The Rise & rise of the mechanistic 'Music school'

[Davemarks]

[quote name='composer' post='117628' date='Jan 10 2008, 09:17 AM']perhaps alternatives to the education were talking about may be the answer. like bassmasterclass.com[/quote]

Are we plugging something?

Looks v cool though....

Dave

[nickcarey]

[quote name='silverfoxnik' post='116065' date='Jan 8 2008, 09:09 AM']Hi Folks,

Thanks for taking time to post your thoughts here, some of which have got me thinking about my original post. I kind of agree with Chris's point about this idea of education in the UK becoming ,[i] "..mass market, exploitative and in many cases, pretty much worthless to the student."[/i] and as a teacher, he should know.

One of the things that I find so mystifying about this in an 'Alice in Wonderland' kind of way is that the recent massive growth in music schools/colleges has come at a time when the industry has shrunk to the point where it cannot possibly support all these new competent or brilliant musicians, no matter how much they've been taught how to be 'professional in their playing, their attitude, keep to a diary, learn how to network etc!

My guess is that because there's no real money left in the music biz from record sales that all the new schools/college are and have been created and run by the people who used to be able to eke out a living through being in a signed band situation?

On the other point about creativity, someone said that the really gifted 10% or so will always come shining through and I think that's fair to say.. As it is about how if you love something you're studying, then you'll do well at it. So, I have definitely taken those positive comments about the music schools on board..

My gut reaction though is that Jimi Hendrix, John Lennon, Elvis, Jaco, The Ox even Mark King for example , would never have even considered going through these type of music schools.. Rather, they would have been too busy getting out there doing it for real each in their own unique way..

Nik[/quote]

I agree with Nik's gut reaction point about how well known bass players developed.

[u]Here is my opinion on the subject:[/u]
I graduated from one of the mentioned Music Schools in the dim and distant past. I went there having played bass since I was in my teens. I think places like BIMM/ACM schools give you some very useful pointers to expand your playing by getting you to study different genres. It is like they give you more tools for your bass 'toolkit'. The only critisim I have of this is that by getting you to focus on many styles it can take the focus off you developing [u]your own [/u][b][/b]unique style. Don't get me wrong I think being a well rounded musician is important, but I left feeling the school did'nt push you enough to develop your own style. At the end of the day I think a producer is more likely to call a bass player back who made a a strong impression with their style rather than someone who can play many styles in a so so way. Considering the famous players, who developed their own style you can recognise them just by listening to them. To me that's more important than being able to play umpteen styles but not have your own distinctive style.

Regarding gear, the school I went to pushed us to be totally rounded musos who could adapt their gear to any gig. I'm not knocking this, but this relates to my point above about having a defined sound. I used to have many basses and amps so I could get many sounds. Today I have one amp and a two basses which are my sound and I feel settled.

I firmly believe in encouraging my students to develop their unique style just like the famous players did. Regarding their gear I suggest the same so they are not constantly trying to perfect their bass and rig around many artists or styles. Once you have found your own style and sound you will feel like you have made a break through and feel much more settled. I don't mean to sound like a buddist about self discovery, but if you go chasing other peoples' styles and gear I don't think you will ever be totally happy with your setup. Believe in yourself.

Sorry about the ranting, i could probably do disseratation on this...

Happy Twanging
Nick

Edited February 21, 2008 by nickcarey

[nickcarey]

[quote name='Beedster' post='116960' date='Jan 9 2008, 01:05 PM']Teaching and performing are two different things. If you want to teach for a profession, your level of technical ability is not all that important, whereas your ability to observe a pupil, to evaluate and identify, to communicate, to motivate, inspire etc are. If you find a school that will train you specifically to be a bass teacher this would likely be a far better route that one which will train you to be a bass performer. They are two different skills.
Chris[/quote]

I could'nt agree with this more. The two are like chalk and cheese. That's why I did my bass course first then 2 years later did my PGCE. I have been taught by some amazing players who can't teach for toffee. Who wants to go to a tutor who just blazes through some incredible bass licks on their bass and makes you feel de-motivated afterwards because you feel leaving humble.

