mcgraham

[quote]to respond to another of your observations, classical music is just as knowledge based as jazz, but the emphasis is on performance, and the ability to reproduce flawlessly, which good classical musicians can do to stunning degrees. I have met and played with all types of musicians and in my view each has their merits.[/quote] I would perhaps submit that classical musicians, whilst immensely knowledgeable about a great deal more than just theory, do not endeavour to improve their ability to improvise or create pieces by application of this knowledge, as it really isn't a needed skill (outside of those who are classical composers) I'm not saying that classical musicians are not creative, nor lazy, but whilst a portion of [i]our[/i] time is split (ideally) between technical ability, writing/creativity/improv or whatever 'area' you wish to call it, and performance, they just do not have the need to practice the middle one. This allows them a lot more time to work on their technique, history of music and performance (amongst other things). Something my classically trained friend once told me has always quite intrigued me. He finds jazz music listenable, but boring. If I paraphrase him correctly, I think he implied that he prefers actual pieces; when I asked him about soloes or interludes, be it intricate or lyrical, he pointed out that you get to hear amazingly complex and beautiful 'soloes' and lyrical phrases in classical music, above and beyond a great deal of improvised music. Quite an interesting viewpoint to have! Although I think he missed out the 'fun' part in improvising and having no idea where it's going when you're watching. That is something I love about music in general, specifically improvised though as you know it's being made up on the spot (more or less ) Mark

[quote]I made this regular guitar into a legend. This guitar will play anything that puts out a standard rca output signal such as a playstation, vcr, dvd player, and more.[/quote] For entertaining the entertainers! Mark

[quote]Technique is not speed, it's not "stunt bass" ability (whatever that is), it's not something that should get in the way of the music. Technique - TRUE TECHNIQUE - is the ability to express yourself without hinderance.[/quote] Amen to that. I find it wonderful to have developed technique. When I wish to demonstrate something, transcribe something, or I hear something, or even just want to jam or noodle, with others or by myself, I have little to no difficulty executing it. Practicing technique in this way means that you almost anticipate difficult pieces that you will play in the future, rather than getting there and finding you can't do it and need to go away and practice, you get there and it just happens. Man I want to go home and play! Mark

It's alright guys! Lets not descend into a debate over what has already been said. 7string, I see your point about not writing it with Janek in mind and I agree, not particularly mature to colour things like that to appear like a suck up. But I [i]do[/i] think it's important to ensure that we phrase our posts such that if the person we are writing about did read them then they could take something from it. Not saying they have to like our opinion, but if you are honest and objective about what you like and don't like it'll help significantly. I did have more written out but it's too offtopic and would only serve to confuse my point. dlloyd and bigd1, 16ths at 800bpm really would be impossible! I can understand confusion at that. Mark

The guy who did that first one has watched waaaay too much Pimp my Ride. Mark

Perhaps. If I'm honest, I think that we (collectively) handled this whole situation rather poorly. I don't believe Bigd1 was out of line posting what he did, in fact I think it's good to hear such opinions. However I don't believe that we (collectively) posted with care or consideration. A number of posts carried an air/tone if you will, similar to the tone you would take if you were speaking about someone behind their back i.e. without care or thought towards how it was worded or how it could be said objectively and constructively. It wasn't [i]really[/i] a thread devoted to constructive criticism or reasoned debate. It was as if we never expected Janek to read this, which really isn't cool on a number of levels. I'm not saying we shouldn't share our opinions about articles or the like, or even voice our personal feelings on such matters, but I don't believe there was the respect due to even a normal poster of the board, even neglecting the fact he is someone of great experience and ability. And may I be the first to suggest that we now leave this be? By all means continue the conversation, I'm greatly enjoying it, but lets not look in the direction of where this thread has come from. Mark

