Jeff Berlin's thought about learning (if this is in your interest to do.)

[JeffBerlin]

Hello to everyone interested in improving your bass playing. It gives me pleasure to share my thoughts about how to improve your playing if this is something that you seek to do.

I am rather different from other bass players that teach as I have been taught by the finest music teachers in the world since age five, right into my adult life. Plus, I researched for a long time how other instruments are taught and learned. From both my musical academic background and looking into teaching outside of the electric bass academic area , I arrived to the conclusion that most of what is being taught to bass players are flawed concepts. We can discuss these things for people to decide if they agree or not.

I recognize that being controversial seems to pop up when I state my thoughts. Bu realize that little to nothing that I share are controversial at all in how other instrumentalists are taught. Ironically, it is the methods being taught to bass players that don't seem to exist in the teaching of other instruments.

Has anyone else noticed that bass players sometimes confuse fan appreciation with learning? This means that if there are players or schools that are admired, as fans, some bass players are more influenced by their fan appreciation before pondering if what is being taught to them actually creates better bass players. I mean no harm to any institution nor to anyone that teaches. My thoughts are only based in two concepts.

1. Learning is diametrically opposite than playing which means that lessons in playing don't produce positive results.

2. Music has only been taught two ways, by self taught effort and by learning and practicing musical content. In that these two descriptions seem to define (at least here) everyone reading this post, it does put learning into a more narrow point of regard.

Learning well is a topic that is very close to my heart. I owe my career and my musical ability to teachers that taught me what I needed to learn, not what I wanted to learn. If you feel like chatting about this, you all are welcome here

 

[ZenG]

I would like it if you could expound in-depth on:-

" Learning is diametrically opposite than playing which means that lessons in playing don't produce positive results. "

Thank you..

 

[tlc1976]

I would like it if you could expound in-depth on:-
" Learning is diametrically opposite than playing which means that lessons in playing don't produce positive results. "
Thank you..

My take on that is that to learn, you have to break from the comfort zone, slow down, take a step back... Sometimes you can't get better unless you accept that something you are doing could be done a better way.

Playing = practicing the things you learned so you get better. Therefore lessons in playing are just guidelines on how to practice. Which could be useful in the very beginning.

 

[JeffBerlin]

I would like it if you could expound in-depth on:-

" Learning is diametrically opposite than playing which means that lessons in playing don't produce positive results. "

Thank you..

Sure!

Learning is the regard of new or reviewed musical information. Learning is always best done out of time to give players a chance to learn new music and how to play it.

Playing is an in-time spontaneous execution of music already learned. Everyone reading this knows that they don't have to think too much about how to play the songs that they've already learned how to perform.

What has happened is that bass education seems focused on the "doing" rather than the "learning" of playing. People know my views about metronomes. This is why I see them as a detriment to learning, because the click is the priority, not the music being learned. It is hard to learn when keeping up takes precedence over learning where to put one's fingers or what the correct notes are.

Learning is 180 degrees opposite from playing which makes performance lessons similar to putting the horse before the cart, at least in a situation of being taught how to play. This is one reason why I feel that players interested in improving their playing and who go to schools or teachers or take the advise of top bass instructors aren't receiving instruction even remotely close to the kind of instruction that nearly all other instrumentalists are taught by.

 

[BAG]

People know my views about metronomes. I see them as a detriment to learning because the click is the priority, not the music being learned. It is hard to learn when the job of keeping up takes precedence over learning.

No wonder your thoughts are controversial here on TB. I couldn't count the amount of times I've read people say "practice with a metronome" as though its a gospel truth.

I tend to practice scales etc alone and then try and see how i can apply it playing along with songs i know or backing tracks. The other way i work is by listening to, and working out how to play, lines that i hear and like and then working out why they work and how theory applies to it. Definitely not a normal learning system but it's been working for me.

 

[JeffBerlin]

No wonder your thoughts are controversial here on TB. I couldn't count the amount of times I've read people say "practice with a metronome" as though its a gospel truth.

