The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I play ITM on the fiddle. I have been playing for around 3.5 years. I have definitely come a long way, to where I would say that I am a decent but utterly unremarkable player. So what I am wondering -- and I know this is sort of vague and open-ended -- is this: how do I move beyond the level of playing I am at? What things should I be paying attention to? What are some common obstacles that need to be overcome to move from "blandly competent" to "impressive" (or even "amazing")?
I realize that:
1. I am asking for advice even though you probably haven't heard me play
2. If I had a teacher, they could probably give me some good advice
3. There is not necessarily just a single path forward from where I am at -- there may be more than one "next level", depending on which direction I want to go
A side note: I also play the mandolin, and have done so for around 7 years. I would say I am much better at the mandolin than I am at the fiddle. And I was already much better at the mandolin after 3.5 years than I am on the fiddle after 3.5 years, even though I have actually probably spent many more hours playing the fiddle in 3.5 years than I spent playing the mandolin in 7 years. I never really hit a plateau on the mandolin where I just really wondered how I was ever going to get better. Basically the more I play the mandolin, the better I get, in what seems to be a more straightforward, linear path. But with the fiddle, my playing is not developing in such a linear, gradual fashion, or at least such development is not apparent to me.
I would be interested in any constructive advice anyone might have.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It may be time for you to stop thinking on the instrument's terms and simply concentrate on the music. It's not about being a better fiddle player, or mandolin player, it's about being a better player of the tunes. Do less practising and more listening and playing. Do more playing for the fun of it and stop analysing. Relax.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I agree that you should find a teacher. If you can, find a pro ITM fiddler near you and take a few lessons. Even a few would give you an idea of how to improve. I believe strongly in taking lessons. Also, you might take lessons from a few different people, because different musicians will have different approaches to the music.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The difference between a bland fiddler and a "remarkable" one isn't technique, but expressiveness. And if your aim is to impress, then that's what you'll express. And likely not impress anyone. (As Martin Hayes says, the more a musician tries to impress him, the less impressed he is.)
The bow hand gives you an incredible range of expressiveness, but it takes time and attention to coax it out of that stick and horsehair. Take a tune that you already play well and ask yourself what that tune makes you feel. Then let the feeling come out in your playing. This can take years in itself--learning to be open to the music instead of controling it.
I'm just now reading a book on the neuroscience of music, and the author says that mastery of any special skill takes on average 10,000 hours. That's 20 hours a week for 10 years. So keep playing....
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I think this whole thing about taking a formal teacher depends on your personality. By this, I ask are you an open sponge, or are you a focused "I know what I want" type?
I'll elaborate ...
If you are the "I know what I want" type, then you may be better off with a teacher. Because your dogmatic attitude may well lead you down some dead ends. It's a difficult thing to judge, you may well think that you have a clear idea of how you would like to play, and all you lack is the technical ability. But maybe your strive for a particular technical ability is clouding your openness for the music? A good teacher will spot this instantly and steer you away from mere technique.
On the other hand. If you are a sponge ... if you have that open wonderment of the beauty of ALL of it ... then the chances are that a teacher would no only smother this, but may also just lead you down one track that isn't you.
Your post seems to suggest that technique is not an issue. If this is the case (and it should be, because technically, this music is very basic) then what you need is not a teacher, but thousands of teachers. All the players you ever hear that you like.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Will, maybe that's right with the 10,000 hours stuff ... for a special skill. But I'm of the opinion that one of the beauties of our diddley music is that, though the music is special, the technical skill required is not that special.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
All teachers can do, even the best teachers (and especially the best teachers), when you're talking about expressiveness, is to show you how *they* see the music, how *they* approach a tune. Even if you don't mimic what they play, it's still nice to have someone explain to you why they emphasize a certain part of a tune, or try to go for a certain feel on a tune, what they feel the tune is trying to tell them. And from that, they can point you in the direction of technique---how a few cuts here can emphasize this part, a few slurs there can give lift to that part---and they can watch what you do and help you see if what you're doing is helping you bring out what you want to express. Hope this makes sense, I'm still at the beginning of this whole process, but my teacher has given me stylistic points from the beginning, so I kind of think you can develop it at any time, all through the learning process.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There are two departments here, one is "the music" and two is your ability to make your instrument play it.
I'm only guessing, but I strongly suggest this will no longer be an issue if you take your clothes off and climb into bed with the music.
Listen and listen,explore, find all the little erogenous zones, solve all the puzzles, and viola.......the next level!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Just in case anyone gets frightened out of their wits at the prospect of 10,000 hours hard slog before they've "mastered" the special skill of playing the fiddle/violin, I'm sure that figure was directed at the players who aim to become world-class classical virtuosos - and there are not so many of those around compared with the generality of musicians. The great classical violin virtuoso and teacher Ruggieri Ricci said that if a pupil hasn't got complete technical mastery by the time they're 16 (or 18 at the latest) then they can forget a career at the topmost world level. The implication would be that such a pupil would have started at about the age of 4 or 5 and would have got in those 10,000 hours by their mid-teens.
As llig (Michael) pointed out, the amount of technical skill required for the fiddle (Irish/folk) is remarkably small compared with even that required for playing in an amateur classical orchestra. Note that I said "amount of technical skill", but your aim should be to get that relatively small amount up to the best standard you can in order to play and express the music at the level it deserves. It's also worth pointing out that the greatest level of technical skill in playing the fiddle is in the bowing. As far as Irish fiddle _technique_ is concerned I think 4,000 - 6,000 hours is a much more realistic target to get near to technical mastery.
But of course, "technique" is a basic tool of the trade and is only one part of the equation. I expect some of us have come across ITM players who are technically perfect but just don't move anyone listening (except perhaps to the bar!). I reckon that it takes at least another 5,000 hours for an ITM player to really understand and express the depths of the music in his playing. Perhaps then he might be approaching one of the plateaux of mastery, only to realise that there is another mountain range in the distance to be scaled, and others further on. But when on that first plateau he may well be at a level where he can teach and pass on the music (not just the technical skills) to others.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I have been playing around 1300 days I guess. I do play a lot; perhaps I have averaged an hour or two per day over this time. So I guess that puts me at perhaps 2000-3000 hours under my belt so far. If it really takes something on the order of 10,000 hours to be a master, then I guess maybe I am just getting ahead of myself and being impatient (my wife would say "obsessed").
I am going to get into bed with the music now, if I can figure out what that means, and if my wife doesn't divorce me over it.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Here are my general and dogmatic answers.
How do I move beyond the level of playing I am at?
ANSWER: Spend about a year on bowing. Then repeat. Repeat ad lib.
What things should I be paying attention to?
ANSWER: You should be paying attention to the tunes that you really like, including any new tunes that you can learn, or put on the list to come back to when you reach the next level. Concentrate on learning the tunes that you can adapt into your style, and also concentrate on developing your style into a style that others will want to play with you, and that you will like to play. Leave aside the tunes that you have learned but that do not present useful exercises or opportunities for your style. For example, want to learn bow rocking? Try Durang’s Hornpipe, and so on. Some tunes just cannot be executed in your skillset, they are either too notey, not directly suitable for fretlessness, or will require some adaptation. So adapt away. Chop out notes or change notes to suit your ear. Remember, this is just to help your style, and you will have to maintain some standards / tunes for playing with others. A fretless stringed instrument has a lot more variables in things like note attack, legato, slurs, slides, unison notes on two strings, sustain, and when and where to change bow direction. For me it is the initiation of the note that obstructs my progress, trying to get more of a vowel start of the note than a consonant. Keep coming back periodically, every six months or so to those tunes that you have left aside, to verify they are still aside; sometimes you can pick one up again with your developing skillset.
