Where does technique end, and music begin?

[xilddx]

[quote name='steve-bbb' post='1317566' date='Jul 26 2011, 08:04 PM']for some there issues wonderful music with complete indfference to technique

for some technique never ends and music never really begins


[b]the two are rarely interdependent[/b] - there has been some great music by bands with very questionable musical technique and conversely there has been some highly technically proficient widdlers producing ..... well.... just plain widdle[/quote]
Ahh, I never said they were

[steve-bbb]

[quote name='silddx' post='1317579' date='Jul 26 2011, 08:14 PM']Ahh, I never said they were [/quote]

i know you didnt

i did!

[xilddx]

[quote name='steve-bbb' post='1317587' date='Jul 26 2011, 08:20 PM']i know you didnt

i did! [/quote]


But where does my question end and your answer begin?

[algmusic]

[quote name='risingson' post='1317505' date='Jul 26 2011, 07:23 PM']Of course, but you don't need brilliant technical skills as a musician to get across your point. Just look at David Bowie. Good technique is enough. Brilliant technique is great but past a point it detracts the focus away from the music and all of a sudden what could have been a nice night at the theatre becomes a night at the circus.[/quote]

Not quite, I never said all technique and no soul. If you have good technique it can help you achieve what you play from your heart with less effort. Most of the time the simple things are things that make a difference in music, just because you have been taught something complex, it doesn't mean you play exactly that, you interpet the technique for what you have learnt to play what comes from the heart. I'm self taught for serval years, then I got some technique down and I found the missing pieces to play the simple things well and to improvise better. On a gig, the theory, technique is almost forgotten and just play what feels good and sounds right, but the technique is what helped you get there. Also I think people think people like Bowie just play and then it's there.. they have 100's of ideas and use only one.. it's all really a form of technique trying to understand what works.

but back to the OP.. answer.. the join is when some thinks it's good enough to listen.. and that is all relative

[lowdown]

[quote name='algmusic' post='1317715' date='Jul 26 2011, 10:17 PM']Not quite, I never said all technique and no soul. If you have good technique it can help you achieve what you play from your heart with less effort. Most of the time the simple things are things that make a difference in music, just because you have been taught something complex, it doesn't mean you play exactly that, you interpet the technique for what you have learnt to play what comes from the heart. I'm self taught for serval years, then I got some technique down and I found the missing pieces to play the simple things well and to improvise better. On a gig, the theory, technique is almost forgotten and just play what feels good and sounds right, but the technique is what helped you get there. Also I think people think people like Bowie just play and then it's there.. they have 100's of ideas and use only one.. it's all really a form of technique trying to understand what works.

but back to the OP.. answer.. the join is when some thinks it's good enough to listen.. and that is all relative[/quote]


I like all that.....
And i agree with your uncomplicated answer.


Garry

[risingson]

[quote name='algmusic' post='1317715' date='Jul 26 2011, 10:17 PM']Not quite, I never said all technique and no soul. If you have good technique it can help you achieve what you play from your heart with less effort. Most of the time the simple things are things that make a difference in music, just because you have been taught something complex, it doesn't mean you play exactly that, you interpet the technique for what you have learnt to play what comes from the heart. I'm self taught for serval years, then I got some technique down and I found the missing pieces to play the simple things well and to improvise better. On a gig, the theory, technique is almost forgotten and just play what feels good and sounds right, but the technique is what helped you get there. Also I think people think people like Bowie just play and then it's there.. they have 100's of ideas and use only one.. it's all really a form of technique trying to understand what works.[/quote]

I agree almost completely. It's just that sometimes after a certain point, technique becomes redundant in the wider picture of performance. I have practiced technique on the bass for years and have worked hard to get it down for the same reasons you describe, but my point is that with a Bowie record or a Beatles record, two artists I consider to be greatly influential, the mistakes and sometimes lack of technical ability colour the track and give it the idiosyncrasies that make it unique. I like good technique, but sometimes in some cases musicians who have practiced good technique are actually quite uninteresting to listen to (in my view at least). Example: Toto, a band of the tightest L.A session guys going. I like listening to some of their stuff because of their technical competency and the fact they've written some very decent tunes, but prolonged listening often makes me think that they're too tight. Their music can lack character because of it, and this isn't helped by the fact the production values are so highly polished either.