I tend to practice scales etc alone and then try and see how i can apply it playing along with songs i know or backing tracks. The other way i work is by listening to, and working out how to play, lines that i hear and like and then working out why they work and how theory applies to it. Definitely not a normal learning system but it's been working for me.

It might help to see if one can find an answer to this question: In the learning of any subject, what subject is learned "in time?" For example, if one learns how to drive, are new driving students encouraged to learn how to drive in the varied real tempos of traffic? Or are they guided to places in order to drive slowly and "out of time" of how real driving functions.

Or, if one is taught to swim, are swimming students taught to swim "in time" as capable swimmers do, or are they told to practice certain swimming concepts in the shallow part of a pool where they have time to learn and feel what it is like to keep one's head out of the water.

See what I mean?

Thus, thinking along the line of learning other things, not performing them, can you or others name subjects that are taught and practiced in the time tempo of how these subjects function? If one cannot, then, exceptions aside, shouldn't bass be learned as everything else appears to be learned?

Let me know what you come up with. Then we can chat further about this.

P.S. Are you sitting down? Scales are not meant to be applied to live music. Practically nothing of what we practice actually is applicable.

 

[Nev375]

So, if I understand what you are saying, metronomes are a terrible thing for the "learning" phase, but an acceptable thing for the "playing" phase?

Or are you saying that metronomes have no important role in music in your opinion?

 

[Groove Doctor]

I was taught to play the correct notes first, then add the rhythm last when learning Piano, Euphonium and Voice at school. Later on I learned Bass the same way. Never taught with or even owned a metronome for years!!

I bought a metronome 8 years later when learning/perfecting 3-finger technique, working on crazy speed drills, and fine tuning complex musical passages. I've rarely used one in the last 25 years.

 

[Lee Moses]

Jeff, longtime admirer of your playing here. You were one of my key influences in my formative years, and still provide a clear but distant target for which I'm still shooting. So glad to see you here.

Now let me be the one to ask you to expound:

Scales are not meant to be applied to live music. Practically nothing of what we practice actually is applicable.

You have said a little bit about your second sentence, but I am curious to hear more when you have a chance. And what do you mean by your first sentence? I can't imagine walking or soloing with no knowledge of or familiarity with scales.

Thanks!

 

[JeffBerlin]

So, if I understand what you are saying, metronomes are a terrible thing for the "learning" phase, but an acceptable thing for the "playing" phase?

Or are you saying that metronomes have no important role in music in your opinion?

In my opinion, they don't fulfill the goal that people seem to attribute to them; they won't help players to obtain a better sense of their own ability to play in time because time doesn't come from a box that clicks and neither speeds up nor slows down. Time is something else entirely, an ability to feel subdivided rhythm. I've never quite understood how bass players arrived to the belief that time could only be arrived at by practicing with a metronome. Musically, this makes no sense.

 

[Intenzity]

A very informative thread.

For instance, today I learned that banned doesn't mean what I thought it meant.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Jeff, longtime admirer of your playing here. You were one of my key influences in my formative years, and still provide a clear but distant target for which I'm still shooting. So glad to see you here.

Now let me be the one to ask you to expound:



You have said a little bit about your second sentence, but I am curious to hear more when you have a chance. And what do you mean by your first sentence? I can't imagine walking or soloing with no knowledge of or familiarity with scales.

Thanks!

Sure! Here are my thoughts. I hope that they make clear my ideas and that they are helpful for you.

Scales are a sequence of notes representing a melodic sound.

Soloing is a manner of playing that removes a player from the role of support musician and allows him/her to be featured as they expand on melody and rhythm.

Scales are a limited harmonic concept. If you imagine my using a limited number of words to write this post instead of the freer and more fully communicative use of English, I wouldn't be able to express my thoughts very well. It is a similar thing with scales. Plus, (and this might seem rather shocking) learning scales was never about soloing on them. In fact, little that people practice is actually applicable to playing live or recording.

If you refer to anyone that solos on bass, you will find a fractional amount of people that solo on scales. The concept actually is a myth within the bass community. Barely anyone (if anyone at all) ever decided to either apply a scale to their playing or to use one when soloing.