What are some common obstacles that need to be overcome to move from "blandly competent" to "impressive" (or even "amazing")?
ANSWER: All the technical issues that must be overcome in the first years of playing. Coming form a fretted instrument, do you find this affects your fiddling? Are you playing / learning the same tunes on both? Are those fingers going in the same places on both? The bow and pick are not. You may want o make fiddle Instrument Number One. The advice to relax is good. For example, can you play the fiddle at 6:00 a.m. before coffee? Sometimes I find I play better when I am tired, at an evening gig. Some relaxation helps dissipate the tensions that often stifle the music, for me. I hear different things in the music at different times, then almost completely astounding me that I did not hear it previously. Sometimes I can carry it to a next level, other times it falls back, and can fall far back, and I have to re-approach. But the approach is always from a fiddle standpoint, and I came from a guitar, banjo, mandolin origin, to which I have not returned. So maybe fret baggage is in play for you.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Gee, I didn't think 10,000 hours was so much. But then I've played fiddle for 30 years now. And crazy_fingers took it more how I meant it--that 3.5 years really isn't all that long to be playing fiddle, so more time spent at it will likely be rewarding.
Maybe the more salient point made in the neuroscience book is that studies of music conservatory students show that what matters most in differentiating the best players from the rest is the amount of time spent playing. The "best" players typically spent twice as much time practicing as the students judged less capable.
In short, if you want to get good at something, do it, a lot. Paying attention to the quality of what you're doing.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I don't want to come off as judgmental or harsh, but I do want to ask the question: Are you playing the fiddle because you WANT to sound "impressive" or "amazing"? If you are, then you need to explain what you mean by that. And if it is that you want people who hear you to say that you are impressive and amazing, then maybe that's not the best reason to put in the time to learn to play the fiddle.
But if you're playing because you love the music and you want to be able to play the music on the fiddle, then what everyone else said applies. Get a teacher if you can. And play the music for your enjoyment. And keep at it. There is no magic about playing for 10,000 hours (i.e.; when you have played for 10,000 everything falls into place and suddenly, you sound like _________________ ((insert name of great fiddle player you want to sound like)). The point is, keep playing if you want to play Irish music on the fiddle.
"Impresisve" and "amazing" are really very subjective . Those words imply that it is other's opinions of your playing that have value to you. If you have gone from beginning to play tunes on the fiddle to "blandly compentent" in 3.5 years, and you know what "blandly competent" means to you, AND you are continuing to play Irish tunes on the fiddle, then I would say you're doing pretty good.
Are you pleased with your progress? Do you feel good about investing the time you have spent at this? Do you like playing the tunes on the fiddle? Are you having fun?
I think these are some questions you should consider.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hi. i think what you need to do is to increase your musical vocabulary. this means firstly identifying, and secondly learning the musical characteristics of players you find special.
for me, i´ve always loved dermot byrne for his smoothness, mairead mooney for her drive, ciaran tourish for the counterpoint and say mairtin o connor for his quirkyness.. so i took the aspects of these peoples styles and incorporated it into my own playng creating something new, and for me exciting to play.
now of course i have been influenced by many other musicians and by many other styles of music but that was certainly a good place to start. Like your character, it´s made
up of many different elements: some robbed, some which later turn out to be oRijioneL!
folk music, being an expression of folk/ people is in my opinion constructed in a like fashion to the people who play it. it is an expression of the self.
then of course if you want to be a "purist" (an incorrect term when applied to irish traditional music because an accepted definition of the genre has not yet been agreed upon) just go and learn how to play like michael coleman and your done.
if you want me to expand on anything i´ve said here, send me an email.
getting a teacher is an obvious answer but probably not the best one because teachers in trad 90 percent of the time only succeed in creating clones of themselves (unintentionally) as opposed to finding a pupils individuality through music which in my humble opinion is where it´s all at.
(oh and don´t shoot me for the 90 percent figure, and give me examples of brilliant teachers, i know they exist!)
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
C_f, you must feel reasonably happy with your own playing in the first place to feel you can move up a level, so that in itself is great- a place a lot of us are still striving to reach. Putting in as many hours as possible, as everyone says, is the only way.
To run with Michael's point about listening to as many different players as possible and trying to be open to the beauty of the music, one of the difficulties (at my level) is in recognising exactly what the players you admire are actually *doing* that makes their sound so special. The beginner can sometimes have difficulty seeing or hearing anything beyond the speed of their playing- and be tempted to emulate that with predictable results.
Secondly, even if you do get an inkling of what else they put in, it's not easy knowing how to translate that to your own playing.
Thirdly, developing your own (albeit borrowed) style can seem something of a luxury when you are in the process of mastering the basics and commiting tunes to memory, and are not that confident. Saying to a teacher (should you be lucky enough to have one specialised in Irish music) 'please teach me to play like so-and-so' seems pretentious and misguided.
The advice above of 'take one tune you love' and make that your platform for experiment seems a very good starting point to me.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Have to agree on working on one tune and turning stuff inside out and upside down and around and then adding subtracting, speeding up and slowing down, I'm doing this after 5 months fiddling on tunes like Boys of Bluehill, there can be enough material to play this tune 100,000 different ways, so I like that advice. You can get stuff like Eileen Ivers, Martin Hayes, Liz Carroll and Tommy Peoples and listen to them just for ideas first an dthen try to get the same sounds in to your tunes.
It's not a 5 year plan at least it shouldn't be, it should be a labour of love. Something you enjoy doing, keep measuring and you won't enjoy!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There seems to be a lot of emphasis on practice here. What I was trying to say was to steer clear of practice. The 10,000 hours thing before you are out of your teens may well be necessary for a classical career. But bear in mind that you have an instrument in your hands with a range of six or seven octaves of 11 notes, though the vast majority of the time you only want just under two octaves of just 7 notes. Do the math ... as the yanks say.
My point is that a lot of practice is frustrating repetition of things you haven't quite got yet. Just don't bother with this, it's counter productive. Play only for your enjoyment and not only will the technique take care of itself, but you'll be staying in love with the music. And if you really do love the music, the one thing you'll have in abundance is patience
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Will, I'm very interested in this book and hunting a new read, would you mind giving the author and title? A friend is working on something similar although not specifically pertaining to music, he'd also be interested (his project is a take on history-meets-neurology).
10,000 hours at 20 hours a week for 10 years, provided you've got that much time, also lends some scientific credence to Seamus Ennis' claim that a master piper took 21 years in the making. While the pipes are still here, by the time I master the new copier at work it will have been outmoded several times. I guess that's an encouraging difference between traditional music and life at the office.
To me, 'practice' only means playing the instrument with every available shred of time I have. Making it so regimented and stiff is looking too closely at a bigger picture, I think. I never started playing music because I had to.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I'd empathise with Llig - 'play from the heart and for the heart '. Someone asked here once for advice on what to do when they got frustrated & fed up with their music making. The best reply imho or maybe the one that suited me best! was to go back to some 'simple' tune and play it slower and as beautifully as possible so as to fall in love with sound all over again. Sounds very soppy this ..... but I have perceived in several aspects of life that one often needs to go backwards to go forwards again. Maybe that's the case here?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I only just got around to reading all the posts in this thread and without mentioning names, I have to say how impressed I am. Impressed with the relevance of the subject matter (to me at least) and impressed with the quality of the responses.
I am six years into the transition from guitar to mandolin and on to fiddle with two years on the latter.
Thank you to everyone.