I'm in general agreement that technique allows you to move forward as a musician and express what you feel on an instrument with increased ease, but it's not the be all and end all.

[algmusic]

[quote name='risingson' post='1317779' date='Jul 26 2011, 11:15 PM']I agree almost completely. It's just that so metimes after a certain point, technique becomes redundant in the wider picture of performance. I have practiced technique on the bass for years and have worked hard to get it down for the same reasons you describe, but my point is that with a Bowie record or a Beatles record, two artists I consider to be greatly influential, the mistakes and sometimes lack of technical ability colour the track and give it the idiosyncrasies that make it unique. I like good technique, but sometimes in some cases musicians who have practiced good technique are actually quite uninteresting to listen to (in my view at least). Example: Toto, a band of the tightest L.A session guys going. I like listening to some of their stuff because of their technical competency and the fact they've written some very decent tunes, but prolonged listening often makes me think that they're too tight. Their music can lack character because of it, and this isn't helped by the fact the production values are so highly polished either.

I'm in general agreement that technique allows you to move forward as a musician and express what you feel on an instrument with increased ease, but it's not the be all and end all.[/quote]

I agreed.. I thought we were on the same page

[Blademan_98]

[quote name='risingson' post='1317779' date='Jul 26 2011, 11:15 PM']I'm in general agreement that technique allows you to move forward as a musician and express what you feel on an instrument with increased ease, but it's not the be all and end all.[/quote]

^^^ This

[Maverick]

[quote name='Wil' post='1317511' date='Jul 26 2011, 07:25 PM']The best musicians can make you weep with one note - it has to be the right note, played in the right place, the right time and with the right feel, of course.[/quote]

The worst musicians can make you weep with one note - it has to be the wrong note, played in the wrong place, the wrong time and with the wrong feel, of course.

[algmusic]

[quote name='Maverick' post='1317820' date='Jul 26 2011, 11:53 PM']The worst musicians can make you weep with one note - it has to be the wrong note, played in the wrong place, the wrong time and with the wrong feel, of course.[/quote]

that made me laugh.. I know a few like that

[62P-Bass]

[quote name='silddx' post='1317543' date='Jul 26 2011, 07:49 PM']I think we'd all agree, but how do you know when you have used it as a reflection of yourself?[/quote]

This is the interesting bit to me - how can we actively improve or increase the 'music' quotient in our own performance?

I saw a masterclass with Chuck Rainey once, and he talked about what I understood to be a 'Zen' idea - the ego vs the spirit. I know naff all about Zen/Buddhism/religion in general, but I liked what I took from this idea in relation to performance and have found it useful. The idea being that your ego would be telling you "play this thing you learnt / force this lick in / you should be doing more / play better / show 'em who's boss! etc.", or what would end up sounding like what has been referred to in this thread as 'Technique'.

The best results are gained when you detach from this and let your subconscious or 'spirit' take over - listen to the music as a whole and react instinctively to the bigger picture, without your ego telling you anything. I think this is often what a listener (and performer) responds to best and what we might call 'music' as oppose to 'technique'. Sounds like this is what happened in Sliddx's rehearsal the other night. I guess different people will tap into this 'spirit/music' in different ways so will have varying responses to different music - 'all sounds like widdling to me'!

In simple music or even music that you have a huge affinity for and not much technique, this egoless state might be easy to reach, or it least it is for the musicians we like to listen to. More challenging music will require greater/broader technique in order to reach the point where your instinct can take over and the ego is eradicated, or at least reduced.

Basically in the masterclass someone asked Chuck what his favourite recordings of him were, or which were the basslines he played that he was most proud of. He said the ones where it sounded like his spirit was in control and not his ego, and they way he could tell would be often he would hear something in the recording that sounded totally new to him and like he couldn't have come up with it or couldn't play it like that again - that was his spirit coming through. That was all he said and I made up all the rest!!
Anyway - this has always been something I've been meaning to look into more and haven't got round to it. I tried to read Zen in the Art of Archery, but never made it all the way through and it's a very short book.