Beedster is so right. Teaching is the complete opposite where the tutor should bring out the best in students. I am a firm believer in active learning (or 'Experiential Learning') where students go through self discovery guided by the tutor rather than being 'fed' information in a one way process like sitting in a lecture.

Nick

[jakenewmanbass]

I have said this before so excuse me if you've read it already.
I taught at a university and a few FE colleges.

There are some good practices and some great inspirational people in some of those places.
There is also some unmitigated sh*t being droned on by people who can't cut it in the professional world.
And everything inbetween.

None of which is the point.

The point, in my view is this:
Great players, performers, writers, engineers, producers etc etc will make it with or without music college.
The reason they are singularly brilliant places is because it gives those individuals time to get their sh*t together, un-molested by the ravages of commerce, mortgage, bills etc and removes them from the distractions of "real job" needs and wants.

Everybody else will be rewarded to the appropriate standard of their personal achievement, musically or otherwise.

Jake

Edited February 21, 2008 by jakesbass

[Davemarks]

Great players, performers, writers, engineers, producers etc etc will make it with or without music college.
The reason they are singularly brilliant places is because it gives those individuals time to get their sh*t together, un-molested by the ravages of commerce, mortgage, bills etc and removes them from the distractions of "real job" needs and wants.

Everybody else will be rewarded to the appropriate standard of their personal achievement, musically or otherwise.

Jake
[/quote]

Beautifully put.

[jakenewmanbass]

Beautifully put.
[/quote]

Thanks Dave

[Steve Lawson]

A few thoughts - the information you get from a teacher will be held in the balance with the inspiration you get from a teacher. Someone can give you good information about the 'science' of music (diatonic theory and how it maps out on the fingerboard of a bass, the mechanics of reading music, some insight into playing a particular style) while providing nothing in the way of inspiration to find out what it is that you want from music. Or have to give to music.

A good teaching environment, whether private or class, will provide both - teach the rules with an emphasis on breaking them to find your own voice.

Classes have limitations and advantages - you can't expect a bespoke full time course from a university. If you're self-motivated, you could get that kind of information by having intense regular private lessons - I've had students that have had two two-hour lessons a week before now, but were playing pretty much full time in between. The intensity of a college course in a bespoke setting, but without any of the interaction with other students playing their instrument. Fortunately, the players in question were in bands and so were trying it out and finding their way in their own context.

Which reminds me, context is everything. All the mechanics of music mean pretty much nothing without context - every area of music requires a degree of mechanized skill (even songwriting) but also a fair dose of fairy dust to make it work. Analyzing common song forms won't make you write great songs any more than learning how to mix 47 shades of yellow will make you Van Gough, but it does give you a framework and a context into which to pour your passions.

Becoming a unique, creative and inspiring musician is really hard. No college course or teaching can MAKE that happen, however a good creative environment (be that a group of friends, or a band, or a college or a relationship with a teacher) will REMOVE obstacles to where you want to go to, and provide illumination on other possible places you hadn't even thought of.

The same college course will be the perfect environment for one person and a disaster for another, based largely on what they choose to take from it. If you are the kind of person who is motivated by and feeds off interaction with a lot of other musicians in the same boat as you, then college will give you that in a way that private lessons never will. Arguably you could also get it from joining multiple bands and just playing as much as possible, though the 'lessons' will be less focused...

I agree that education is in a pretty disastrous state in the UK. The shift that Beedster highlights, from teaching being an aspirational vocation to become 'what people do when they realise they can't get a job in their chosen field' is awful. It bodes so so badly for the future.