Will, I would love to read that book on neuroscience - give us the title/author please.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
On a different tack from replies so far, record yourself. (The quality needs to be decent so you can trust the results, not the built in microphone of an old cassette recorder.) Start with something that you know well and are confident about, not something "hard," keep the pace steady. Are you in tune? Is that pesky third finger "pinching" notes slightly flat? Is the time steady, how do the starts and ends of notes sound. Try again, working on the things you didn't like. Go round that cycle half a dizen times and the improvement can be remarkable.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
No, don't go recording yourself. It's just the kind of navel gazing you shouldn't be doing. You should be hearing all the stuff as you play. Listen to yourself live. All a recording (and lets face it, unless you have $10,000 of equipment, it will be a bad recording) will give you is a stark look at your technique, but you should be past this. I know people will chime in here and say how useful it is to hear yourself how others hear you, but you really shouldn't be bothered with this. Care how you sound to yourself, and how you sound to others will fall into place. Be ego free.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hussar- that process you mention rings true- forever taking a step back in order to progress.
I've just started recording myself and it's a rude awakening. Rarely does it sound as good as I think it sounds the rest of the time- and that isn't saying much! That could be explained by impatience, the urge to forge ahead, record everything just to see. Also being recorded can cause you to mess up through self-consciousness, so the net result *can* be disappointing.
Chad, I'm going to try that 'micro-learning' approach you suggest, especially the starts and ends of notes-concentrating on individual notes is something easily forgotten as you try to get the whole tune.
Michael- I like the idea of respite from 'the frustration of endless repetition of things you haven't quite got yet', but what to replace it with for, say, two hours a day? Is it better to head on with new tunes waiting to be learnt, or experiment/play around with existing ones? I don't begrudge the time spent practicing the pieces I (almost) know, but it would be nice to discover alternative, less frustrating ways of moving forward.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
If you are, say, a guitarist (I use guitar simply so I can speak from experience) who has been working on strumming speed and smoothness (among many other things) but can't seem to make progress, a teacher can say, "oh, if you hold your hand this way, and use your forearm more than your wrist as you strum, and play more lightly, etc, etc......" And all of a sudden, what was difficult doing it the way you used to do it becomes easy, and you make a breakthrough. Instead of using a technique that can't do what you want it to, you are using a new technique, and your playing mutates. That is the kind of thing a good teacher can do.
I highly recommend finding a teacher if you find yourself deadlocked. If you are specific about what you want, and approach the lessons as a collaboration, rather than a "tear everything you do apart so you can relearn everything and sound like me" experience, great things can happen--things that wouldn't necessarily happen either from unguided practice, or from simply playing out for fun.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Be patient. Don't keep looking for short cuts. Listening to yourself whilst you play is not as easy as listening to a recording, but it you will not progress unless this is second nature. It seems an odd thing to say, but plenty of musicians don't listen to themselves when they play. Too hung up on technique. Also, listen to others, recordings if you have nothing else. Take respite from your frustration and sit and really listen to some music. Don't potter about doing the washing up or driving or something. Sit and give it your full attention. An hour of this will do more for your playing than an hour of trying to do something you can't.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Michael's got it in one. Really listening to your playing as you play (and _not_ via a recording!) is the most difficult lesson for any musician to learn. When you've cracked that one then you'll really progress.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
"Active" listening to yourself, others and to recordings is great advice. One thing that I had to overcome, and I am not sure I have completely done it yet, is hearing how you really sound versus how you think you sound; or perhaps how you think you should sound.
I think that your mind can trick you, as you hold the music in your head, and then try to replicate that music through your instrument.
I have found recording to be a useful tool in showing myself that I do not always sound the way that I "think". Or perhaps I hear it differently while playing? Or perhaps I am not listening as closely as I should be listening.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The book is "This is Your Brain on Music" by Daniel J. Levitin, 2006 Dutton Press or Penguin Publishing.
Just finished reading it last night, and I'm a little disappointed at the lack of depth--it strikes me as written more for the music listener than the musician. But then I've also been reading "The Developing Mind" by Daniel J. Siegel, and it goes into much greater detail on neuroanatomy and neural process (though it only infrequently touches on music and auditory processing).
I agree with Michael that learning to really listen--to yourself and other musicians--is essential and likely to be the most helpful. For me, this raises the question--what to listen for?
Everything, of course. But a few things jump out.
- Listen to how you articulate notes, in particular how you start and end them. Play with this--find as many ways as you can to vary how you start and end notes, and you'll have a tremendous vocabulary for varying your timing and expression.
- Listen to your sense of phrasing. How do you "chunk" a tune--and how can you change your sense of a tune by grouping notes into longer or shorter chunks? What happens at the end of one chunk and the beginning of another? Where is the breathing space between chunks and withing chunks?
- Listen to the timbre of your playing. Is it round and full, or thin and whingey? How many ways can you vary the timbre of your instrument?
- Listen to the beat. Where are the strong beats, weak beats? How do good players push and pull the beat to create momentum and interest?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Here's a thought---I spent the first few months of my fiddling career learning *not* to listen to myself. My intonation was so bad I couldn't bear it! If I hadn't learned to ignore most of the sour pitches and squeaks and crunches, I would have quit before I ever learned to make them go away. It's only lately that I can stand to hear some of what comes out of my fiddle, and that's only on the good days. So I have to learn to listen to myself all over again.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It would be interesting to test the recording thing objectively. Record your playing, write down your comments in detail, then listen to the recording and see if you agree, and/or have any other comments to add.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The difference between how you think you play and sound and how you see/hear yourself playing on a recording is interesting. My recorded timbre sounds thin and scratchy, but I kid myself that might to some extent be an effect of the cheap recording gear. What surprised me most, though, was that the pieces I know pretty well and was trying to play at a good speed came out on the recording as wooden, gutless and boring- as if I wasn't expending half as much energy as I should.
To make things worse, I have just spent this afternoon listening to The Bothy Band and watching the Altan 'John Doherty's Reels' clip on YouTube! http://youtube.com/watch?v=EJDTQW87w-s.
It's not the speed I covert so much as the precision and vitality. What use a leaden fiddler in Irish music, eh? So I shall put away the recorder, as suggested, and concentrate on listening to myself and others. Envy is a terrible thing, though, isn't it?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
In addition to the listen to yourself suggestions, which is spot on, I would add, watch yourself play. In a mirror if nothing else, but better still, have someone capture your playing on video.
You will quickly notice things you're not even aware you're doing. I've started doing this and I have noticed several bad bowing habits I'm trying to break.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
A story worth repeating here: Kevin Burke tells of sitting down with an accomplished musician friend to play some tunes in the ktichen. The friend, a box player, soon is complaining that he's in a slump, can't play worth sh*te lately.
"No, surely," Kevin says, "it sounds grand from where I'm sitting." They go into another tune.
"Jaysus," wails the box player, "I can't do anything right. This is just pug-ugly noise."
"I can't hear what you're going on about," says Kevin. "Really, you sound fine. It's all in your head."
To which the box player replies, "Sure, but can you imagine a worse place for it to be?"
Over the years, I've noticed that some of the best players go through a phase of being their own worst critics-- they've learned to listen critically, realistically to themselves. But most of them move on to listening to and building on ***what sounds good*** in their own playing.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Right then, here's a u-turn. Go record yourself. Do the test. Record your playing, write down your comments in detail, then listen to the recording and see if you agree.
The only reason I say try this ... and I must stress you only need to try it once ... is to see if you are listening to yourself properly. It won't help you play better. How are you going to make your playing less wooden if you are not hearing the wood in real time? How is your intonation gonna improve if you hear your top B on a recording as flat, and estimate that you have to stretch your pinky a bit further? How is your estimation gonna be accurate if you are not listening for the correct pitch as you play
As for feckin videoing yourself. You wanna win a feckin beauty contest?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Kevin Burke tells the best stories! I like the one he tells about Johnny Cunningham, when they were in Celtic Fiddle Festival---Johnny was a nervous wreck backstage---Kevin went out for the first set and when he came back, Johnny asked him how the audience was, and Kevin said, "Oh, they loved me, but they're going to hate you."