Cheers,

Andrew

[Austin7]

[quote name='johnny_frog' post='1316732' date='Jul 26 2011, 09:33 AM']"It's interesting because music is a language, you can learn its vocabulary, but how does one COMMUNICATE to others in a way they understand what is intended? It's an interpretive language and I think drawing parallels with verbal languages is inadequate."

I suppose that would be the creative bit... using the techniques and tools you have to allow you to convey an idea to your audience.

As an example...
"Do not go gentle into that good night, Old age should burn and rage at close of day; Rage, rage against the dying of the light." Dylan Thomas

Versus
" I know you are old but don't just give up and die" Me

Both use the same technique (english) to convey the same basic information... but to my mind Mr. Thomas does it a bit more creatively

Oh... and good choice of debate topic mate... way more interesting that discussing scratchplate colour [/quote]


A good succinct interpretation of Dylan Thomas, though.

[xilddx]

[quote name='62P-Bass' post='1317839' date='Jul 27 2011, 12:09 AM']This is the interesting bit to me - how can we actively improve or increase the 'music' quotient in our own performance?

I saw a masterclass with Chuck Rainey once, and he talked about what I understood to be a 'Zen' idea - the ego vs the spirit. I know naff all about Zen/Buddhism/religion in general, but I liked what I took from this idea in relation to performance and have found it useful. The idea being that your ego would be telling you "play this thing you learnt / force this lick in / you should be doing more / play better / show 'em who's boss! etc.", or what would end up sounding like what has been referred to in this thread as 'Technique'.

The best results are gained when you detach from this and let your subconscious or 'spirit' take over - listen to the music as a whole and react instinctively to the bigger picture, without your ego telling you anything. I think this is often what a listener (and performer) responds to best and what we might call 'music' as oppose to 'technique'. Sounds like this is what happened in Sliddx's rehearsal the other night. I guess different people will tap into this 'spirit/music' in different ways so will have varying responses to different music - 'all sounds like widdling to me'!

In simple music or even music that you have a huge affinity for and not much technique, this egoless state might be easy to reach, or it least it is for the musicians we like to listen to. More challenging music will require greater/broader technique in order to reach the point where your instinct can take over and the ego is eradicated, or at least reduced.

Basically in the masterclass someone asked Chuck what his favourite recordings of him were, or which were the basslines he played that he was most proud of. He said the ones where it sounded like his spirit was in control and not his ego, and they way he could tell would be often he would hear something in the recording that sounded totally new to him and like he couldn't have come up with it or couldn't play it like that again - that was his spirit coming through. That was all he said and I made up all the rest!!
Anyway - this has always been something I've been meaning to look into more and haven't got round to it. I tried to read Zen in the Art of Archery, but never made it all the way through and it's a very short book.

Cheers,

Andrew[/quote]
Yes! This is it. When you listen back and it sounds like you but you don't remember playing it, and you have to learn how to play what you played. Then that process seems to make it technique all over again But when you do it, it feels like you are strolling over sweet pasture, aimless and beautiful, you become in touch with nature, your surroundings.

Edited July 27, 2011 by silddx

[urb]

[quote name='62P-Bass' post='1317839' date='Jul 27 2011, 12:09 AM']This is the interesting bit to me - how can we actively improve or increase the 'music' quotient in our own performance?

I saw a masterclass with Chuck Rainey once, and he talked about what I understood to be a 'Zen' idea - the ego vs the spirit. I know naff all about Zen/Buddhism/religion in general, but I liked what I took from this idea in relation to performance and have found it useful. The idea being that your ego would be telling you "play this thing you learnt / force this lick in / you should be doing more / play better / show 'em who's boss! etc.", or what would end up sounding like what has been referred to in this thread as 'Technique'.

The best results are gained when you detach from this and let your subconscious or 'spirit' take over - listen to the music as a whole and react instinctively to the bigger picture, without your ego telling you anything. I think this is often what a listener (and performer) responds to best and what we might call 'music' as oppose to 'technique'. Sounds like this is what happened in Sliddx's rehearsal the other night. I guess different people will tap into this 'spirit/music' in different ways so will have varying responses to different music - 'all sounds like widdling to me'!