[quote]I've just read a few of the threads. Quite funny. It's like one great "Who can suck up to the pro the most" competition over there! Thank God we're all mature enough to question and debate things in an open forum over here, without attempting to perform a lewd act on the pros.[/quote] Whilst I wouldn't go [i]quite[/i] that far, or even in that general region (no jokes please!) I have to admit I was more than a little unimpressed at how quickly the forumites who responded there started slagging off this forum for something that, yes, may have been offensive and got slightly out of hand at moments, but was still to some extent being discussed. I mentioned this to someone in a conversation the other day, TB never felt like a place I felt welcome to post. It always felt like people were there to say 'well IIII think this...', and never really got a community spirit going. I have to say, I feel like BC is a wonderful community and I really did want to post that here after the slagging over there. I know BC is virtual and it's no substitute for the real world, but gosh darn it, you guys make me feel welcome. It always feels like people here genuinely want to hear your opinion, share theirs, and discuss it as friends would. Props to you all! Mark

[quote]Just out of interest, how many people here have taken the time to visit Janek's forum on talkbass.com to read about his own history and background and thoughts on music?[/quote] I checked it out when he first got his own forum, found a lot of his thoughts very insightful, I agree with almost everything he's said that can be agreed with (beyond personal revelations and the like). Learn from other people's insights and others mistakes, great (and cheap!) way to learn. [quote]I found them here... [url="http://www.sheetmusicarchive.net/single_li...m?composer_id=7"]http://www.sheetmusicarchive.net/single_li...m?composer_id=7[/url] I'll give them a shot and see what happens...[/quote] dlloyd, if you like I can forward on a bit of spiel on how I found those exercises worked best that I emailed to those who asked me for a copy of those exercises. Just drop me a PM or message here if you'd like it. Mark

[quote]On the subject of theory versus creativity: one of the guitarists in my band is technically fantastic. He knows all the theory, loads of weird scales/modes etc etc and practices at least four hours a day (even if that means getting up at 5 in the morning to get a couple of hours in before he starts work!) and can play super fast and super clean. Theres no doubt that he knows what hes doing....... BUT he overcooks things sometimes. We play pretty basic old school rock/metal and he'll often be soloing and throw in these weird and 'clever' scales but they'll sound wrong in the context of the song despite being technically correct. He doesn't understand when we tell him that it sounds wrong though because 'technically' what he's playing IS correct. Its one example where perhaps using his ears instead of his theory and listening to whats going on around him would work better. The other guitarist on the other hand comes from a more bluesy kinda background with much less technical know how and his solos are always much more creative. Personally i do like alot of technical stuff but for me, there does have to be equal parts creativity. Many of these solo bass virtuoso albums etc do seem quite sterile in a way. As for practicing 10 hrs a day, I don't think i could go that far. I used to do 3 or 4 hrs practice when i had the time but these days its perhaps 1 or 2 at most.[/quote] You've pretty much said it, there needs to be a balance between technical ability and creative vision. When the two are married together well you get a musician that can fit into an uncountable number of styles with great ease. Without the technical ability there is an impairment to the execution of creative ideas; without creativity there is a severe lack of substance to what such a musician produces; and without a balanced combination of the two you get musicians who don't lack the above, but just do not listen and the ego and/or pride that comes with acknowledged talent starts to cloud things... at least in my experience, and I know I've fallen victim to that mentality many a time. About practicing that many hours a day, I often don't make a conscious choice to do so. I've been known to start on something at x oclock and the next time I look at the clock it's x + n oclock (I think the most I've ever done was 6 like that). I then usually realise I need to stop before I burst my bladder or suffer from malnutrition. Mark

[quote]Well, by practicing semi-quavers at 400 bpm you will actually distort the space-time continuum and time will appear to stand still to you and all your relatives (wasn't that what Einstein said ?)[/quote] Paraphrasing.... but more or less.... Mark

You should always make time for practice, that's why I practice for 7 hours between 6pm and 10pm when I get in from work Mark

If it's the Hanon exercises and similar exercises he's advocated on TalkBass, I've already used them to great effect. Trust me, they really work. Get a few of them under your belt! You won't regret it. Mark

