Calling all teachers...

[Deliberate1]

Friends, I have been playing for about two year, and been taking weekly lesson for about a year and a half. The focus has largely been theory-based - chord structure, transposition, secondary dominants, chord melody, melodic minor modes, etc. And, to be sure, I find this very interesting, at least from an intellectual perspective.

But, after all this time, I find that I can practically use only a small fraction of what I have learned because I am still just trying to get my fingers untied to form chords, or move them fast enough to play or keep up. I am still trying to learn the fret board and triad alternative fingerings, which is a particular goal of mine. There has been very little focus on the mechanics of playing - picking patterns, barre chords, etc. And, in the absense of using the theory skills to make music, they eventually fade in time.

So to you teachers, or students of teachers, I would be interested to know what approach you take with new students, and the progression of skills/skillsets you focus on. I recognize that every teacher has a different approach and different priorities for new students. And that is what I would like you to describe to me.

Thanks
David

[Andyrondack]

So after two years study you can't play any music? Why did you stick with that teacher so long? I was taught all the music theory needed in about 2 hours and even that was overkill .

[Deliberate1]

Originally Posted by Andyrondack

So after two years study you can't play any music? Why did you stick with that teacher so long? I was taught all the music theory needed in about 2 hours and even that was overkill .

You misinterpret my post. To say that I “can’t play any music” after two years is inaccurate. To say that what I have learned exceeds what I can do is.
I would be interested to know what elements of music theory you learned during that “two hours,” how you found it “overkill,” and time poorly spent.
David

[DCCougar]

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

...I am still trying to learn... triad alternative fingerings....

Others may disagree, but I find this as downright non-crucial. I get emails from Acoustic Guitar Mag, and occasionally they're pushing an article something like "Play C# five different ways!" Say what?? I know a couple handfuls of chord shapes; if I need a new one for a particular song, I'll learn it then, but not now!

It's great you've stuck with your teacher, but jeez, s/he sounds pretty uninspiring....

[Andyrondack]

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

You misinterpret my post. To say that I “can’t play any music” after two years is inaccurate. To say that what I have learned exceeds what I can do is.
I would be interested to know what elements of music theory you learned during that “two hours,” how you found it “overkill,” and time poorly spent.
David

When I was introduced to music theory I had been playing music from notation for years as I had weekly piano lessons then trumpet lessons as a kid, I also played bluesy type stuff on guitar by ear by ear and from chord progressions in books, so I already understood and could apply concepts related to rythmn and timing, it was allso clear to me that musicians who improvised were doing a lot of stuff I didn't understand .A jazz guitarist introduced me to the concept of scales , how they are formed and how individual notes can be combined to make different types of chords, how to create diatonic chord progressions and how to use the circle of 5ths to create ragtime/jazzy progressions, up till then scales had been presented to me as no more than a technical exercise . That's all very usefull , when I say 2 hours on that kind of stuff was probably overkill it's because the teacher had written a book on the subject years previously which would have been out of print buy they time I showed up, so he got me writting out what must have been reams of notes from a chapter in his book when it would have saved a lot of time to just buy a book with a lot of the info on scales and harmony in it as reference but then he was a nice guy to hang out with so I don't mind.
The point is that if you have only ever played music from notation you don't automaticaly learn that melody and harmony are seperate concepts that can be taken apart and rebuilt.
The difference between me and you is that 1 I left town and could not have or afford more lessons and 2 straight away I put to use what he had taught me to find my way around the guitar , so I started creating chord progressions in order to learn and practice new chords in a musical way, you don't seem to have done that. I am totally baffled as to why or how anyone could study music theory for nearly 2 years if you just want to play the guitar? It only takes a few lessons to be introduced to the aspects of theory which you have listed, you then gain an understanding of music over time by interpreting written music and music you improvise in the light of the theory, so playing music and learning to apply theory should happen at the same time.
Time poorly spent? No that's your words not mine, please don't misquote me.

[Andyrondack]

Originally Posted by DCCougar

Others may disagree, but I find this as downright non-crucial. I get emails from Acoustic Guitar Mag, and occasionally they're pushing an article something like "Play C# five different ways!" Say what?? I know a couple handfuls of chord shapes; if I need a new one for a particular song, I'll learn it then, but not now!

It's great you've stuck with your teacher, but jeez, s/he sounds pretty uninspiring....

Yes learning chords as and when you need them is the way to go otherwise if you have no imediate use for a new inversion it'll probably be forgotten by the time you need it, but the point of music theory is that if you understand how to create chords from scales then you can find any chord you want as and when you need it without having to refer to a chord chart.

[Deliberate1]

Interesting. Good luck with your journey.
David

[Sax Player Guy]

Hi David,

If it's any help to you, I'll list what my teacher is having me work on.

Background: I am pretty much you. Been playing about two years. The difference is that I went with online instruction (Guitar Tricks, TrueFire, youtube) until quite recently. This means that my teacher hasn't taken me from absolute beginner, but has been sussing out where I am at on the journey. I've just had three lessons so far. Here's what he's had me work on:

RH, LH warmups-- DUDU picking, with various LH fingerings, each LH finger assigned to its own fret, first position. Patterns like 1234, 1243, 1342, 1342, etc., starting on the low E string and then reverse the pattern and come back down fro the high E string. He's given me four new patterns each time.