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hmmm. Well, this will probably come out fiddle-specific, but here are some ideas, just off the top of my head. Mind you, it's a lot easier to show and hear these things in person than to scribble about them here.
Take the opening phrase of Rolling in the Ryegrass.
A2 AF DFAF|G2 BG dGBG|
This gets repeated throughout the A part of the tune, so to create momentum and interest, you'll want lots of ways to vary how you play these notes. At the most basic level, you can start by thinking about how crisp and clean--or slurry and smooth--you want notes to start out, especially the notes on downbeats.
Take that first A for example. One way to play it is with a sharp, crisp stroke--going from no sound, to an instant, clear open "A" string. You may notice subtle differences in how this sounds whether you do it with an up bow or down bow. And you can vary the abruptness of the attack by starting with the hair not moving on the string to a sudden draw, or coming onto the string from above.
You can also play the first A loud, as the main down beat, or come down louder on the second A, to create a bit of backbeat pulse.
Next, just for the sake of difference, try slurring onto that A by starting on a pick-up note--B. Play a down bow on the B and then keep the bow going down as you release your left index finger to the open A. Change bow direction to get the second A. Now try it starting with an up bow slur.
B-|A2 AF DFAF|
Also vary the amount of "pop" you get letting go of the B note--by varying bow weight and speed as you change notes, or as you stop on the A to change directions. Play around with it to see what sounds good to you.
For a totally different sound to that beginning, try slurring three notes together:
ABAF DFAF|G2 BG dGBG|
Take the ABA all on a down bow and "pop" the 2nd A as you come off of it. Start the F on and up bow.
Now, as I repeat this phrase in the tune, I'll find other ways to articulate the opening A.
bowed triplet
A/A/A AF DFAF|
bowed triplet starting on B:
B/A/A AF DFAF
slide into a drone with the fourth finger on the D string:
[A2A2] AF DFAF|
etc.
Bear in mind that with every variation, you can toy with bow weighting and unweighting, bow speed, and how much empty space to create before and after the notes.
And then you can go on to develop the same sort of articulations for the next bit of phrase.
While it's fun to play around with variations like this, getting the sound you're after really depends on being in control of bow weighting and speed and using those nuances withint the variations to get the tone and pulse you want in your playing.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
You can use that opening A2 A bit to find out just how much bow control you have. Play each A with a separate bow stroke, and vary the sharpness/smoothness of your attack. On one end of the scale, you want to be able to punch out two crunchy, distinct notes, with a bit of "crack" to the start of each. Also try leaving a little silence between them by cutting your stroke short on the first A.
On the other end of the spectrum, try to make the bow direction change as invisible as possible, almost blurring the two A's into one.
And then play everything in between these two extremes.
I might use a lot of sharp attack in a session or ceili band setting, where you're driving the tune, really pouncing on the downbeats. And I might smooth everything out when playing solo, looking for a light and whimsical mood from the tune. The key is to have that range available any time you want it.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Will, you know I am a fan of your elaborations, and your stuff above is typical good stuff indeed. However, and I hope you'll agree, I'd advise anyone against specifically practising your very specific examples.
I'd suggest to people that you take Will's examples as just examples. I don't want to tread on your toes Will. I just would like to emphasise that the whole point of this is that players should be looking for their own ways of articulating notes and taking Will's suggestions as direction, not specifics.
Will is a good teacher, but to get to "The Next Level" I think you should be discovering this on your own.
Will and I have different ways of looking at stuff and - correct me if I'm wrong, Will, his emphasis is on the minutiae. While mine eschews the detail in favour of the big picture. Will's approach is that if you master the minutiae, the big picture will emerge. My approach is the other way round. If you concentrate on the big picture, the minutiae will fall into place.
Maybe those who are getting hung up on the minutiae would benefit from my approach. And maybe those who are lacking overall direction would benefit taking it down to the minutiae?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I can't remember who the guy was who, when paraphrased, said "perservence will prevail over talent". From someone who has struggled from the lowest rungs to slightly less low rungs on the metaphoric ladder with a marginal modicum of talent, I suspect this to be so.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
A basic problem with the fiddle is that the player hears different sounds to what an audience would hear a few yards away. This leads me to suggest that if a fiddle player wants to hear himself playing in real time (not a recording) as others would hear him, and so that he can instantly correct in his playing what he hears, then he could fit up a decent mic and amp a few feet away and listen on good 'phones plugged into the amp. There shouldn't be any feedback from the 'phones to the mic because of the distance, and the player should have a better idea of what an audience would be hearing.
Alternatively (and a lot less expensive!), play into a corner of a room with acoustically reflective walls. You'll hear more of your "audience" sound coming back to you. Incidentally, this is a trick used by some classical guitarists when practicing, so that they can hear better what they are playing.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Heh, Michael, somehow I just knew that you'd weigh in on my novella.
No worries. Actually, I don't play this way at all. I come at the music from the bigger perspective of simply dancing along to the pulse, the timing within phrases, and how it all fits together.
So I agree with you, Michael.
But as a teacher, I can deconstruct what I'm doing, so I can explain it to someone else. P-K asked for more detail, so I provided it. The ideas I presented above are good examples of what it means to pay attention to how you start and end a note on fiddle. And some people will gain a great deal of understanding of how this fits into the music by playing through the examples.
If those examples don't resonate with you, don't worry. If they help, however, don't feel guilty that you benefitted from having it spelled out. You'll still have to do the work yourself of figuring out how to make the bow do what you want it to.
I've run into people who learn from the details up, and from the big picture down, and blends of the two. I don't know that it matters which way you learn, so long as you eventually end up with some wholistic, broad-and-deep understanding the of the music that informs your playing. There are many ways to learn.
At any rate, I've met plenty of brilliant fiddlers who can talk about these sorts of nuances and details, and who've clearly thought about them at length. Not that they're conscious of them while actually soaring through the tunes, but the subtle understanding and knowledge is there when they talk about it. I've also met brilliant fiddlers who can't explain a thing they do, and that's okay too. I wouldn't recommend them as teachers, though you can still learn a lot just by listening to them.
For me, playing music is all about being in the zone and just letting it happen. Teaching music is all about understanding what happens when you're in the zone and being able to explain that to someone else, particularly to someone who might be struggling to find the zone in the first place.
So playing and teaching are two vastly different things.
Playing, on the other hand, is a form of learning. So be open to that when you play. But don't discount more structured learning ***if that helps you.***
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
P.S. Sometimes I worry that people who stay focused on the big picture sometimes fall into ruts. They don't examine the details and subtleties, and so never realize that they play habitually--stuck in predictable patterns.
I've heard flute players say, "Don't worry about when you take a breath in a tune--it'll come naturally." And then you hear them play and they take a breath in exactly the same spot every time through a tune.
I've heard fiddlers say, "I've never concentrated on my rolls--I just do them." And found myself wishing they'd go find the woodshed because their rolls aren't rolls at all, just untimed mush.
Not everyone falls into these traps, of course. But even great players can wallow in predictable, less-than-inspired habits. Take Martin Hayes' penchant for single bowing jigs, for example (eh, Michael? ), or early Kevin Burke's over reliance on the Georgia shuffle bowing pattern in reels.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
(Now you've got me going...)
It also strikes me that this music is all about nuance. How many times have your ears perked up at just one note different in someone's setting of a tune, a note that makes a big difference?
Yes, with enough listening, these details tend to come out in our own playing, but is there really any harm in calling out these nuances and details?
