Jeff Berlin says - Bass Teachers Work Harder at Fixing Learning Concepts That Don't Require Fixing

[JeffBerlin]

Has anyone noticed some bass teachers' attempts to take concepts of academic learning and try to make them easier to understand instead of encouraging bass students to learn them in their present form? My question is to ask what is wrong with learning music as almost every other academic student has done. If it worked for them, it will work for you.

Teaching simplified approaches of musical content such as bass exercises or theory is unfortunate because, by trying to simplify the learning of music, people are not going to learn academic music as they have already has been proven to work. Why? Because the proven method has been altered to make things easier for people to understand, one of the the most patronizing attitudes to view bass students with.

Bass teachers have taken it upon themselves to "make easy to understand" methods of music that actually aren't difficult to understand in the first place. Assuming that learning music via the established approaches is too hard or takes too long is worse than a myth; it is a lie.

Some people also want to speed up the learning of musical principles. But, this is a false philosophy of learning music because everything that is well learned takes its own time to be understood. HERE is where we are different and where one might learn a theoretical principle in a day while someone else might need a week. But, the lessons don't need to be dumbed down, to be make "simple." You can't learn something faster by dumbing down the principles which to me, actually seems a bit of an insult that one might be viewed as incapable of learning music as so many others have done before. This points to two thoughts: 1. Why do bass players put up with this kind of patronizing attitude and 2. if speeding up the learning process is a serious goal of yours, what's the rush?

 

[White Beard]

1) Because we're "bass players," not musicians.

2) It's the twentieth century, baby. We've got electric can-openers and automatic transmissions.

If you really want to get down to it, then we've got to get a little offensive and into territory that is going to be uncomfortable for a lot of casual players. But, there is also a lot of people who don't have access to proper music instruction, but do have access to the internet. Let's not forget that Electric Bass Guitar and even orchestral Bass is not taught in public schools in a large part of the country. Hence, the sort of large scale music education programs specifically called for in order to get a new mindset into the youth is not there.

Conclusion: The people who want to be musicians, will be musicians. The people who want to be bass players, will be bass players.

 

[Drgonzonm]

@JeffBerlin,
I can see your point, and agree it would be nice that the rigors of academia were followed. However, the standards of academia differ from one school to another, and may vary in the same school year to year, Depending on sho is teaching. My background is not music, but I do enjoy music theory and it's applications. I have an undergraduate degree from a research university where engineering, physics were the majority of degrees issued.
Poster #2, states "we are base players...." there is a lots of truth in that statement, however, we are musicians. The question to me, "do bass players really need the rigors that a piano or a guitar player needs when it comes to the genre's of jazz, or classical music?" My answer is "I don't know." I do believe that bass players should have the rudimentries of some of the vast theory, some of the threads, on this forum are in the ionosphere, when the discussions refer to shifting modes, the poster lost me. Would it be nice to know what what poster said, yes, is it necessary,no. I am a member of the mediocre bass club in this forum. My skills will never allow me to leave.
I will never attend a music school as I likely can not pass the audition. Fight the windmills of mediocrity, maybe one day I will graduate from the first course of music as a second language.
....

 

[Gorn]

Is there any evidence that a simplified approach to learning academic music is a bad thing? Isn't every subject taught in a simplified way, at least initially? Maybe the methods that you think are easy to understand aren't easy to understand for everyone. Not everyone in every class gets an A, even if the teacher meets Jeff Berlin's standards.

 

[SteveCS]

@JeffBerlin
Bang on again! Even basic nomenclature and terminology is overlooked or simplified to the point of pointlessness, all in the name of progress and instant gratification. I wonder how many people know, for example, the names of all scale degrees (not just tonic and dominant), how to properly refer to a first or second inversion without using a slash notation or, the difference between tonic and root? Or how to beam notes wrt the key signature. I see it in books and magazine articles all the time which suggests that even proof-readers often think it not important, that we won't notice or, worse, that they don't know it's wrong. Either way, the misunderstandings get perpetuated...
Aaarghh...