Pentatonic scales in the five shapes. As of my most recent lesson, I'm now starting a few permutations (e.g. 123235356561, etc.; 123523563561, etc.; and so on).

I-IV-V progressions in triads with just the top three strings in 3 places on the neck.

Now just introduced triads and 7th chords using the top four strings (same I-IV-V progression).

At the same time, he's given me a tune each time. First week it was a basic Blues in E. Second week it was Sunshine of Your Love, Last week it was Funk 49.

My wife bought me a looper pedal for my birthday, so my teacher showed me how to use it, and then gave me the task of laying down that basic Blues he had taught me, and then putting the I-IV-V triads over the top of that, and then soloing using the pentatonic scale over that.

Besides the above, he's also got me working on strumming; currently a bolero pattern strummed six different ways, varying the Downs and the Ups, working to increase my speed. Also, picking with the goal of making a smooth crescendo-decrescendo from pp to ff and back.

It's certainly been keeping me busy. Gaining the ability to jam along and play tunes is important to me. At the first lesson I told my teacher that I would like to begin with the Blues, and getting decent at being able to jam along with Blues tunes. It seems to me that he's guiding me in that direction with much of the stuff he's got me working on.

If there's something you specifically want to work on that you think you are not getting from your teacher, I encourage you to ask about it at your next lesson. As a saxophone teacher I strive to make sure my students are getting stuff they specifically want to learn, while also having them work on general skills I think they need. Nonetheless, we can easily fall into a groove (rut?) of the teacher giving the student stuff to do, while the student passively accepts whatever the teacher assigns them. Some of the most enjoyable times I've had in lessons with m students is when they ask me something out of the blue regarding some skill they are interested in acquiring, which sends things in a new direction.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

Friends, I have been playing for about two year, and been taking weekly lesson for about a year and a half. The focus has largely been theory-based - chord structure, transposition, secondary dominants, chord melody, melodic minor modes, etc.

Oh dear...

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

And, to be sure, I find this very interesting, at least from an intellectual perspective.

Well, that's good. I also find theory intellectually interesting.
But I didn't learn anything like that in my first two years. It was at least 15 years - maybe 20 - before I encountered any of that terminology. I'd been gigging in bands nearly that long.
Of course, I was playing music which employed all those concepts, and I understood them all in practice - i.e., as sounds and how to play them.

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

But, after all this time, I find that I can practically use only a small fraction of what I have learned because I am still just trying to get my fingers untied to form chords, or move them fast enough to play or keep up.

Understood. That's not necessarily a problem, of course, provided you do find the theory intellectually interesting, and understand it in the abstract.

Naturally, you need to work on your technical skill anyway, to improve your speed and dexterity. That's fundamental, and I hope your lessons are addressing those things as much as you need - and/or that you are practising enough between lessons to get those fingers up to speed. You certainly shouldn't be allowing theoretical study to get in the way of that.

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

I am still trying to learn the fret board and triad alternative fingerings, which is a particular goal of mine.

I disagree with DCCougar to some extent here. I do think this is a good goal (fretboard mastery!) - but I also agree with his point that learning specific techniqes can always wait until you find a song you want to play that uses it. There is no sense (IMHO) in learning technical stuff for the sake of it.
To learn how to use a tool, wait until you need to do a job that needs that tool. Otherwise it's wasted.
But increasing your knowledge of the fretboard is never wasted, because it can be applied to everything you learn.

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

There has been very little focus on the mechanics of playing - picking patterns, barre chords, etc. And, in the absense of using the theory skills to make music, they eventually fade in time.

Well, hold on.
You don't "use theory skills to make music". You use those technical skills. Theory skills are for talking about the music you hear and make, to describe its elements.

Theory does not help you play music. I speak as someone who has been playing music of various kinds for 55 years, and studying theory - on and off, at a mostly amateur level - for the last 35-40 years.
My theoretical knowledge has not improved my playing at all. It has not even improved my composition and improvisation skills that much. What it has done is given me a much clearer oversight of how it all works, how it all connects up. It's that sense of intellectual command. But it doesn't equate to technical command.
My playing has improved by (a) playing more, and (b) listening better. My composition and improvisation skills have improved by learning more songs, copying more recordings, and just doing more of it.

Theory helps you talk the talk - it doesn't help you walk the walk.

But yes - any skill (practical or theoretical) fades in time if you don't use it. That's natural. So if you don't want that to happen you have to find ways of using it!

Originally Posted by Deliberate1

So to you teachers, or students of teachers, I would be interested to know what approach you take with new students, and the progression of skills/skillsets you focus on.

If you mean beginners, then the only theory I address is the names for whatever stuff the music I'm teaching contains. That would be note names and chord names at least.
I do teach note names very early on, and hand out maps of the fretboard - although I insist on getting to know only frets 0-3. The rest can wait. Frets 0-3 contain 2/3 of the entire range of the guitar, almost all beginner material happens down there, and there is only one place for any note.

