you'd have to chose a specific style/subset as the target for your book: you'd likely sell very few copies of a generalist book that covers the greater whole of the guitar-playing musician.

An important point that Joni Mitchel once made is that no one asks a painter to paint a favourite painting again, but everyone asks a musician to play one's favourite song again. It might be that a guitar method book is simply how to play the favourite song that the aspiring guitarist wants to learn to play: there are already many videos out there attempting to show people how to do that.

[SprintBob]

I don’t think it is quite the barren sea out there if you know what you are looking for.

As a lower intermediate player who after two years decided I wanted to focus on fingerstyle, I was overwhelmed by the options that were available between YouTube and sources like Truefire and Homespun.

With recommendations from this forum, I went to Mark Hanson’s Accent on Music website and decided his fingerstyle method books seemed to be an excellent gateway into the world of fingerstyle. I diligently worked through both his Contemporary Travis Picking and Art of Solo Fingerstyle books (over a 3 year period) and that was reinforced with taking Skype lessons from Mark every 2-3 weeks. I did supplement what I worked on in the books with some other arrangements Mark gave me as well as some I picked up on my own.

Now I am kind of “on my own” but still have Mark as my teacher. I pick challenging arrangements to learn based on the style(s) of music I enjoy. I’ve been doing a lot of DADGAD and Open D stuff. Books like Doug Young’s DADGAD reference book and Alex DeGrassi’s fingerstyle method book are great references for me.

I’m not a singer so I choose solo fingerstyle arrangements to learn. I would like to explore flatpicking so I’m looking for some good method books for flatpicking arrangements with melody lines. A lot of flatpicking material I have found is more rooted in bluegrass and rhythm. Suggestions here would be appreciated.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by SprintBob

I would like to explore flatpicking so I’m looking for some good method books for flatpicking arrangements with melody lines. A lot of flatpicking material I have found is more rooted in bluegrass and rhythm. Suggestions here would be appreciated.

You might want to go the "learn by playing songs" method that a lot of people use. Check out Molly Tuttle on youtube. Here's an "instructional" video she made. If I were to start re-learning flat picking, this is someone I would try to emulate.

[Pitar]

There's some vague memories of the classical style book I read in 74 that I dismissed at the time as more stylistic than utilitarian, as it did seem to be more towards a traditional doctrine than a practical application of motor skills and sensible posture. One aspect was the non-use of the little finger. I dismissed that immediately because I had already developed its use in proper coordination. I think a new guide needs to be written that embraces possibilities rather than eschewing them.

[tonyo]

I've learned heaps from: Musical Principles for the Skeptical Guitarist. By Bruce Emery.

Have bought quite a few of the books by Bruce Emery.

Learning from a book clearly has it's limitations. Bruce helps minimize those limitations to a degree by being readable / accessible.

[rick-slo]

For beginner, intermediate, advanced, for general music or more specific styles, leaning towards steel string or nylon string guitars? Since there are so many things in print already you may want to specialize somewhat. Personally I would avoid a bunch of theory and try to make it enjoyable with a logical sequence of material with good well written tunes included.

[frankmcr]

Just a couple of thoughts -

I've never come across a book that covered how to move your fingers smoothly and efficiently from one chord formation to another. Essential part of playing that most books just leave for beginners to figure out by themselves.

You do not need to play all six strings every time you play a chord. A guitar has six strings so you can find options for 3- or 4-string chords, not because you're required to use them all at once.

Don't use terms like "downbeat" or "pickup notes" without providing a clear explanation. Never assume "everybody knows" what something means.

[Mr. Jelly]

Some things that come to my mind are. Often the key of the lesson isn't mentioned. Or the a figure or lick being put forward doesn't mention the context in which it works. As in this works moving from the IV chord to the I chord. The one item for me that sticks in my craw is explaining what chord the particular figure, notes or lick is being played out of. As in two notes are played somewhere on the fret board in the middle of a tune. Often the original creator of the notes was fingering a chord and ended up playing two notes out of it. But the tab just shows two fretted notes. It would be more explanatory for chicken picking, flat picking, blues and rags.