 

[SteveCS]

Is there any evidence that a simplified approach to learning academic music is a bad thing? Isn't every subject taught in a simplified way, at least initially? Maybe the methods that you think are easy to understand aren't easy to understand for everyone. Not everyone in every class gets an A, even if the teacher meets Jeff Berlin's standards.

Most concepts in themselves are fairly simple and logical when built on top of other fundamental concepts. If simplification of a higher concept is necessary due to holes in the understanding of the underpinning concepts then yes, simplification is a false premise. When do the holes get plugged, and how much unlearning is necessary once the holes get exposed?
YMMV.

 

[redstrand]

Again with the trolling. Jeff, all learners are different, that's a scientific fact. What's easy for you isn't always for others. Teaching isn't about watering things down, it's about finding what works for the student. Once they get rolling everything tends to fall into place, if it doesn't the student doesn't get the grade because they couldn't show mastery. Bass playing and music in general is no different, either you master it or you don't...how you get there is up to you, not someone declaring everyone else is incorrect on their approach.

 

[Sneakyfish]

I think the answer to the 2nd question could be as simple as:

1) Unfortunately people can be impatient and not willing to invest what's seen as too much time to develop their thing enough to reach their musical goals.

2) They can be demoralised by the shear volume of musical information they need to learn because they're human, and so the first snake-oil seller that walks up to them saying they can learn it in 3-easy-steps is going to catch a fish.

3) We would all honestly like some instant gratification now and then! (I would love to think that there is some book of simplified terms I could read to become a musical genius overnight.)


As for the first question, well you are the educator here Jeff, this could be all wrong but here goes!

I frame my thoughts on your first question this way. If a hypothetical student and teacher are studying a subject together and the student encounters an element which seems above their current level of understanding, they will most likely ask the teacher for clarification. (or remain ignorant)

Putting myself in as the teacher briefly, I seemingly have three options:

1) Continue to expound the concept "as is", maybe viewing it from different, but not necessarily simplified, angles. Working with them until they have their eureka moment!

2) Break the problem down into simplified approaches for the student, presenting them until the student combines the "little" solutions to surmount the original obstacle.

3) Give up.


In the 2nd instance, where the student asked for clarification and the teacher gave them simplified problems to work through in order to get the solution. It is possible that the student was well aware that their teacher might use this method. They might be fine with it, and they have essentially asked to be patronised! "Pretend I'm dumb on this subject and take me through it from the top, please." The student is dictating the course of the learning at this point. They could, alternatively, specifically ask for option 1, where the teacher still holds the reigns.

The difference between these two approaches appears to be: Perceived time spent to arrive at a solution. And it seems, on it's face, reasonable to both of them to assume that breaking the issue down and then rebuilding it will be easier for the student ergo they will absorb the concept faster and they can both go home.

This reveals the underlying belief that the teacher and student seem to be holding to. Namely, Easier = Faster. This statement is obviously not true in all instances.

But, not only do they believe that Easier = Faster, they also appear to believe that Easier + Faster = Better. Why is this?

(I suppose that answers why a student would be willing to be patronised)

I suppose if I have something like a hand-tool which is somehow superior to the next guy's, I'll be able to do the job more quickly with less effort. So the next guy will say: "I want that tool, it's better than what I have."

In this instance, easier + faster does mean better.

But music is not really a tool to me, more a sum of knowledge. A 'working knowledge' of a subject is not a complete knowledge of it. And I think the point is that sugar-coating musical knowledge to make it easier to absorb is somehow lessening the quality or completeness of the knowledge being imparted. i.e. mass-producing a million awful cars quickly vs. hand-building one awesome car slowly.

In this instance easier + faster does not mean better.

Because people are seeing some success in other fields when using the easier/faster paradigm, they assume that it is also applicable to their learning/teaching of music.

Additionally, I think focusing on simpler versions of the problem is NOT focusing on the actual problem itself. And so the approach of simplification kinda represents wasted time and not time gained, regardless of whether or not the student is fine with being patronised. As well as the fact that any musical content has wrapped up in it all of the smaller problems of theory, technique etc. So a more complete picture gets practiced/learned in the end, though it may take you longer.