In simple music or even music that you have a huge affinity for and not much technique, this egoless state might be easy to reach, or it least it is for the musicians we like to listen to. More challenging music will require greater/broader technique in order to reach the point where your instinct can take over and the ego is eradicated, or at least reduced.

Basically in the masterclass someone asked Chuck what his favourite recordings of him were, or which were the basslines he played that he was most proud of. He said the ones where it sounded like his spirit was in control and not his ego, and they way he could tell would be often he would hear something in the recording that sounded totally new to him and like he couldn't have come up with it or couldn't play it like that again - that was his spirit coming through. That was all he said and I made up all the rest!!
Anyway - this has always been something I've been meaning to look into more and haven't got round to it. I tried to read Zen in the Art of Archery, but never made it all the way through and it's a very short book.

Cheers,

Andrew[/quote]

Great post - and you really hit the nail on the head - I find that the best music I've made is almost certainly when I've let my 'spirit' take over and forgotten all about showing off my chops - for me that moment almost certainly happens in a slight haze (no nothing to do with drink or drugs) like you are suddenly letting your fingers/heart/body play the music without your head getting in the way... it doesn;t happen all the time but a good starting place is to listen hard and then respond - not the other way round - i.e. I've got this great bass line and it's going in the song whther it needs it or not!

Good debate geezers - very enlightening

[Skol303]

[quote name='62P-Bass' post='1317839' date='Jul 27 2011, 12:09 AM']...I tried to read Zen in the Art of Archery, but never made it all the way through and it's a very short book.[/quote]

^ Try 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' instead.

Seriously... it's a good book all about the concept of 'quality'. It's written in the context of writing literature, but applies equally to music. And it actually has very little to do with motorcycles, in case anyone's wondering...

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_and_the_Art_of_Motorcycle_Maintenance"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zen_and_the_A...cle_Maintenance[/url]

And now for a time-honoured zen joke: "Jesus saves, but Buddha scores on the rebound!" (ba-da-boom-tish).

[Earbrass]

[quote name='Skol303' post='1319243' date='Jul 28 2011, 12:55 PM']^ Try 'Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance' instead.

Seriously... it's a good book all about the concept of 'quality'. It's written in the context of writing literature, but applies equally to music. And it actually has very little to do with motorcycles, in case anyone's wondering...[/quote]


Got to disagree - a truly awful book. Tries to be clever and fails dismally. Avoid.

[Skol303]

[quote name='Earbrass' post='1319257' date='Jul 28 2011, 01:07 PM']Got to disagree - a truly awful book. Tries to be clever and fails dismally. Avoid.[/quote]

Ah, the beauty of personal opinion.

I mean, where does one opinion end and another begin...??

[Doddy]

[quote name='urb' post='1319218' date='Jul 28 2011, 12:31 PM']- I find that the best music I've made is almost certainly when I've let my 'spirit' take over and forgotten all about showing off my chops - for me that moment almost certainly happens in a slight haze (no nothing to do with drink or drugs) like you are suddenly letting your fingers/heart/body play the music without your head getting in the way... it doesn;t happen all the time but a good starting place is to listen hard and then respond -[/quote]

This is why I think that technique is important. The idea is that when you get these moments of inspiration you want to be able to pull them off. It's not about thinking 'check out my chops'(which has it's place),it's about being unencumbered by your technique to allow you to play what you want.
Right now I'm playing quite a lot of synth bass,and while I can comfortably play the groove there are things that I hear,either on record or in the moment,that I can't quite execute as well as I want to or at all.So,I need to work on my technique so that I can play them. It's the same with both the electric and upright-if I can't pull something off cleanly,I need to work on it until I can.

[62P-Bass]

[quote name='urb' post='1319218' date='Jul 28 2011, 12:31 PM']Great post - and you really hit the nail on the head - I find that the best music I've made is almost certainly when I've let my 'spirit' take over and forgotten all about showing off my chops - for me that moment almost certainly happens in a slight haze (no nothing to do with drink or drugs) like you are suddenly letting your fingers/heart/body play the music without your head getting in the way... it doesn;t happen all the time but a good starting place is to listen hard and then respond - not the other way round - i.e. I've got this great bass line and it's going in the song whther it needs it or not!