[pf400]

You asked: "Does anyone have any opinions on what is routinely absent from guitar method books?"

Briefly:

- give more examples of (more modern) songs
- teach from the perspective of a guitar tuned E to E. For example teach scales and Nashville Numbering System starting in key of E
- provide on-line guidance to supplement the book including backing tracks to play scales over. Provide backing tracks with someone jamming over them in various scales. Leave modes for a more advanced study
- do teach scales but avoid the images of a fretboard overwhelmed by one scale, eg, all positions of the minor pentatonic in one diagram. Keep the illustrations of scales short and simple, not going all over the place.
- if you intend to teach how to read the staff, that's one whole book in itself. No problem though, simply showing where the notes are on the staff
- stick to treble clef. Leave bass clef for bass players and other instruments

[charles Tauber]

Originally Posted by pf400

- if you intend to teach how to read the staff, that's one whole book in itself. No problem though, simply showing where the notes are on the staff

What would be in there that would require an entire book?

I figure it takes about 3 or 4 pages to teach how to read a treble clef staff. The rest is practice/repetition. Sheet music, written in a single treble clef, can be found for free in many places on the internet: I see no reason to fill a paid-for book with material that is easily found for free.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by pf400

You asked: "Does anyone have any opinions on what is routinely absent from guitar method books?"

Briefly:

- give more examples of (more modern) songs

Yes, but there are two issues there. One is copyright, and having to pay for licences to use the material. The other is fashion: how modern is "modern"? Most authors and publishers will want the book to still be value 5, 10 or more years from now, ideally with little or no updating.
A third issue would be how do you choose the songs? Some "modern" songs might put off as many buyers as they might attract.

That's why tutor books - if they use well known songs at all - will go for vintage "classics", or public domain tunes.

Originally Posted by pf400

- teach from the perspective of a guitar tuned E to E. For example teach scales and Nashville Numbering System starting in key of E

Standard tuning has nothing to do with the key of E though. The easiest key on guitar is G, followed by D, A and C (roughly in that order, before you get to E major.
E blues is easy enough of course, because of how much it has in common with E minor.

Originally Posted by pf400

- provide on-line guidance to supplement the book including backing tracks to play scales over. Provide backing tracks with someone jamming over them in various scales. Leave modes for a more advanced study

Both agreed. I think there's no excuse now for a book not to have some kind of online tie-in, youtubes, etc, to provide audio samples. That used to be the job of DVDs, but they seem somewhat archaic now.

Originally Posted by pf400

- do teach scales but avoid the images of a fretboard overwhelmed by one scale, eg, all positions of the minor pentatonic in one diagram. Keep the illustrations of scales short and simple, not going all over the place.

I agree. I also think scales have to be linked to chords. Key > chord shapes > scale.
Don't teach scale patterns in any part of the fretboard where the relevant chord shapes are not known. Chords and chord shapes first.

In fact, I think it's a great idea to teach everything about open position first. Frets 0-4 contain 2/3 of the entire range of the guitar, and every single chord and key scale can be played there. Plus, there is only one position for every note. The more you know there, the easier it is to transfer that knowledge up the fretboard

Originally Posted by pf400

- if you intend to teach how to read the staff, that's one whole book in itself.

Not really.

Originally Posted by pf400

No problem though, simply showing where the notes are on the staff

Yes, but I think rhythms are also important. Again, it need take no more than a few pages. And online demos would come into their own there. You have to hear it as well as see it.

Originally Posted by pf400

- stick to treble clef. Leave bass clef for bass players and other instruments

Well, obviously.

[PeterMN]

We live in the age of Google and YouTube, vehicles for information that books cannot compete with when it comes to something like learning to play guitar.