Worth noting is that I am admittedly proceeding under this supposition: It's instinctive to reduce a complex problem into simpler parts which, once solved, combine to generate the solution to the original problem. Because this is perceived as the easiest method to achieve a solution. Basically going the way of Decartes. It is in my experience what people like to do.

Maybe it's because people are getting... dare I say it... lazy? So the teachers you describe are devolving along with them?
I'm also interested to know if you think that there are any merits at all in simplification? Or is it all bad?

I'm sry it's so long, but we are here for real good conversations about bass in music. Stay low! \m/

 

[Sneakyfish]

If you want to learn in your own way then study yourself. If you decide to enter into academia, knowing what that entails, why complain when you're met with traditional academic methods of instruction?

 

[two fingers]

Again with the trolling. Jeff, all learners are different, that's a scientific fact. What's easy for you isn't always for others. Teaching isn't about watering things down, it's about finding what works for the student. Once they get rolling everything tends to fall into place, if it doesn't the student doesn't get the grade because they couldn't show mastery. Bass playing and music in general is no different, either you master it or you don't...how you get there is up to you, not someone declaring everyone else is incorrect on their approach.

Have you ever taught beginner bass lessons? I Have. Students are impatient. They want to know everything now. They want to be able to play their favorite bass line NOW. In fact, they have little or no interest in knowing WHY that bass line was written the way it was, or how it fits into the rest of the chord structure. So part of the reason they want the quick and dirty version is that they don't CARE about the how or why. Just show me the what....aka shutup and teach me my favorite bass parts.

"Forget the fundamentals. Forget technique. Forget theory. I need to be able to play Red Hot Chilli Peppers Roller Coaster for my friends by TUESDAY!!!"

@JeffBerlin this is where I ran into trouble teaching. I had to spend a significant amount of time in each lesson explaining WHY the tried and true way of getting started would serve them well later on. Granted, most of my student were high school age. But it became a chore to keep them inspired while we went through basic finger exercises and intro to theory instaed of learning how to slap 100 notes per second on a bass line that they had no concept of how it was written or why it was written the way it was.

So the task (for me anyway) was to keep them motivated and inspired..... to remind them why they picked up a bass in the first place ..... while I got them pointed in the right direction intellectually.

I ended up trying to find a balance. I would make them a deal. Stick with me for phase one of the boring part for six weeks. Do everything I say and don't ask why. (Think "wax on wax off") At the end of the six weeks I agreed to teach them at least part of their favorite song. (Unfortunately back then it was a lot of Dio.....)

I took on the task and insisted on basic theory and finger technique before moving on. And I tried to positively reenforce the reasons behind them (rather than finger wagging and lectures). And it worked in most cases. But that part of my shtick took up more time than I was prepared for going in.

Not long ago I played a softball game with some friends. When the ball was hit to me I made textbook catches and stops. I got in front of a ground ball. I led a pop fly so that when it got to my glove I had been waiting for it for several seconds. I backed up infielders without even thinking about it. Later I was asked about what leagues I play in. I replied "Other than one season of church ball a decade ago I haven't played in almost thirty years."

My father was my coach growing up. He was a firm believer in the basics and fundamentals. Drills. Oh my God the drills. I hated them at first.

But to this day, I am programmed to play every aspect of any game on a diamond. I constantly boggle my wife's mind when we are watching the Red Sox play. I usually say which pitcher they are about to put in before the coach heads to the mound. I usually say the outfield is about to play deep before the commentators announce it. I know the game.

The same goes for bass. I do fill-in shows a lot. I play entire shows with people I met at soundcheck. I can do that because I know my job. I learned the fundamentals. I applied those fubdamentals to more and more complex scenarios over time. So, these days, knowledge guided by experience has made me a bass player who can read the stitches on a fastball.

 

[JeffBerlin]

1) Because we're "bass players," not musicians.