[quote]But how do you practice creativity? Surely you have to get out and play with others and learn to weave lines around other players. It's great having the technical side, but if you can't play with other players it's all meaningless[/quote] I'm afraid that's not something I can quantitatively answer. It's where the science of practice meets the art of creativity. I for one like to use creativity to master my technical ability. For example, one idea I like to use is that I create pieces, progressions, rhythms etc that make very little sense and perhaps sound very angular or bizarre, then try to make musical sense of them such that something 'awful' becomes something lyrical and musical. It breaks down barriers you've erected from too much theory and forces your ear and brain to hear and think of something new. It also adds to your repertoire and your own voice. Try it yourself! I also agree with the get out and play aspect too. Playing with other musicians is wonderful, unfortunately I meet fewer and fewer who wish to improve with the same fervour I have. Most reach a plateau of comfort, complacency or just due to time constraints. Means I get bored and frustrated (every so often) with musicians who lack the the ability to play something, but also lack the vision to bring out new ideas i.e. creativity. The two are linked in some bizarre way, they complement each other, but they seem to be at odds in so many musicians... Alas. Mark

[quote]Complete agreement here.[/quote] Thanks

[quote]For those who think I'm saying "practice is wrong" - I'm not at all[/quote] It's alright BBC, I never got the impression you thought that. I do think you have a valid point about technical ability posing a threat to creativity. It is very easy to think that because you [i]can[/i] play x notes per second over x different scales that you [i]have[/i] to do so. Is that at least one aspect of the point you're making? I would say that is an entirely real and plausible issue we face as improving musicians. However, I would like to point out that technical ability on its own is transparent; it is not creative, it is not egotistical, it is not proud, it's just ability. So I would submit that purely technical players don't lack creativity because of their technical prowess, they just lack creativity (in at least the pieces they choose to play or have written); those that play overindulgently don't play that way because of their ability to play overindulgent stuff, it's due to ego and pride. Do you see what I'm suggesting? Taking that one step further, it is entirely fair to say practicing [i]only[/i] technical aspects will leave you as an unbalanced and perhaps uncreative player. You need to practice creativity too. However, to say that you should not practice such elements for fear of losing creativity is a very very poor excuse. Technical ability combined with a creative player can produce truly stupendous works of musical art. That is something I want to strive for and think is worth striving for. Mark

It is very good to practice things you can't do, that's how you get better. [i]However[/i], if you only discover things you can't do when you're actually practicing with a band or in performance, it's too late by that point to get it down for that gig or practice. The purpose in practicing difficult pieces and exercises above and beyond what you would be called to play on a daily basis is so that whatever you come across in band practice or performance, whether rehearsed or improvised, you don't need to go away and woodshed on it before you can do it. That is one key purpose of personal practice, to prepare you for performance. I appreciate that some of you may be happy with woodshedding something [i]after[/i] you find you couldn't do it in a practice or gig, but it is an inefficient way to go about practicing your instrument. If you're happy with going about your instrument in that way, fine; if you're like me, you won't be. However please don't try and explain away why it's detrimental to a musician to practice in such a manner, as it is ludicrous to try and do so (IMO). Mark

Picks are awesome, they can give you such a wide variety of tones. Props for trying to get to grips with one. Advice I picked up from a few dedicated guitar students at a local music college was on how to grip the pick correctly (or at least one way that promotes good overall technique). 1) Fold your fingers up (e.g. form a fist, then open your hand but keeping your fingers curled/folded up) 2) You'll notice you have quite a wide flat area on the left side of your index finger (from it being curled/folded up). --> Place the pick flush against that flat portion such that the pointed part sticks out perpendicular to the nail side 3) Cover the pick with your thumb, placing it such that the left edge of your thumb lines up with the left edge of your finger finger --> Where exactly you place your thumb is all down to comfort. I suggest placing your thumb such that the line of the middle join of your thumb matches with the tip of your index finger and try to find a comfortable hold from there. 4) Then relax. You should find your hand will take a more natural relaxed pose but won't be too different from what it was. Tips: Keep your fingers tucked up and don't anchor your fingers. It's much more efficient and keeps you relaxed. You really don't need to anchor either, it will slow down your progress as you'll force yourself to learn different muscle memory movements. Watch Jason Becker to see finger anchoring at its extreme and how uncomfortable it looks (not that I'm attacking his ability, but he sounds/sounded amazing and plays/played amazingly in spite of his technique rather than because of it) Also, let the up and down motion come from the wrist, and don't try and 'muscle' your way to speed. You should always stay as relaxed as possible without losing your grip and dropping your pick. I appreciate it's difficult to understand exactly what I mean by all this just from writing, best of luck you to you! Once you've got the basic mechanics of it you should find it's a lot easier to use a pick. They are a lot easier to start with than perhaps fingers and other tools used to make sounds (i.e. bows!) Mark