However, I do think that musicians actually fair better than most in this way, precisely because the path to originality, inspiration and finding your voice aren't mechanised, and the inspiration can be found in a whole lot of different environments. I went to one of the first 'rock schools' in the country, in Perth in Scotland, and was deeply deeply inspired by being there. Yes, I had to play the bass parts to crappy 80s pop songs in a lame band with singers that were awful, drummers that couldn't groove, and with no concern given to 'having something to say' or 'playing it like you mean it', but I was still playing, and through that was formulating what it was I wanted to do as a player, what I wanted from music, and where I wanted to go (which at the time had nothing to do with playing solo bass - I was a professional bassist for almost 7 years before I ever did a solo gig)...

I draw on what I learned at college every day, I draw on the inspiration to think, to play, to break rules, to mean something, to be as good as I can be at what I do. There were other people on my course who didn't get any of that from it, who thought it wasn't worth doing. And perhaps that comes back to the idea that if you're going to do it, you're going to do it whatever, and if you're not, you're not. What a good college/teacher/music study peer group will do is find, encourage and nurture that desire for creativity and excellence.

One thing I will say is that if you are thinking of 'becoming a music student', you might be better of thinking of yourself as one already, and then looking for the best environment in which to work on the things that you care about. I'm a music student, have been since I picked up the instrument. I still look for places and people to inspire and teach me as I go along, look for ways to shape my outlook, give me a new perspective and an environment in which to learn and grow. I didn't start being a music student when I went to college, and didn't stop when I left. The situation you're in won't change how you think about the process of gleaning the information you require, or your quest for inspiration. Hopefully, it will provide you with stepping stones, and will inspire you to do more, and provide you with a process to get where you want to be if you're willing to do the work, rather than telling you not to bother.

What I'll also say is that the two colleges I have experience with in the London area - the ACM and ICMP - have some really really great bass teachers at them. You can look at the course material, time-table and cost yourselves and decide if they work for you, but the bit that I can say I endorse wholeheartedly is the quality of the teachers that I know.

It's also worth mentioning that I've had quite a few students who've come to me for more specific private lessons while studying at one or other of the London colleges or music universities - I don't think that reflects badly on the college, as to expect a class-based environment to provide what everyone needs is unrealistic in all but the most mechanistic of study areas (as Beedster so wisely highlighted).

cheers

Steve
www.stevelawson.net

[silverfoxnik]

[quote name='nickcarey' post='144284' date='Feb 21 2008, 11:39 AM']I could'nt agree with this more. The two are like chalk and cheese. That's why I did my bass course first then 2 years later did my PGCE. I have been taught by some amazing players who can't teach for toffee. Who wants to go to a tutor who just blazes through some incredible bass licks on their bass and makes you feel de-motivated afterwards because you feel leaving humble.

Beedster is so right. Teaching is the complete opposite where the tutor should bring out the best in students. I am a firm believer in active learning (or 'Experiential Learning') where students go through self discovery guided by the tutor rather than being 'fed' information in a one way process like sitting in a lecture.

Nick[/quote]
I couldn't agree more with your posts Nick - thanks for setting it out so well! In the job I work in we teach young kids about disability and we do that through 'active learning' and the results are amazing! Same too re: Jake's comments; again really well put..

In terms of my original post, it's given me a much more rounded view of the subject now...

Nik

[Steve Lawson]

[quote name='nickcarey' post='144284' date='Feb 21 2008, 11:39 AM']Beedster is so right. Teaching is the complete opposite where the tutor should bring out the best in students. I am a firm believer in active learning (or 'Experiential Learning') where students go through self discovery guided by the tutor rather than being 'fed' information in a one way process like sitting in a lecture.[/quote]

Very much so. Very well put,

Steve
www.stevelawson.net

[timloudon]

This is an interesting thread!

I'm currently studying at Leeds College of Music, which I'm surprised to find hasn't been mentioned yet- maybe I chose the wrong institute. I'm studying what's called 'Popular Music Studies'. It's a combination of group and individual playing with modules on the industry, cultural theory, experimentation, journalism etc...

I'm actually just about to start a case study on the 'validity' (a word used very loosely) of the study of popular music at HE. It's an interesting subject.