It's a bit like learning vocabulary in school, on the road to becoming a better reader. Most of us benefitted by have grammar and punctuation and some vocabulary broken down and taught to us. Very few children learn to read well by simply sitting down with a volume of Samuel Beckett and diving in headfirst.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It is just this kind of mix of advice that makes this site so great. Thanks, Will, for unfailingly taking the time and trouble to explain what things to try, and how precisely to try them- this is really invaluable to those of us who don't have or can't get a regular teacher (even if we could, I doubt there would be many who could explain things so clearly without physically being there). Michael's line of approach I also find valuable (when he isn't doing his snake impressions ) for constantly reminding us of the beauty of the whole, of the need for intuition, patience and respect, and how this isn't a race or competition.
C_F's original request for ways to move forward clearly reflected what a lot of us needed, and these different approaches come together to give us the tools to move on, practically and 'spiritually', so to speak.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Lovely thread to lurk into. It can be self defeating to bash yourself up too much. Can't help with the popping question P-K. I thought it was what pipers did with the chanters on their knees - silly me.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I think both Will and Michael are right, balancing each other like yin and yang. Making music is both a physical endeavor and a spiritual one. Michael gives us a description of the spiritual dimension of the pursuit, while Will gives us a description of the physical tools. Both important, and neither alone will carry us to the next level.
I agree with domnull--great thread! Thanks guys!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Find whatever tunes make you smile without even knowing it, then if you can, listen to how others play that tune,and try to find what it is they put in that appeals to you and make a difference. Start small, one tune played in a way that makes you proud is better than one hundred that are not.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Yes, that's good advice. Don't be seduced by the clamour for repertoire. I'm always coming across players who reckon they know 100s of tunes but can't actually play any of them. It's back to thing about, in the beginning, reading music being counterproductive. We talked earlier about training your ears to be able to hear yourself properly. To be able to hear all the little nuances of the many many ways a single phrase can be approached and the ways subtleties of rhythm build to make the music pleasurable. All the things that are not in the sheet music.
And to really appreciate the best tunes, learn to hear how unpredictable phrases turn in on themselves. How the intervals relate. Learn how to discern good tunes from boring ones. See if you can why the good ones are good
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
LOL at Michael's "big yin and yank."
I should point out that in giving specific, physical examples of how to play the opening A in Rolling in the Ryegrass, I didn't do the same for all the other notes in the tune. That's for each player to suss out on their own, eh? How you execute those articulations matters much less than imagining them in the first place. Playing music is ***play*** and it is 99.99999 percent imagination.
The "pop" I'm talking about comes from unweighting the bow abruptly to end a note. You can do it on a single bow stroke, or at the end of a slur. In fact, you can do it anytime--even in the middle of a slur that continues on to another note. Of course, you also have to synchronize your left hand fingering to suit the pop.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Thanks, Will, for explaining the 'pop'. Glad no cruelty to weasels was involved in making it (English joke!).
Good news about Michael coming out as Billy Connolly, though. No surprise to me- all that swearing was a give-away
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I think this music supports a wide range of approaches to it, from analytical to wholistic, without any one excluding the other. The simple fact that it has a well established set of labels for most of the nuances (cuts, slides, smears, slurs, long rolls, short rolls, crans, bowed triplets, drones, etc.) shows that players of previous generations thought and talked about these details.
On the other hand, it is music after all, not poetry or prose, and some of the best parts are ineffable. As they should be.
The danger in deconstructing the music and learning to play it by putting the pieces back together is that you will over-intellectualize it. That's the road to calculated, mechanical, predictable playing (and what passes for new classical music these days).
For me then, these ideas may "inform" my playing, but I want my playing to be ***inspired*** by happiness, sorrow, playfulness, anger, joy, etc., and by the thrill of actively listening to what my session mates are playing at the same time.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There are parallels, I would suggest, in the various possible approaches to literature. Many a time I've heard a young person say "I really liked that book when I read it, but deconstructing it for an essay has removed all the magic."
For the analytical mind, the deconstruction of a novel, play, or poem to see how it works is equally fascinating- though, like any tinkering, risks destroying the thing that fascinates.
Creative writing, in the terms of this discussion, could perhaps be seen on a par with playing (dare I say performing?) the piece of music, if only in the following sense: having honed the necessary skills over the years, the last thing to be thinking about as pen hits paper is technique.
At it's best, the writing 'performance' involved in the final version can be as inspired and holistic as the musical one- though usually preceded by a deal of drudgery (itself on a par with the musical practice we have been discussing above.)
For me, playing music now has the edge in that it leads to a direct sharing with other folk- the buzz of the 'ephemeral moment' as Guernsey Pete put it so eloquently in a different thread many moons ago.
In a sense, the 'level' is immaterial to the enjoyment- it's being involved that counts.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
A lot of writers do construct their work in a very analytical and measured way. Think of Joyce, for example with his maps of Dublin laid out on the floor and his stop watch. Very different from Jack Kerouac, but a lot of both feel like the stream of consciousness.
Music is different, because it happens in real time - or at least it used to before the invention of multi track recording and sequencing. But our diddley music is different, the repetitions exist for you to not make them repetitious. The stream of improvisation and variation that is the zone of playing well is the essence of it, not the regurgitation of what you have practised. And it all passes into the ether and there is no time to analyse it, just move on to the next set. (Except if someone recorded it, then you could analyse it like a piece of literature, but really, what a shame to freeze dry it like that?)
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
That's what I love about making music--it's spontaneous, ephemeral, transient even. I was a prof juggler for many years, and the same qualities are what I enjoyed most about that art form as well.
I suspect this is why both Michael and I are disinclined to recording music ourselves--it's antithetical to why we play music in the first place.
Writing (which is what I do for a living), even when it's fun, is drudgery compared to throwing objects at the sky or skirling a tune offf a bow. "Even a bad day at the fiddle is better than a good day of wordsmithing."
With music, I've always liked the thought that we cannot relive a tune, but we can re-enliven it. In other words, we don't just regurgitate what we've played before, but we re-create the tune, and it's a fresh, new experience every time.
That said, being able to identify and understand the tricky bits that are this music makes it easier to suss out what another player is doing and borrow/steal it for your own use. I've also had it happen in a flying session that something musical will come off my bow or out of my fingers that I've never done before, and two phrases later, part of my brain is trying to figure out what just happened so I can try it again or at least store it for later retrieval. Again, having a vocabulary and analytical understanding of the structure of this music can help, particularly if the whiskey gets in the way of simple muscle memory or visceral recall. hic.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Erm, all of which is to say that I try to be methodical and analytical when I write (mostly non-fiction), but that's not how I play music. Music, for me, is the antidote to days spent writing.
And what you see in my posts on these threads, obviously, is writing, "how to think about making music," not "the making of music."
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
"The repetitions exist for you not to make them repetitious."
That thought is heartening and enlightening, Michael- and, with Will's "recreating the tune", is not something any literal teacher will ever tell you.
Coming on here and reading you guys "thinking about making music" is the third part of the trinity, with listening and trying to play better. I keep reminding myself that this kind of global interchange has never been available to people in quite this way before.
Will, just whizz me over one of your "bad days on the fiddle". I'll settle for that!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Nope, I wouldn't wish my bad fiddles days on anyone. If they happen to land on a session, I switch to mandolin or banjo (where no one can tell the difference between a bad day and a good one)....
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Like Will, I was a professional wordsmith where being methodical and analytical were the order of the day, and playing music in the evenings and weekends was the essential antidote to my work.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Seems we have a fair bit in common here guys- though I was at the free-wheeling, literary end of the spectrum, coming late to the wonders of the non-verbal- hence the endless, pain-in-the-arse questions!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
On the question of recording yourself for diagnostic purposes, I tried that thing of Chad's- record, note your thoughts on how you played, play back, see if your thoughts correspond. It may be a blunt instrument, but it does focus the mind on a) listening to yourself attentively while playing b) getting some idea of how you fared tackling the whole tune- whether you kept a steady pace, bowed straight etc. I think if you then build on the things you did OK, used occasionally it could be a useful tool (I don't intend keeping the clips for posterity!)
