Fingerstyle versus Plectrum

[Sordello]

I thought I would put this post here as I hope the discussion centers around the issue of technique behind creativity as opposed to which style of music is or isn't "creative".

I read an interview with Bruce Clarke (likely not known very much outside of Australia) and he is, er, rather opinionated. He made mention of fingerstyle and plectrum technique in relation to "creativity", and so I wanted to throw this out for comments from fellow Forum members. \ Do you agree with the opinion; disagree? Any thoughts to continue on that line ??? (I'll add that he is coming from a jazz perspective and as a jazz guitar teacher, and as such, I think there is some equivocation between 'creativity' and jazz improvisation. That, of course, is a separate issue...)


R.P: Your list of clinicians was devoid of classically trained guitarists. Do you have one on your staff?

B.C: No!

R.P: Why not?

B.C: They have nothing to offer us! I trust you will have a lot of blog space because once I get started on the world of the classically trained guitarist, a whole flood of irate readers will leap off their footstools and go for my jugular. Let me qualify my observation by pointing out that for some 25 years the nylon strung box was part of my day to day professional life, so I am speaking from a vantage point that few have occupied. Outside of Julian Bream (whose work I greatly admire), John Williams and a small number of international concert artists who function at the highest level, the classically trained guitarist's underlying musicianship always worries me. Now, before we get too far into this, remember that I said "classically trained," and also note that I exclude the many fine players who have extended the newer styles of music associated with the instrument by either avoiding, or rising above, the general restrictive isolated background. So, what could they offer us? Speed reading skills? New insight in modern music? Will they enrich our harmonic awareness? Could they write arrangements for ensemble workshops? Believe me, I'm not being pompous, just practical.

R.P: Is the problem one of finger-style vs. plectrum technique?

B.C: To some extent. The materials and opportunities available to the talented plectrum player are more likely to produce a thinking musician. I've met and played with many great jazz musicians who play both styles - Joe Pass, Don Andrews, George Golla, Charlie Byrd, Ike Isaacs and I know of a few others - George Van Eps and Bucky Pizzarelli - but each of these came to the music from a plectrum style background before moving their mastery (of that musical construction kit I mentioned earlier) over to a finger-style approach. The very existence of their recorded, written and playing achievements far outweighs anything the other team have produced in the field of creative music. I find it interesting that Julian Breams rates Django Reinhardt along with Segovia and John Williams and places Joe Pass up their in the same league. I cannot think of one influential improviser who started out from a finger-style base -maybe an early exposure to Jazz Studies could turn the tables.

[Malcolm]

I'll jump in first. I have found in keyboard that some (have to say some not all) classically trained pianist are lost with out their sheet music. Yet are reluctant to venture away from the written score and when forced to do so feel they are cheating.

My, finger picking revolves around "the pattern" my fingers know. Put a plectrum in my hand and I'm not tied to T-I-M-R the plectrum brings more freedom to pick and choose THE notes I think best.

So if we are categorizing and lumping all into the same area, which is always dangerous, then I agree with what he said.

Malcolm

[imwjl]

A first electric guitar a a few years ago and getting beyond decades of occasional strumming cowboy chords got me hybrid picking.

I don't put the thought in that some do but it clearly allows different sounds and patterns at same time or close to each other.

I don't care about theory, purity, or a style as a religion or way of life. Some tones I love are only possible or ideal with a pick and a strum and some I love come from plucking 2 - 4 strings at the same time.

[rick-slo]

You are going down the wrong road if you are implying an inherent difference between plectrum playing and fingerstyle as to creative potential. Creativity is where the player takes it, either style.

I do agree however with his statement "The materials and opportunities available to the talented plectrum player are more likely to produce a thinking musician." For example being part of an ensemble (a jazz group, etc. )and a more open improvisational repertoire contribute to that.

I also agree that classically trained guitarists tend to be more receptacles of music than actively thinking creators of music and that, as he said, regarding classical guitar music there are "Too many players, too little great music. Something new needs to be added, not just more of the same thing."

That said what I like to listen to is music that is well thought out in from start to finish in advance of the performance. Too much free improvisation usually loses my interest pretty quickly.

[Brent Hutto]

Unless you name is Bertoncini, yeah you need to be able to use a pick to play jazz. Next topic...

[mmmaak]

Originally Posted by Brent Hutto

Unless you name is Bertoncini, yeah you need to be able to use a pick to play jazz. Next topic...

Or David Cullen

I wonder if Martin Taylor started out with a pick?

[815C]

The guy seems pretty closed minded to me.

[Bern]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

You are going down the wrong road if you are implying an inherent difference between plectrum playing and fingerstyle as to creative potential. Creativity is where the player takes it, either style.

That's my believe as well...

That said what I like to listen to is music that is well thought out in from start to finish in advance of the performance. Too much free improvisation usually loses my interest pretty quickly.

Personally, I believe that this really depends on a musician's creativity, style and his or her command of the instrument.