Good debate geezers - very enlightening[/quote]

Exactly Mike - listen hard first! A couple of tactics I use on occasion to help try and achieve this:

1. Listen to the whole band. Imagine you are in the audience hearing and seeing the whole band equally, or you are the producer/engineer sitting slap bang in the middle of two amazing studio monitors.

2. Try and concentrate 100% on what someone else is playing. This changes on the song/situation. Some of the guitar players I've had the fortune of playing with are so damn funky (namely Nigel Price and Al Cherry), that all I have to do is listen to their rhythm playing and my job takes care of itself. Alternatively if there is a soloist or lead singer, focus 100% on them and what they're doing and try to react instinctively, rather than deliberately. It helps to look at them too, although try not to put them off!

Any other tactics for people?

I think this is the crux of the reason that I practice. So that in a performance situation I don't have to pay any attention to what I'm doing, and can focus as much as possible on what other people are doing. It's more interesting for me that way, and more of a conversation which results in a better performance. Also I've found that I rarely get bored playing the same songs over and over again, especially when it's with new people.

Andrew

[algmusic]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1319380' date='Jul 28 2011, 02:48 PM']it's about being unencumbered by your technique to allow you to play what you want.[/quote]

[size=6]Yes[/size]

[Kongo]

Not really read all of this from the start, though it's an interesting one, especially as my preferred genre does, on occasions, go a little too far on Technique (Did someone say "Viraemia"? :-P).

In case no one has though, just wanted to say in Billy Sheehan's DVD "IMHO" he addresses this well witht he whole "practise versus playing" section, speaking on music and mechanics.
I know some of you are thinking that name always follows a load of fret w***, but that's just Youtube, he's actually a very rhythm based guy.
Also has a section on locking with the bass drum, for those of groove mind. :-)

Anyway, that out the way, let the discussion continue. :-)

[Earbrass]

[quote name='Doddy' post='1319380' date='Jul 28 2011, 02:48 PM']it's about being unencumbered by your technique to allow you to play what you want.[/quote]

Hmm, but aren't most people encumbered more by their [b]lack[/b] of technique than by a surplus? The more technique you have, the more options are at your fingertips - although it's still up to your musical sense to select the right option.

[Skol303]

Surely this is a bit like asking: where does vocabulary and grammar end and conversation (or perhaps poetry) begin?

If you're fluent in speaking French, for instance, then you'll find it easier to converse with French people - or even woo them with your poetic verse! Whereas if your French speaking is poor, then your poetry is likely to be poor also... or perhaps just simplistic.

So in summary: technique is like vocabulary, it's what gives musicians the range and freedom to express themselves more fluenty through their instruments.

... or failing that, I suppose you could just stomp on the metaphorical fuzz box and shout ("VOO-LAY-VOO-PARR-LAY-ONG-LEZ?").

[xilddx]

[quote name='Skol303' post='1319420' date='Jul 28 2011, 03:36 PM'][b]Surely this is a bit like asking: where does vocabulary and grammar end and conversation (or perhaps poetry) begin?[/b]
If you're fluent in speaking French, for instance, then you'll find it easier to converse with French people - or even woo them with your poetic verse! Whereas if your French speaking is poor, then your poetry is likely to be poor also... or perhaps just simplistic.

So in summary: technique is like vocabulary, it's what gives musicians the range and freedom to express themselves more fluenty through their instruments.

... or failing that, I suppose you could just stomp on the metaphorical fuzz box and shout ("VOO-LAY-VOO-PARR-LAY-ONG-LEZ?").[/quote]
Yes, perhaps, but we aren't on ChatChat, we're on BassChat

[redstriper]

[quote name='Kongo' post='1319394' date='Jul 28 2011, 02:58 PM']In case no one has though, just wanted to say in Billy Sheehan's DVD "IMHO" he addresses this well witht he whole "practise versus playing" section, speaking on music and mechanics.[/quote]

I haven't seen that DVD - would you mind summarising what he says about "practise versus playing".

Thanks for your time (if you have enough).

Steve.