[quote]And while you were listening to him, did he "create" anything that could be appreciated by a non-bass player?[/quote] I realise you've clarified your point, I just wanted to point out (slightly offtopic) that I've often whacked on his earlier CD in the car when my Mum has been there, and she's really liked it. Her musical taste and CD collection normally sits somewhere between Scissor Sisters and Tom Jones *scream*. Same has occurred with Marcus Miller, Joe Satriani (DVD's and CD's), I think I even had the Manring, Carbonne and DiPiazza CD on once and she dug them to varying degrees. Similar things have happened with numerous other artists and numerous other friends and acquaintances. I often handle music at people's/friends parties and I get at least 5-10 people asking me who's playing and where they can get a copy of their music. 9/10 it's no-one they've heard of or would ever find in any mainstream music in any continent. Considering a lot of musician's narrow-mindedness, I'm almost inclined to think that it's those that *know* about music, who are least capable of learning about music. It's my 'musically inept' friends who are most open to listening to different types of music, from super basic to extreme virtuoso. I take a leaf out of their book there. Mark

[quote]But personally I find that technical ability and making music I enjoy are often poles apart[/quote] Totally disagree with you. Technical ability (i.e. proficiency) does not mean that whatever level you are at then you ALWAYS max out your ability i.e. you play 2000npm in 13/8 over a constantly shifting key centre and play only outside notes because you can; although I will concede that a number of musicians feel the need to throw out everything they've got all the time. What technical ability does mean is that you CAN play the above, or whatever level you are at. I work very hard on my technique so that I never find things (or rather mitigate the number of things) that I am not technically able to do at a large range of tempos, time signatures, keys, styles, feels... you name it. Technical ability is intended to open up the road to musical expression, not to block it off. I do see your point, or at least what you've been driving at, however I willingly recognise that if one is happy with where one is at, or at least partially satisfied with their level of musical ability and the outlet for that ability, then it would make sense why they would see little reason or need to improve or try or seek out new things that they cannot do. Mark

+1 I occasionally pop into Smiths to see what is featured in music mags, not necessarily bass, but unfortunately it never seems to interest me. It doesn't help that I scour the internet for useful articles on music, theory, technique, interviews etc anyway, and I've found many useful articles (and infinitely more useless articles than that!) that have been more instrumental (no pun intended) in helping me improve and inspiring me. Of all things I wish I could see more of, it'd be a greater diversity of lessons from other types of instrumentalist with more qualitative lessons that have various levels of application rather than just for the beginning punk bassist or just for the advanced jazz muso. I fully believe it'd help create more rounded musicians, although I admit that I have completely ignored this from a sales perspective. Mark

I'm with Ped on this one, great idea, I think it looks MUCH better than any other sliding pickup design, but it would be set and forget after a day or two of fiddling. Thinking about it, it may be advantageous to use that in conjunction with fanned frets, that way the effect would be more similar to that of the sliding pickup design. Thinking about people who use ramps and whatnot, the Line6 variax (in all it's simulated glory) allows you to 'slide' a pickup to achieve 'any' sound you want. That's a pretty nifty feature whilst still being able to have a ramp in your favourite place, if you like the sounds of course. Mark

I don't mind too much, although most stages I've played on I tend to end up stage right. I usually position myself so that I can see everyone else and communicate with them. Mark

What a pain in the ass! The system requirements for Mac are OS 10.4 and 1.25GHz G4, I have neither. Balls to it I say, balls! Mark