For people who can really play though, I take all the stuff about freezing the moment etc., but don't you guys feel we would all be the poorer if, for example, someone hadn't recorded The Bothy Band live on camera and passed it down, making it available for all to see? It may be second best to having been there on the day, but it is inspirational and surely better than having nothing at all?
Or do you take the view that all such recording is like pinning the butterfly to the board?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
For a few years, I tried writing in my spare time, got a few professional articles and even a science fiction story published. But then I got into trad, and got hooked on the immediate gratification. Why wait months for a check and for someone to comment on what you wrote, when you can produce something lovely that you enjoy producing, and get applause and pints the very same evening!!!!!
Very interesting thread here, without the sniping that often crops up and overtakes the topic!!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Back again to say that I think recording oneself can be a good tool to help you get to the next level. Listening to oneself is very important, and will get you to play better. However, listening while playing forces you to listen to what you are doing now, at that very moment. It can be difficult to hear the bigger picture.
Recording yourself playing a few different kinds of tunes, and then listening back to it, allows you to analyze tendencies and places for improvement. It gives you both the bigger picture view, and the minutia at the same time.
I would recommend it to the original poster as a possible way of identifying working points. I would not recommend it as a daily, monthly or even yearly exercise.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
For me, recording is indeed "pinning the butterfly." And recording oneself for others to hear (and buy) smacks a bit of ego, which is also antithetical to the enjoyment I get out of this music.
(Mind, I'm not condemning anyone else for making (or selling) recordings--it's just not something I myself need to do.)
Years ago, I videotaped myself and watched it one time. It was an eye opener--I realized that I looked and sounded far more relaxed and easy than I felt when playing, and that I might improve if I let my mind relax as much as my body apparenty was. It worked. But I also learned the same lesson from simply standing in front of a mirror.
Jode's right in saying that it's hard to hear the big picture--and to catch all the tricky bits--when simply listening to oneself in real time. Recording does make it easier to hear what you're doing. But Michael's also right--that sooner than later you have to learn to do this in real time, as you're playing, if you hope to have fluency as a musician.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Al, this thread reminds me of what the board used to be like on a regular basis--thoughtful differences of opinion that developed into real dialogue because people listened to what others were saying.
For example, Michael went to great pains in one of his posts above to make clear that he wasn't attacking me, while still challenging my analytical approach to deconstructing the music. Not the first time he's been so civil, either (despite what some people think about Mr. Gill). And that led to a good discussion on the distinction between thinkinbg about how to play the music, vs. actually playing the music. In short, Michael's challenge led me to clarify my thinking and comments here.
Thank goodness, the board seems to be headed more in this direction again. We can all help it along by engaging in these positive threads and simply ignoring the purely negative posts (they're Jeremy's bailiwick anyway).
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Though I'm not sure Jode was listening. Jode, The only thing that listening to a recording of yourself can give you is the knowledge of whether you are or aren't listening to yourself properly while you are playing. We know it's harder to listen in real time whilst playing than listen to a recording, but we all agree it's an essential skill.
I'm sorry to repeat myself, but, " recording yourself won't help you play better. How are you going to make your playing less wooden if you are not hearing the wood in real time? How is your intonation gonna improve if you hear your top B on a recording as flat, and estimate that you have to stretch your pinky a bit further? How is your estimation gonna be accurate if you are not listening for the correct pitch as you play." etc.
And this is not to mention why play in the first place if you are not listening?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
If all you helpful guys aren't already suffering 'advice fatigue', here is another question.
One of the main things that seems to distinguish players who have moved up 'the levels' is the ability to use ornamentation instinctively.
Will gave a list of the nuances above (cuts, slides, smears, slurs, long rolls, short rolls, crans, bowed triplets, drones, etc.)
I know roughly what most of these are (except smears!)- but can only manage the slur and the odd feeble cut.
I remember reading on the board a while back the opinion that, in essence, ornamentation in tunes needed to be learnt from the beginning with the tune, but what if- and I assume this may be/have been the case for a few other people- that hasn't happened?
What is the best way back from this situation, and can anyone suggest the first few steps?
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Everyone has their own method of learning ornamentation.
When I´m learning a tune, I learn the bare bones of it first. Then, when I can play it reasonable well by memory (I don´t sight read), I start adding the ornamentation which is conditioned by the instrument I play (concertina) and my style of playing.
When I learn a tune from the Tunes section here, by listening to the midi sound file, I sometimes have to unravel the ornamentation to find out what the basic tune is.
If the tune was submitted by a fiddle player, then the ornamentation will be appropriate for a fiddle, and so on.
I know from previous threads that Will is in favour of submitting tunes complete with ornamentation, and I respect that, it´s just that we have to work harder to find out what the tune is !
I don´t think ornamentation should be written in stone, rather it should depend on the player, his/her skill and style, and the instrument being played.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The problem with so-called "bare bones" versions of tunes is that they aren't really the music. How you articulate the notes is a significant part of what sets this music apart from other genres. They're *not* "ornaments" or embellishments, but integral to the rhythms and melodies.
An easy example is the B part to Last Night's Fun: |d~f3 a~f3|d~f3 agfe| Without rolls, bowed triplets, or some sort of articulation of the pulse on the f3s, you end up with Muzak.
This also reveals the hazards of learning from the dots or abcs--I rarely if ever play a tune "as written" (I hear Michael muttering "You CAN'T play a tune 'as written' so don't bother trying.") You have to aurally know the music-tradition-genre well enough to hear how articulations fit, regardless of what the dots show. If you can't hear that, I'd advise against sight reading tunes.
P-K, let me think a bit on your question--I can give an example of how to layer interest on a tune skeleton, but I'm not sure how much that would actually help. I''ll think on the larger principles and get back to you shortly.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I like the submission of tunes here as it normally is - tunes laid out plainly in crotchets and quavers for the most part, with the odd triplet, normally standing in for a crotchet that clearly needs "something doing to it", be it a triplet or a roll.
The triplets themselves make it that bit harder to read the music, and tend to jam in the midi - not that these are serious impediments to learning the tune, but they don't help much, unless they indicate a descending or ascending run of notes, as opposed to rolls. I'd be happy if rolls and crans were just indicated by a symbol such as the little curve over the note that you get in some music books.
I suppose this system can't handle the notation of long notes and crans note for note. Anyway, as stated or implied, I prefer it simple, with triplets only where really necessary. I have no problem reading off a tune from The Session database and "translating" it into an ornamented tune on the whistle as - or if - I get it properly learnt.
I didn't learn ornamentation when I started whistle, but after years of trying to play the thing like a recorder (!) I found myself able to learn to read music, and whistle ornamentation, at one and the same time from a tutor. I found myself able to apply this very quickly - mind, I was young and enthusiastic.
Right off, I see this as most small arppegios around the notes in a G major chord (G B and d). I know I can add interest and a sense of momentum by using other notes in the G scale. That pattern of |G2 BG dGBG| is a really common one in Irish reels, so let's try a more linear melodic line:
G2 BG dGBc|dBeB dBAB|
or
GABG dGBe|dBeB dBAB|
or
DGBG DGBc|dgeB dBAB|
Or, since this is basically just "noise in G," why not try some rolls and triplets.
An obvious place to use a triplet is the first G2.