2) It's the twentieth century, baby. We've got electric can-openers and automatic transmissions.

If you really want to get down to it, then we've got to get a little offensive and into territory that is going to be uncomfortable for a lot of casual players. But, there is also a lot of people who don't have access to proper music instruction, but do have access to the internet. Let's not forget that Electric Bass Guitar and even orchestral Bass is not taught in public schools in a large part of the country. Hence, the sort of large scale music education programs specifically called for in order to get a new mindset into the youth is not there.

Conclusion: The people who want to be musicians, will be musicians. The people who want to be bass players, will be bass players.

I have another option: Teach correctly! Lecture correctly! Guide bass players/musicians to seek better quality information than they are now being offered. Teachers aim low and often make excuses about why they do it. I've never, not once did this and the only thing that I could guarantee anyone that ever studied with me took place; they were given the right music to improve with.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Is there any evidence that a simplified approach to learning academic music is a bad thing? Isn't every subject taught in a simplified way, at least initially? Maybe the methods that you think are easy to understand aren't easy to understand for everyone. Not everyone in every class gets an A, even if the teacher meets Jeff Berlin's standards.

Interesting thoughts. But every student in every class deserves to be taught the best music to give them an equal chance at musical improvement. Is there evidence that a simplified approach to learn academic music is a bad thing? My view is that methods that are 100% proven to improve your playing or understanding of music already exist but some teachers literally think that "you" aren't either capable or willing to learn as literally everyone else in music academics was taught. In other words, you are paying to be taught via and experiment of altered learning because no one knows for sure if this kind of teaching actually works. But we know for certain that the methods that are now being used do teach us music and have done so for a long, long time.

 

[Gorn]

Interesting thoughts. But every student in every class deserves to be taught the best music to give them an equal chance at musical improvement. Is there evidence that a simplified approach to learn academic music is a bad thing? My view is that methods that are 100% proven to improve your playing or understanding of music already exist but some teachers literally think that "you" aren't either capable or willing to learn as literally everyone else in music academics was taught. In other words, you are paying to be taught via and experiment of altered learning because no one knows for sure if this kind of teaching actually works. But we know for certain that the methods that are now being used do teach us music and have done so for a long, long time.

More assertions. Thanks.

 

[JeffBerlin]

They can be demoralised by the shear volume of musical information they need to learn because they're human, and so the first snake-oil seller that walks up to them saying they can learn it in 3-easy-steps is going to catch a fish.

I thought to take this comment as it caught my eye. I've heard this comment before and it bears looking at.

If you are interested in improving as bass players and musicians, then you should be taken seriously and taught this way. There is good news to think about: All that one has to deal with is this week's lesson. No one needs to think about the sheer volume of musical information because this isn't what I am talking about, that players have to know what I know or what someone more serious about music than me might know. If you go to a school or a teacher, then you clearly want to know more about music than you already do. To those that do, I say, BRAVO! Your teacher (if they really are capable in their job) has to help you to raise your ability, not simplify the task as if you are mentally or emotionally incapable of dealing with a little musical truth each week. For me, this smites of educational stupidity; imagine the teacher trying to dumb down the lesson before the student is even given the assignment.

To end, don't deal with the enormity of music, a subject that I, to this day, am still struggling with. Just insist that both teacher and student be willing to expect the best from each other because, in my opinion, this isn't happening much anymore.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Again with the trolling. Jeff, all learners are different, that's a scientific fact. What's easy for you isn't always for others. Teaching isn't about watering things down, it's about finding what works for the student. Once they get rolling everything tends to fall into place, if it doesn't the student doesn't get the grade because they couldn't show mastery. Bass playing and music in general is no different, either you master it or you don't...how you get there is up to you, not someone declaring everyone else is incorrect on their approach.

I don't have a problem with working with a student and I think that you are correct that teachers should do this. I have a problem with dumbing down musical information and letting students run the lesson.

If everyone, you included, was taught how to read and write the same way, then what suddenly changed with adult men and women in music who, according to you, are so different that they are incapable of being taught music the same way?