Scales are no more or less important than any other harmonic principle. Identifying them as special is like saying that verbs are more important than adjectives. This makes no sense. See what I mean?

 

[SJan3]

I think I get Jeff's metronome point. Better to understand and physically learn to execute new material 1st. Once learned, apply time and play it. I mean, we can't ignore time or "feel" in this conversation. 2 players can play the same notes and it will most likely "feel" different, owing to the uniqueness of us all. Even if I can execute a specific line, I'm never going to sound like Jeff Berlin. I just don't possess that level of innate talent. But I can play in time. How I feel that time is a variable though. Still, with few exceptions, there is a meter to most music.

 

[Thumb n Fingers]

First off, very happy to have you here on TB and to see you active in discussions. I eagerly await to hear and absorb all I can from you as both a fan and an enthusiastic lifelong student.

I completely agree that metronomes have no place at the start of the learning process. No one sight reading a piece should be expected to instantly be "in time" on their first run through. I believe the initial concentration has to be on how to you get from point A to point Z in the most efficient and effective manner. Particularly with newer players.

You go on to describe time as "an ability to feel subdivided rhythm," and I completely get that, but how do you believe one learns that feel without some kind of rhythmic assistance? I can assume you mean the feel of playing with others and the organic creation of music, but I'm not sure that was where you were headed. A new student, with no preconceived notions of "time," will struggle to hold a tempo and keep a bass line as needed/intended/recognizable without some training vessel to do so. I'm wide open on this topic, so please don't assume I disagree. But I am very curious as to where you are heading with this.

P.S. Are you sitting down? Scales are not meant to be applied to live music.

I agree regarding scales. Two points I'll make, and maybe they are valid, but maybe not what you were intending here. (1) learning scales (intervals between notes in particular) was huge for ear development for me. I assume others as well. (2) as a visual learner, in a largely aural world, I found that learning scales all over the fingerboard (in all sorts of patterns - the visual learning part for me) in my early development allowed me "know" the fingerboard and quickly figure out the best positioning (I hate that term, though) and movements on whatever I am playing.

Finally, (and sorry for the long post), I'm curious as to what you mean by "Practically nothing of what we practice actually is applicable." I can see where a lot of what we tend to practice, especially in the formative, early days, doesn't directly correlate to actual performance. But I'm also of the mindset that everything we ever do on a bass (or other instrument) has some applicable value to it, albeit some far more than others. It's all about what we can develop to a next step from whatever we are practicing.

 

[ZenG]

Sure!

Learning is the regard of new or reviewed musical information. Learning is always best done out of time to give players a chance to learn new music and how to play it.

Playing is an in-time spontaneous execution of music already learned. Everyone reading this knows that they don't have to think too much about how to play the songs that they've already learned how to perform.

What has happened is that bass education seems focused on the "doing" rather than the "learning" of playing. People know my views about metronomes. This is why I see them as a detriment to learning, because the click is the priority, not the music being learned. It is hard to learn when keeping up takes precedence over learning where to put one's fingers or what the correct notes are.

Learning is 180 degrees opposite from playing which makes performance lessons similar to putting the horse before the cart, at least in a situation of being taught how to play. This is one reason why I feel that players interested in improving their playing and who go to schools or teachers or take the advise of top bass instructors aren't receiving instruction even remotely close to the kind of instruction that nearly all other instrumentalists are taught by.

Thanks..

I see where you're coming from on metronomes (or for that matter, digital drum machines too I guess). A click track isn't going teach a person much musically except how to play along to a click track.

I get that one needs to "feel" the groove. It may be harder 'live' to accurately keep locked with a drummer who is all over the map tempo-wise.

Do you feel that metronomes or drum machines are a waste of time to improve strictly 'timing' chops?

 

[JeffBerlin]

Thumb n Fingers asked, "how do you believe one learns that feel without some kind of rhythmic assistance?