G/G/G BG dGBc|dBeB dB B/B/B|
But that doesn't add much lift or momentum. It could set up something more interesting:
G/G/G BG dB B/B/B|dBeB d/d/B AB|
Now the first triplet falls on the strong beat, the second triplet comes after the weak beat, and the third triplet comes on the weak beat of the 2nd bar, but it moves down in pitch as it goes. All of this plays with our expectations (compared to the fairly straightforward approach of the basic melody).
Rolls, maybe?
G2 BG d~B3|dBeB d~B3|
or
G~B3 d~B3|gdeg dB c/B/A|
In the early stages of such exploration, you might want to figure out a few variations that sound good to you and play them enough to get them under your fingers at session speed. Mix them in with however you used to play it before. But don't forget to come back to the same phrases and suss out other ideas.
Seeing the possibilities can also encourage you to polish up your cuts, rolls, triplets, etc., so that they really are available on the fly, and you can let your imagination loose as you're playing the tune. Frankly, it's easier to hear where a tune wants lift when you're already playing it at tempo, in the thick of things. With the articulations comfortably at hand, they tend to insert themselves.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Reckon only one trick at a time, try it in one or two of your best tunes. Don't try and pack everything in everywhere. Try to record yourself and compare.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There is a hell of a lot of talk about decoration/variation verses tune and skeletons and versions etc etc on this web site - a decent proportion of which may well have been generated by Will and I.
I think the most important lesson to learn about all this is to take the many conundrums and inconsistencies on the chin.
For example:
"This is how it goes, if you don't have it this way, you have it wrong"
&
"This is also how it goes"
&
"And it can go this way too, just so long as you remember how it actually goes."
All these statements clearly contradict each other, and yet all are true. It's not rocket science. It's not science at all.
But it's very very important not to interpret the above as freedom. One of my biggest bug bears is lazy eedjits who who like to camouflage their poor ears under the umbrella of what they refer to as the "folk process" - that spurious linking of traditional music with chinese whispers.
I've said this before and will not apologise for repeating it:
People often learn tunes a little bit wrong, substituting phrases that are fresh and imaginative with similar, but wrong, phrases from other tunes they already know. This unfortunate dilution has the inevitable consequence of fertilising that old maxim that it all sounds the same.
However, back to P-K's question and I'll answer it twice, in contradiction:
1 - Its impossible to use ornamentation instinctively. An instinct is something hot-wired into you dna. Humans have very few of these and playing diddley music is not one of them. If you try to fake it by practising over and over all the different ways you can possibly play a phrase and trying to pick them at random on the hoof, you will merely sink yourself into the torments of technique.
2 - If you listen and play diddley music regularly with intelligent concentration, you will, by default, be listening to and playing phrases with a kind of instinctive creative inconsistency. I say inconsistent because you will be constantly experimenting and pushing the boundaries of what you already know.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
OK,OK, enough already, I surrender
...but....
Let me try to clarify my question a little. I was thinking of something like Amrhan Na Leabhar (Song of the Books)- (of which there are about five entries in the Tunes section, all apparently with the same midi- don't get this-why?).
Anyway, having learnt the 'bare bones' (midi) version, you have a beautiful tune, which some, however, might term 'banal'. So you want to add in some of the twiddly bits from the Matt Cranitch version, say (bear in mind I still have the L plates on).
How best to tackle this- a) one by one within the tune, or b) set out to learn how to do rolls etc. outside the tune and then try to apply them?
I suppose that is what I was getting at with the 'instinctive' thing. If you take the b) route, and practise them in the abstract, so to speak, is this a better way of 'having them available on the fly' to apply in the longer term in other tunes?
(What I really want, of course, is for someone to wave a magic wand and make twinkly stuff descend on my playing. Sad, really- but then I'm just a kid ;) )
P.S. 'Instinctive inconsistency' - now, that I do have.
PPS. I'm listening, Michael, lord knows I'm listening!
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hi Michael and Will, how are you these days? I haven't been around the board too much recently. Sorry I was not more in the mix here to make it seem as if I was listening.
Michael, I do agree that we need to learn to listen, and that it is a prime skill, a necessary skill. You said:
"The only thing that listening to a recording of yourself can give you is the knowledge of whether you are or aren't listening to yourself properly while you are playing. "
If recording yourself teaches the types of things you are hearing and not hearing, it does help then, doesn't it?
The last time I did this was about 3 or 4 years ago, when I was making a CD of tunes for my Mom. There was a jig that I thought I was playing well. When listening back, there was a run of notes crossing strings. I was hearing a smooth sound in my head, but was bowing it singly, and it actually came out rough.
Now, you will say that I was not listening to myself well enough. That's OK. But, I did not discover this tendency until I examined that tune. In fact, I did note this about my playing overall. That it was rough in spots where I wanted it to sound smoother.
Now I know what to listen for, and concentrate to hear those sorts of things while I am playing.
I am not saying that this should be a form of practice. I just think that hearing yourself from a different perspective can be a useful tool.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hey Jode, we've missed you--though many of us old timers here now come out of the woodwork only for good threads like this one.
I agree--listening to a recording of yourself can be a powerful wake up call. Once in a great while is probably enough (and as much as some of us can stomach).
P-K, how your learn the actually twiddly bits, and how you learn to fit them into your playing of the tunes really is up to you. If they seem physically difficult to do--just to coordinate the fingers, bow, and whatever--then maybe it'd be best to single them out and do some serious woodshedding on the basic technique for each type of twiddly bit.
Also, if the twiddly bits are a struggle, realize that you can work your way into them through building blocks. For example, to play rolls well, you'll want to be able to do simple cuts cleanly and with a sense of timing that adds lift when you use cuts.
So you could practice playing a cut to separate two B notes on the 2nd string: | AB{d}B2 |, using your ring finger to flick the string (not actually landing on "d"). This then sets the timing for doing a roll: | A~B3 |
A roll on the beat would need a cut more like: | B2{d}BA |, where you hang on the first B before starting the cut. The roll would then be | ~B3A |
Similarly, with bowed triplets, it helps to get very comfortable with single bowing jig phrases, and also triplet runs in hornpipes. Try single bowing all the way through a jig like Lilting Banshee, just to get those nerves firing in patters of down-up-down and up-down-up.
Then learn a tune like the Belfast Hornpipe. The C part is a long series of triplets--good warm up for bowed triplets.
Then bowed triplets follow, making the down-up-down or up-down-up motion as small and "close to the stick" as possible while keeping all three notes distinct and clear. Work on the triplets within a tune--say the opening to Silver Spear.
FA A/A/A
where you down bow the F, up bow the first A, and then do the triplet down-up-down (assuming that direction feels comfortable to you).
As you realize, there are no shortcuts, no magic wands. But once the twiddly bits feel familiar to you--by sheer dint of doing them a lot--they will be "easy."
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
You put it well Jode, that perspective can also cheer you up and realise you are progressing, I know you should be able to do this in real time, or shoud I say Reel time, but that's a skill some of us are still developing. Perhaps try to find someone to play music with, it's more fun for sure for learning, don't forget to enjoy it.
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hi Will, good to converse with you again. Yes, I agree about the "great while" part too. It just seemed decent advice for someone who feels like they are stuck on a plateau.
I don't want to come off as some advocate for recording a tune, listening back to it, recording it again with changes...
The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I play ITM on the fiddle. I have been playing for around 3.5 years. I have definitely come a long way, to where I would say that I am a decent but utterly unremarkable player. So what I am wondering -- and I know this is sort of vague and open-ended -- is this: how do I move beyond the level of playing I am at? What things should I be paying attention to? What are some common obstacles that need to be overcome to move from "blandly competent" to "impressive" (or even "amazing")?
