LarryUK Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I've just watched a video of a highly respected player (not saying his name). He's 59 now and has studied jazz and classical. The video made me cringe. His vibrato was awful and he had no taste at all in my opinion. So, the question is. Does all the training make you good or is the guitar best in the hands of a soulful player? My opinion is that training helps. But all the training in the world won't give you taste. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EpiphoneFan1989 Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I think, if somebody wants to be good, he can it learn with many motivation and joy. But the talent will have the most influence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlie brown Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Training helps get you the technique(s), provided you have the necessary talent, too. "Taste," like talent, is (somewhat) more innate...IMHO. You either have it, or you don't. And, it's somewhat subjective, too...depending on the listener's own preferences, as well. There are some "well known" guitarists, that I can't really get all that interested in, because of their "own styles," and other's, that I really enjoy, that some other people don't, at all. So...??? To me, George Harrison, BB King, and Eric Clapton, are all very "tasteful" players. They all did/do more, with less, than a lot of folks. There are other's as well...I always liked Ritchie Blackmore, in his "Deep Purple" days, especially, because he had taste, but a very unique (at the time) "style," as well...that was unlike any one else, back then. So, I think it's a culmination, really, of many factors. CB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I've just watched a video of a highly respected player (not saying his name). He's 59 now and has studied jazz and classical. The video made me cringe. His vibrato was awful and he had no taste at all in my opinion. So, the question is. Does all the training make you good or is the guitar best in the hands of a soulful player? My opinion is that training helps. But all the training in the world won't give you taste. "in my opinion" you answered your own question realy... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Training or schooling alone will never make a player good. But that goes for doctors, lawyers, plumbers, and electricians, too. Adversely, all the heart and soul in the world won't help you navigate the fret board. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dallastx Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Training or schooling alone will never make a player good. But that goes for doctors, lawyers, plumbers, and electricians, too. Adversely, all the heart and soul in the world won't help you navigate the fret board. I picked up my first guitar when I was 5. Took 2 years of guitar lessons when I was 10. Took music theory in Highschool. I learned more on my own jamming with and watching other guitarists. D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS44 Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 The way I look at it is, to be an incredible musician, you must be both talented and dedicated (to the study of your chosen art). All the knowledge in the world can't make up for having little to no talent or, if you prefer, a natural affinity for it (and conversely talent won't immediately make you an incredible musician). You can't learn talent, but (imo) you gather your own taste as you grow. Taste is something that insinuates itself into your music, you're not born with it, nor can learn it per se. I find it is the culmination of the music, even literature (and a score of other influences) that hits home to you. Taste... in a sense, is your personality in notes (doesn't capture what I mean exactly). Soul fits in the same category for me, something that becomes part of your music because of you. Love of music, personal strife, etc can all expose themselves in the music. If you feel it in your veins, it's soulful. I'm having some trouble putting it into words again... so I'll leave it at that. Musicianship... comes from an amalgam of elements in one person... dedication, talent, knowledge, passion... the list goes on. I myself just play because it is my one release, I love it in ways words can't express... It's the type of thing, I don't care much how good I am, just so long as I have strings to strum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duende Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 Training isn't what makes a player lack soul - what makes them lack soul (IMHO) is that they simply lacked soul in the first place! :) Learning new things expands your mind and creative possibilities; add that to soul and things can get interesting! Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted November 24, 2011 Share Posted November 24, 2011 I picked up my first guitar when I was 5. Took 2 years of guitar lessons when I was 10. Took music theory in Highschool. I learned more on my own jamming with and watching other guitarists. D Going to go out on a limb here, but I'm guessing you're underestimating the foundation your formal training gave you. Note value, beats, understanding of time signatures, chords, and scales. With all that under your belt I'm sure it made it easier to "teach yourself". I'm in complete agreement about jamming with others and watching better guitarists. That's the best way to improve, but improve upon what? Grabbing your guitar without knowing some chords or a scale or what a beat is, or how you interact with the drummer, or what the bass player is doing.....well, one might as well start playing hockey before they know how to skate. I'm 80% self taught, 20% schooling (or some sort of lessons) most of which I learned on trumpet. Without those basics under my belt, I never could have taught myself the level of guitar playing I enjoy now. As with most things in life, it's all about balance. In this case, balancing formal and informal education. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 I don't know who the "highly respected" player might be, but if he's someone we might recognize, somebody must like his pickin'. I've always envied people who have talent at stuff I've wanted to do, and have done. I think anyone with a half decent ear and half decent physical capability can develop skill at music of one style or another and may even be quite "good enough" to make a decent living at it; I think to go beyond that takes something ... else. Matt S, for example, to me demonstrates talent, academic knowledge and great skill. Where he's comfortable as a music professional then has to do with other aspects of his mind. I agree with him that those who are "schooled" and lack soul probably didn't have it in the first place, and those with less schooling will still play with soul. Those of us who love the instrument and music will play with varying degrees of skill, depending on our work ethic, our inclination and how we're exposed to options in technique. We'll do so with our own variation in talent as best we can. But I'm reminded of a lady friend who had a career in big-name symphony orchestras and who had a far greater talent and far greater skill than ever I could match. She said that in ways she envied me for my own musical career which was at the time playing weekends in saloons and doing occasional festival old-time type stuff. I, she said, could play what I wanted... So there's more than talent and skill - it's all of our life's pathways that become involved. Don't take this as pro or con politics, please. I watched former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice discuss her original life's goal of being a concert pianist and realized at a piano "camp" that she was quite skilled and had a good bit of talent - but not in the same league as those few great talents of each generation who truly make it. So... she still plays her piano, but took her life other directions. Bill Clinton wasn't a bad sax player, but didn't take it into a profession; nor did Mike Huckabee the bass, nor Harry Truman the piano or... <grin> EDIT: Just reread Firstmeasure. I think he's right in that we often fail to realize how important our childhood music training helps our guitar pickin' even if, in theory, we're totally self taught. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silenced Fred Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 I forget who said it but it was a jazz musician (might have been Charlie Parker) but it was "learn all you can then forget all that bullshit and just play". Stuck with me quite a bit Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The RandyMan Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Passion (or "soul") = you "feel" what you hear in a way that makes you automatically react in some way to what you've heard Ability = either a natural tendency to learn instinctively, or to learn through mimicry or teaching (self-taught or taught by others, formally or informally) Passion + no ability = Bad Ability + no passion = Bad Passion + ability = the power to put feeling into what you play = Good Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
McDuff Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 A player needs a lot of heart skill soul and a plethora of other things to really be successful but I refuse to believe that those things can not be won throughout your life.I can not play the blues to save my life really but the reason I chose the name I did is because it is what I want to grow into. I have no innate musical talent but everyday I try and get a little better than I was the day before. I wont believe that you are either born with "it" or you have all ready failed because that would kill my only dream and I am far to young to let that go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
awel Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Training isn't what makes a player lack soul - what makes them lack soul (IMHO) is that they simply lacked soul in the first place! :) Learning new things expands your mind and creative possibilities; add that to soul and things can get interesting! Matt I agree with Matt, there are a lot of people that's hiding behind that kind of thought, but learning new technics and theory only expends your playground, if you're a a soulfull and tasty players, this wouldn't change a thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 I forget who said it but it was a jazz musician (might have been Charlie Parker) but it was "learn all you can then forget all that bullshit and just play". Stuck with me quite a bit Truthful but misleading quote. The problem is, most folks don't get the first part of that quote. They don't learn all they can, they blindly noodle around the fretboard convinced they're better off not knowing what their doing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duende Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 Truthful but misleading quote. The problem is, most folks don't get the first part of that quote. They don't learn all they can, they blindly noodle around the fretboard convinced they're better off not knowing what their doing. I agree - it is often interpreted that way - I think what Charlie Parker meant was the 'full circle' that occurs in learning; i.e you work very hard learning as much as possible, then - when you are ready (and that knowledge has become a part of you), you 'forget' it ('forget' as in being aware that is there in your subconscious - and you don't have to consciously think about it anymore) and just play! Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FirstMeasure Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 I agree - it is often interpreted that way - I think what Charlie Parker meant was the 'full circle' that occurs in learning; i.e you work very hard learning as much as possible, then - when you are ready (and that knowledge has become a part of you), you 'forget' it ('forget' as in being aware that is there in your subconscious - and you don't have to consciously think about it anymore) and just play! Matt Exactly, it's internalized and becomes autonomic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShredAstaire Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Four_stages_of_competence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milod Posted November 25, 2011 Share Posted November 25, 2011 It's the same as in other psychophysical material. Whether it's tennis or soccer or guitar playing, one learns the game and develops the skills - and at some point simply plays. m Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobB Posted November 26, 2011 Share Posted November 26, 2011 Training is a good thing, but the emotion has to come from the player. If there is no emotion, the playing will be dry and mechanical. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.