I think the issue of whether they are worth your time is entirely down to the individual. I've found that the main benefit of being at an institute is meeting other musicians/producers with which to work. I know that these are the people who I will be conducting work with later on in life. I've met plenty of people who I know are going to be incredibly successful. It's also shown me many different pathways to follow in terms of career, giving me a glimpse of a world i didn't know was out there. Also, as has been mentioned before, it gives me many transferrable skills.

However, there are of course downsides to this kind of education. It's costing a LOT of money, something that incidentally, can work as an incentive. I also know very well that having a degree in music will by no means secure a job within the industry. I agree that it's not a way to guarantee that you'll be a good musician.

I think that it's all what you take from it. Lots of people have already made this point, and I totally agree.

What's everybody else's thoughts on LCM? Has anyone else studied there?

[Steve Lawson]

[quote]What's everybody else's thoughts on LCM? Has anyone else studied there?[/quote]

not been there, but it does have a good reputation, has done for years.

I've done masterclasses at Salford Uni, which looks to be a pretty good place to study too - as a side point, here's the story of my audition there when I applied in my teens to study there... [url="http://steve.anthropiccollective.org/archives/2008/02/bluffing.html"]http://steve.anthropiccollective.org/archi...2/bluffing.html[/url]



Steve

Edited February 21, 2008 by Steve Lawson

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='timloudon' post='144352' date='Feb 21 2008, 01:25 PM']This is an interesting thread!

I'm currently studying at Leeds College of Music, which I'm surprised to find hasn't been mentioned yet- maybe I chose the wrong institute. I'm studying what's called 'Popular Music Studies'. It's a combination of group and individual playing with modules on the industry, cultural theory, experimentation, journalism etc...

I'm actually just about to start a case study on the 'validity' (a word used very loosely) of the study of popular music at HE. It's an interesting subject.

I think the issue of whether they are worth your time is entirely down to the individual. I've found that the main benefit of being at an institute is meeting other musicians/producers with which to work. I know that these are the people who I will be conducting work with later on in life. I've met plenty of people who I know are going to be incredibly successful. It's also shown me many different pathways to follow in terms of career, giving me a glimpse of a world i didn't know was out there. Also, as has been mentioned before, it gives me many transferrable skills.

However, there are of course downsides to this kind of education. It's costing a LOT of money, something that incidentally, can work as an incentive. I also know very well that having a degree in music will by no means secure a job within the industry. I agree that it's not a way to guarantee that you'll be a good musician.

I think that it's all what you take from it. Lots of people have already made this point, and I totally agree.

What's everybody else's thoughts on LCM? Has anyone else studied there?[/quote]

Not studied or taught there but many of my colleagues from the North West scene (when I was up there) taught there. Notables like Tony Faulkner (arranging genius and drummer) Mike Walker (world class guitarist and improvisor) Les Chisnall (my favourite pianist) Nikki Iles (great pianist now a resident of the south)
the history of the place speaks for itself and some really good players (some of whom are doing very well) have come out of there.

Edited February 24, 2008 by jakesbass

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='Steve Lawson' post='144376' date='Feb 21 2008, 01:46 PM']not been there, but it does have a good reputation, has done for years.

I've done masterclasses at Salford Uni, which looks to be a pretty good place to study too - as a side point, here's the story of my audition there when I applied in my teens to study there... [url="http://steve.anthropiccollective.org/archives/2008/02/bluffing.html"]http://steve.anthropiccollective.org/archi...2/bluffing.html[/url]



Steve[/quote]

I was the bass tutor at Salford from 1996-2004
Its a really good course and has some of the inspirational people I mentioned in my earlier post.
The Bass tutor there now is Ollie Collins (who I taught there some years ago). He's a great player and from what I've heard is doing great as the tutor there.
Another hidden gem of Salford is Robin Dewhurst head of music, again a great player, and a wonderful arranger. I still do the occasional gig with Robin he is a joy to play with. Lovely touch and immpeccable placement, IMO two essential qualites in a pianist.
Jake