 

[JeffBerlin]

Have you ever taught beginner bass lessons? I Have. Students are impatient. They want to know everything now. They want to be able to play their favorite bass line NOW. In fact, they have little or no interest in knowing WHY that bass line was written the way it was, or how it fits into the rest of the chord structure. So part of the reason they want the quick and dirty version is that they don't CARE about the how or why. Just show me the what....aka shutup and teach me my favorite bass parts.

"Forget the fundamentals. Forget technique. Forget theory. I need to be able to play Red Hot Chilli Peppers Roller Coaster for my friends by TUESDAY!!!"

Haha! Yep! You have quite a job trying to get young players to realize the priorities in learning.

This next statement is just my opinion.

Anyone that comes to me to learn has to do it my way. Of course I explain my reasons and try to get them to see the logic of being taught correctly. But, it comes down to a choice; do I want their money or do I want to EARN their money by giving them what they need, not what they want. I'm the teacher, not them. I don't hire a plumber to fix my sink and then tell him/her how to do the job. I run the show, and lucky for them that I do. This is a lesson and I am supposed to be the expert. But, on another subject, bass teachers don't seem to do this anymore which explains why bass players aren't playing well. Frankly, if I were a consumer seeking musical improvement, I would aim toward the moon seeking the best music teacher I could find because even if I hit about tree level, I'm still aiming higher than many who pay for lessons and who sadly won't improve their playing from them.

 

[Sneakyfish]

If everyone, you included, was taught how to read and write the same way, then what suddenly changed with adult men and women in music who, according to you, are so different that they are incapable of being taught music the same way?

I agree in principal, it shouldn't on paper really be that different. I have one thought though. Mostly we learned these skills as children (excluding the multi-lingual for 1 second). I'm curious as to how do you reconcile this with some of your earlier comments that adults do not learn in the same way as children? Do you mean that we learned these skills in a formalised environment i.e. school, and so an adult should be able to do the same if not better? With greater dedication?

 

[JeffBerlin]

Haha! Yep! You have quite a job trying to get young players to realize the priorities in learning.

This next statement is just my opinion.

Anyone that comes to me to learn has to do it my way. Of course I explain my reasons and try to get them to see the logic of being taught correctly. But, it comes down to a choice; do I want their money or do I want to EARN their money by giving them what they need, not what they want. I'm the teacher, not them. I don't hire a plumber to fix my sink and then tell him/her how to do the job. I run the show, and lucky for them that I do. This is a lesson and I am supposed to be the expert. But, on another subject, bass teachers don't seem to do this anymore which explains why bass players aren't playing well. Frankly, if I were a consumer seeking musical improvement, I would aim toward the moon seeking the best music teacher I could find because even if I hit about tree level, I'm still aiming higher than many who pay for lessons and who sadly won't improve their playing from them.

Oh, P.S. I am not of the mindset that it is my job to keep students motivated to learn music. I surely share my enthusiasm for learning with them. But, even as kids, there was the group of us that simply could not live without great musical instruction. They have to "want it" more than they do, and I encourage people to look inward for the spark that should come from them, not their teacher.

 

[JeffBerlin]

I agree in principal, it shouldn't on paper really be that different. I have one thought though. Mostly we learned these skills as children (excluding the multi-lingual for 1 second). I'm curious as to how do you reconcile this with some of your earlier comments that adults do not learn in the same way as children? Do you mean that we learned these skills in a formalised environment i.e. school, and so an adult should be able to do the same if not better? With greater dedication?

Great question! I meant that children learn differently than adults in that the lesson/lecture offered by Victor Wooten that we should learn music as a child learns language doesn't apply the same way for people 16 and up because our physical brain doesn't work the same. But, college classes are filled with 19 year olds and up, all learning the same material and learning it the same way, buy studying it. So, it can be done if someone is motivated to learn correctly

 

[JeffBerlin]

If you want to learn in your own way then study yourself. If you decide to enter into academia, knowing what that entails, why complain when you're met with traditional academic methods of instruction?

Well said!