[TBman]

The time it takes to master fingerstyle (including the classical approach) is really burdensome, at least for me anyway. GENERALLY, a person can get "better" faster, learning with a pick, than they can playing fingerstyle. This is not to say that fingerstyle is better, it just takes a heck of a lot longer to play as fast as a flatpicker, actually its darn near impossible for the average player. So using a pick probably opens up more musical exploration in the early years of playing for many. There are so many neat things you can do with a pick and with hybrid playing that can't be touched using fingerstyle by the average joe like me.

To be honest I think if the classical teachers and schools used tab to teach instead of spending so much time on sight reading skills, classical playing would be better off and a lot more popular than it is now. There's always been that "snobbery" associated with classical playing - as if reading music really well was like being a medical doctor. Its not.


Ok, the soapbox is clear for the next guy, LOL.

[Brent Hutto]

Barry,

I'd respectfully offer that there's a "point" to the reading music thing that most non-classically-trained musicians tend to ignore. The idea behind classical performance (as traditionally taught anyway) is to do a certain degree of personal interpretation of a piece while staying strictly within what you might call the "musical meaning" of the original score.

That "meaning" is complicated to those cats and I don't really get it myself but it has to do with the period in which it was written, what you know about the composer's works for various instruments and ensembles and a lot of picky little details that they know how to read between the lines (so to speak) on the music. Compared to being able to accomplish the deep reading they are supposed to be doing, knowing how to read standard notation is the smallest possible drop in the bucket.

That isn't to say that they couldn't make classical guitar playing, for instance, more popular and accessible by translating it to non-professional and/or non-classical musicians. No doubt they could. But classical music, guitar or otherwise, is a way of thinking and a way of experiencing a piece of written-out music that can't be remotely captured in tab or playing by ear.

The guy in the next office from me at work has a music degree (classical trumpet, like in orchestras) and from talking to him I think playing classical music without reference to the original score is just as inconceivable as trying to play jazz by reading every note and every beat off the music. He took one semester of jazz trumpet and the instructor told him early on that you have to feel jazz to play jazz and it was obvious this guy does not feel the jazz. He says that was quite true.

[Bern]

Originally Posted by TBman

Ok, the soapbox is clear for the next guy, LOL.

Hmm...wouldn't want to occupy the place where you just stood.

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Bern

Hmm...wouldn't want to occupy the place where you just stood.

Hey, I took a shower,

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Brent Hutto

Barry,

I'd respectfully offer that there's a "point" to the reading music thing that most non-classically-trained musicians tend to ignore. The idea behind classical performance (as traditionally taught anyway) is to do a certain degree of personal interpretation of a piece while staying strictly within what you might call the "musical meaning" of the original score.

That "meaning" is complicated to those cats and I don't really get it myself but it has to do with the period in which it was written, what you know about the composer's works for various instruments and ensembles and a lot of picky little details that they know how to read between the lines (so to speak) on the music. Compared to being able to accomplish the deep reading they are supposed to be doing, knowing how to read standard notation is the smallest possible drop in the bucket.

That isn't to say that they couldn't make classical guitar playing, for instance, more popular and accessible by translating it to non-professional and/or non-classical musicians. No doubt they could. But classical music, guitar or otherwise, is a way of thinking and a way of experiencing a piece of written-out music that can't be remotely captured in tab or playing by ear.

The guy in the next office from me at work has a music degree (classical trumpet, like in orchestras) and from talking to him I think playing classical music without reference to the original score is just as inconceivable as trying to play jazz by reading every note and every beat off the music. He took one semester of jazz trumpet and the instructor told him early on that you have to feel jazz to play jazz and it was obvious this guy does not feel the jazz. He says that was quite true.

I know where you're coming from, they are trying to maintain the history of the instrument and the art of reading music, but alot of it is the "emperor's clothes" to me.

[Brent Hutto]

I think a lot of it is emporer's clothes. That's the problem with such a "mature" art form, it becomes impossible to separate out genuine respect for the material and the form with plain old bloody-mindedness and doing things a certain way just because they're difficult.

But let me ask this. How much listening do you do to classical music? As in fully attentive close listening where you're totally into it? I know for me the answer is virtually none. And if you're like me in that, it's no surprise we don't "get" the whole of it. Frankly, it's like a lot of "harder" jazz forms. For me the music isn't worth the effort it takes to really listen and appreciate it.

I'm a lazy music listener, so sue me...

[TBman]

Originally Posted by Brent Hutto

I think a lot of it is emporer's clothes. That's the problem with such a "mature" art form, it becomes impossible to separate out genuine respect for the material and the form with plain old bloody-mindedness and doing things a certain way just because they're difficult.

But let me ask this. How much listening do you do to classical music? As in fully attentive close listening where you're totally into it? I know for me the answer is virtually none. And if you're like me in that, it's no surprise we don't "get" the whole of it. Frankly, it's like a lot of "harder" jazz forms. For me the music isn't worth the effort it takes to really listen and appreciate it.

I'm a lazy music listener, so sue me...

The few cds of classical I have I do actually listen to, but alot of times my mind starts wondering about whether or not I can find the music, would I really get into playing this piece, etc. When I watch a video of classical music I'm half listening, half admiring the techniques used. I guess I don't really just listen. Even when I listen to rock music I daydream about playing the lead parts.