I focus mainly on learning tunes: just whatever techniques, reading skills or theory is needed for accomplishing that task, and no more. No scale practice (because melodies provide enough scale practice, and are more fun to play).
Melody first, by the way, for several reasons: (a) it's easier than chords; (b) you can play a recognisable piece of music in less than a day (chord sequences are not recognisable songs); (c) it gives an excellent foundation in understanding what music is all about.
Chords come soon after, naturally, but mainly for those who want to sing, or accompany other singers. Not many of my students want to sing!

[JimCA]

Deliberate1, your post resonated with me. I've been playing much longer than you and share your frustration. JonPR's post put things in perspective for me.

I think I have the curse of theory is easy and playing is hard for me. Theory is fun and beautiful to me, so I spend a lot of time there, expecting big payoff in my playing. Physical dexterity, hearing and recognizing tones, chords and rhythms are a challenge for me. This thread makes me rethink how I proceed.

[charles Tauber]

David,

It depends upon what YOU want from YOUR playing or musical education. The ideal is to find a teacher who will help you attain what you want from it.

Let me give you an example. I used to do guitar repairs for a local music store. Throughout the day, one hears the usual guitar-buyers come in and play the usual stuff - Stairway to Heaven, etc. One day, to my surprise, the person playing played marvellous chord-melody jazz standards. I'd long since been a huge fan of chord-melody jazz guitar. I stopped what I was doing to go listen. After a few tunes, I asked if he teaches. He said he did. I asked if he would take me as a student. He said his teaching schedule was full and to call him in a month if I was serious. I called him in a month.

He then scheduled what he called an interview with him to discuss what I wanted to learn and what he was offering, to see if it was a good fit. He stated that his teaching curriculum is what his primary guitar teacher, Tony Braden, taught him. (He studied with Tony for more than a decade, stopping only when Tony retired and moved to the other side of the country.)

His curriculum started with the most basic of the most basic. For the most part, he didn't teach how to play - i.e. technique - he taught what to play. It started with single string exercises, then single string scales. Then added triads on the top three strings, then triads on the middle three strings, then triads on the bass strings, in all inversions. That involved "spelling" chords - the theory of how chords are assembled, the four types of chords and so on. Then he taught four note chords, with and without added notes - 6ths, 7ths, 9ths, 13ths, b5, augmented... in all inversions up and down the neck. It was a lot of "dog" work that well-prepared one for what was to follow.

Next, he taught how to harmonize a melody, two-part harmony. I'd pick any melody I liked and harmonize it according to the "rules", write it down in standard notation and then play if for him the next week. He'd go through it with suggestions for improvement. Later, we'd harmonizing with two notes, then three - providing the the basics of four-part harmony and arranging for band or orchestra - each with "rules" for voicing. Then it became largely "free-form" where each week I'd pick a melody of my choosing - any style of music, though I like jazz - and I'd harmonize it, write it down on standard staff, and then play it for him the following week. He'd then go through it with me, offer suggestions for improvement, and possible variations I hadn't considered.

I studied with him for seven years. Prior to starting with him, I was classically trained in performance and had completed all of the standard curriculum of theory. I was able to progress through the basics of his curriculum pretty quickly. We've been good friends ever since and we built a pair of 7-string arch top guitars together, which is what he plays out. Here is an example of his playing: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4-XF3BmdU7I

He later told me that the purpose of having a prospective student call him a month later, and then be interviewed, was to ensure that the student was sufficiently serious about studying with him. His experience over decades of teaching was that most of the students who studied with him either quit fairly early - at the point of learning to "spell" chords - or stayed with him for numerous years.

The point of my story is that the teaching he offered wasn't for everybody - it isn't what everybody wants. The bottom line is that it is best to work with a teacher who can help you get what you want out of your music. What you want can be performance, theory, composition, history...

[mr. beaumont]

What kind of music are you trying to play?

[Deliberate1]

Originally Posted by Sax Player Guy

Hi David,

If it's any help to you, I'll list what my teacher is having me work on.

SPG, nice to hear from a fellow winds player. I have been a clarinetist, now jazz, for about 55 years. And a sax guy for slightly less than that. Currently (at least prior to the pandemic), lead tenor in an 18 piece big band. The guitar is a whole 'nother kettle of fish.

I appreciate the description of your teacher's curriculum, and will use that as a springboard to talk with my teacher. It seems to me that he is giving you theory with a practical application, combined with mechanical drills, that you can use right now. That is what I am looking for as well.

Best of luck with your journey.
David

[Deliberate1]

Originally Posted by JonPR

Oh dear...

LOL, Jon. It is a mouthfull. Or handful. Thanks for the sensible insights.
David

[Deliberate1]

Originally Posted by JimCA

Deliberate1, your post resonated with me. I've been playing much longer than you and share your frustration. JonPR's post put things in perspective for me.

I think I have the curse of theory is easy and playing is hard for me. Theory is fun and beautiful to me, so I spend a lot of time there, expecting big payoff in my playing. Physical dexterity, hearing and recognizing tones, chords and rhythms are a challenge for me. This thread makes me rethink how I proceed.

Jim, welcome to my quandry. Best of luck finding a way through it.
David