Jeff answered: Music itself is created in part, with rhythm. Everyone has seen musicians tapping their foot or bobbing up and down in some kind of version of 4/4. A quarter note is practically everyone's musical legacy; even non-musicians can clap in time while dancing The Chicken Dance at a wedding or while singing in church.

Reading and counting music that you are reading cuts straight into where good time actually comes from (other than one's natural proclivity and history of playing.) It is THE best manner to improve your musical thing because every bit of extraneous fat is cut off, leaving only pitch, rhythm, one's bass and the bass player him/herself. Totally perfection and everyone improves in time this way.


Thumb n Fingers asked,I'm curious as to what you mean by "Practically nothing of what we practice actually is applicable."

Jeff answered: Great question! I was referring to musical content that we practice, scales, approach notes, etc.

Somehow, the notion of learning and the notion of playing got put together. But these are separate items and shouldn't be regarded in the same way. When players state a wish to apply scales to music (which I assume would be songs or original music) a misconception took place. While there might be scale notes that can be identified in your music, your music probably wasn't written using scales. Example: Practically the whole melody of Hey Jude is written on a basic major scale. But Paul McCartney didn't apply a scale to write it. See what I am saying?

Bass players have unfortunately distorted what learning how to play really is; It is the regard of new music that teaches us both the function of music and our improvement as bass players as we practice these ideas on the bass. There practically is no actual known use of scales in music that bass players either play or write. True, it happens! But the intention for using scales is to learn them. Application of music in art isn't the goal! Learning them is.

 

[JeffBerlin]

Thanks..

I see where you're coming from on metronomes (or for that matter, digital drum machines too I guess). A click track isn't going teach a person much musically except how to play along to a click track.

I get that one needs to "feel" the groove. It may be harder 'live' to accurately keep locked with a drummer who is all over the map tempo-wise.

Do you feel that metronomes or drum machines are a waste of time to improve strictly 'timing' chops?

Yes! You and I don't know each other, but if we met, I could show you that you already have excellent time in you. What you MIGHT not have is the musical knowledge or experience to demonstrate this. This is what great practicing provides you, a way to improve.

P.S. (I will write this in Caps) LEARNING CORRECTLY IS NOT A REPLACEMENT FOR ANYTHING THAT ANYONE DOES ON THEIR BASS THAT GIVES THEM PLEASURE. LEARNING CORRECTLY IS AN ADDITION TO YOUR MUSICAL DAY AND IT WILL MAKE EVERYONE READING THIS A MUCH BETTER BASS PLAYER STARTING WITHIN THREE MONTHS OR SO!

 

[somebrains]

AWS streams live coding sessions on Twitch. Twitch
Recordings go to YouTube for those that can't make it.

They aren't the only vendor that helps people in tech get up to speed, but they were the first to do it this way.
What I was taught in school isn't relevant to tech, but all the music I learned from elementary school - high school is relevant.

Music doesn't deprecate entire bodies of thought, bodies of thought are a basis for continual learning.

Continual learning is always a worthy pursuit.

 

[JeffBerlin]

The most distinct violation in my view that has taken place in learning how to play is the emphasis on groove. I really feel that there is a negative legacy by stressing this point as much as it is stressed, certainly in how the bass is being taught. I see it as the close sibling to the metronome; a focus on performance instead of learning how to play seems to be the central theme in how the bass is taught. I find this an erroneous concept and would be happy to discuss this with people if this is your interest.

 

[Thumb n Fingers]

Music itself is created in part, with rhythm. Everyone has seen musicians tapping their foot or bobbing up and down in some kind of version of 4/4. A quarter note is practically everyone's musical legacy; even non-musicians can clap in time while dancing The Chicken Dance at a wedding or while singing in church.

OK. So I follow that music is at least partially rhythmically created. I think more of what I was alluding to is how would you (you!) teach rhythm to someone without some example to follow or practice along with? Or was that not your intention at all? Perhaps you're saying developing a sense of "time" or "rhythm" is best learned in an organic performance environment where tempo is not necessarily a hard, but more often flexible, constant?