I realize that:
1. I am asking for advice even though you probably haven't heard me play
2. If I had a teacher, they could probably give me some good advice
3. There is not necessarily just a single path forward from where I am at -- there may be more than one "next level", depending on which direction I want to go
A side note: I also play the mandolin, and have done so for around 7 years. I would say I am much better at the mandolin than I am at the fiddle. And I was already much better at the mandolin after 3.5 years than I am on the fiddle after 3.5 years, even though I have actually probably spent many more hours playing the fiddle in 3.5 years than I spent playing the mandolin in 7 years. I never really hit a plateau on the mandolin where I just really wondered how I was ever going to get better. Basically the more I play the mandolin, the better I get, in what seems to be a more straightforward, linear path. But with the fiddle, my playing is not developing in such a linear, gradual fashion, or at least such development is not apparent to me.
I would be interested in any constructive advice anyone might have.
# Posted on July 15th 2007 by crazy_fingerz
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Get a teacher. That's good advice in and of itself.
--DtM
# Posted on July 15th 2007 by Dan the Man
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It may be time for you to stop thinking on the instrument's terms and simply concentrate on the music. It's not about being a better fiddle player, or mandolin player, it's about being a better player of the tunes. Do less practising and more listening and playing. Do more playing for the fun of it and stop analysing. Relax.
# Posted on July 15th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I agree that you should find a teacher. If you can, find a pro ITM fiddler near you and take a few lessons. Even a few would give you an idea of how to improve. I believe strongly in taking lessons. Also, you might take lessons from a few different people, because different musicians will have different approaches to the music.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by dyersituations
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The difference between a bland fiddler and a "remarkable" one isn't technique, but expressiveness. And if your aim is to impress, then that's what you'll express. And likely not impress anyone. (As Martin Hayes says, the more a musician tries to impress him, the less impressed he is.)
The bow hand gives you an incredible range of expressiveness, but it takes time and attention to coax it out of that stick and horsehair. Take a tune that you already play well and ask yourself what that tune makes you feel. Then let the feeling come out in your playing. This can take years in itself--learning to be open to the music instead of controling it.
I'm just now reading a book on the neuroscience of music, and the author says that mastery of any special skill takes on average 10,000 hours. That's 20 hours a week for 10 years. So keep playing....
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I think this whole thing about taking a formal teacher depends on your personality. By this, I ask are you an open sponge, or are you a focused "I know what I want" type?
I'll elaborate ...
If you are the "I know what I want" type, then you may be better off with a teacher. Because your dogmatic attitude may well lead you down some dead ends. It's a difficult thing to judge, you may well think that you have a clear idea of how you would like to play, and all you lack is the technical ability. But maybe your strive for a particular technical ability is clouding your openness for the music? A good teacher will spot this instantly and steer you away from mere technique.
On the other hand. If you are a sponge ... if you have that open wonderment of the beauty of ALL of it ... then the chances are that a teacher would no only smother this, but may also just lead you down one track that isn't you.
Your post seems to suggest that technique is not an issue. If this is the case (and it should be, because technically, this music is very basic) then what you need is not a teacher, but thousands of teachers. All the players you ever hear that you like.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Well said, Michael.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Will, maybe that's right with the 10,000 hours stuff ... for a special skill. But I'm of the opinion that one of the beauties of our diddley music is that, though the music is special, the technical skill required is not that special.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
All teachers can do, even the best teachers (and especially the best teachers), when you're talking about expressiveness, is to show you how *they* see the music, how *they* approach a tune. Even if you don't mimic what they play, it's still nice to have someone explain to you why they emphasize a certain part of a tune, or try to go for a certain feel on a tune, what they feel the tune is trying to tell them. And from that, they can point you in the direction of technique---how a few cuts here can emphasize this part, a few slurs there can give lift to that part---and they can watch what you do and help you see if what you're doing is helping you bring out what you want to express. Hope this makes sense, I'm still at the beginning of this whole process, but my teacher has given me stylistic points from the beginning, so I kind of think you can develop it at any time, all through the learning process.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by kennedy
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There are two departments here, one is "the music" and two is your ability to make your instrument play it.
I'm only guessing, but I strongly suggest this will no longer be an issue if you take your clothes off and climb into bed with the music.
Listen and listen,explore, find all the little erogenous zones, solve all the puzzles, and viola.......the next level!
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by mcknowall
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Just in case anyone gets frightened out of their wits at the prospect of 10,000 hours hard slog before they've "mastered" the special skill of playing the fiddle/violin, I'm sure that figure was directed at the players who aim to become world-class classical virtuosos - and there are not so many of those around compared with the generality of musicians. The great classical violin virtuoso and teacher Ruggieri Ricci said that if a pupil hasn't got complete technical mastery by the time they're 16 (or 18 at the latest) then they can forget a career at the topmost world level. The implication would be that such a pupil would have started at about the age of 4 or 5 and would have got in those 10,000 hours by their mid-teens.
As llig (Michael) pointed out, the amount of technical skill required for the fiddle (Irish/folk) is remarkably small compared with even that required for playing in an amateur classical orchestra. Note that I said "amount of technical skill", but your aim should be to get that relatively small amount up to the best standard you can in order to play and express the music at the level it deserves. It's also worth pointing out that the greatest level of technical skill in playing the fiddle is in the bowing. As far as Irish fiddle _technique_ is concerned I think 4,000 - 6,000 hours is a much more realistic target to get near to technical mastery.
But of course, "technique" is a basic tool of the trade and is only one part of the equation. I expect some of us have come across ITM players who are technically perfect but just don't move anyone listening (except perhaps to the bar!). I reckon that it takes at least another 5,000 hours for an ITM player to really understand and express the depths of the music in his playing. Perhaps then he might be approaching one of the plateaux of mastery, only to realise that there is another mountain range in the distance to be scaled, and others further on. But when on that first plateau he may well be at a level where he can teach and pass on the music (not just the technical skills) to others.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by lazyhound
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I have been playing around 1300 days I guess. I do play a lot; perhaps I have averaged an hour or two per day over this time. So I guess that puts me at perhaps 2000-3000 hours under my belt so far. If it really takes something on the order of 10,000 hours to be a master, then I guess maybe I am just getting ahead of myself and being impatient (my wife would say "obsessed").
I am going to get into bed with the music now, if I can figure out what that means, and if my wife doesn't divorce me over it.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by crazy_fingerz
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Here are my general and dogmatic answers.
How do I move beyond the level of playing I am at?
ANSWER: Spend about a year on bowing. Then repeat. Repeat ad lib.
What things should I be paying attention to?
ANSWER: You should be paying attention to the tunes that you really like, including any new tunes that you can learn, or put on the list to come back to when you reach the next level. Concentrate on learning the tunes that you can adapt into your style, and also concentrate on developing your style into a style that others will want to play with you, and that you will like to play. Leave aside the tunes that you have learned but that do not present useful exercises or opportunities for your style. For example, want to learn bow rocking? Try Durang’s Hornpipe, and so on. Some tunes just cannot be executed in your skillset, they are either too notey, not directly suitable for fretlessness, or will require some adaptation. So adapt away. Chop out notes or change notes to suit your ear. Remember, this is just to help your style, and you will have to maintain some standards / tunes for playing with others. A fretless stringed instrument has a lot more variables in things like note attack, legato, slurs, slides, unison notes on two strings, sustain, and when and where to change bow direction. For me it is the initiation of the note that obstructs my progress, trying to get more of a vowel start of the note than a consonant. Keep coming back periodically, every six months or so to those tunes that you have left aside, to verify they are still aside; sometimes you can pick one up again with your developing skillset.
What are some common obstacles that need to be overcome to move from "blandly competent" to "impressive" (or even "amazing")?
ANSWER: All the technical issues that must be overcome in the first years of playing. Coming form a fretted instrument, do you find this affects your fiddling? Are you playing / learning the same tunes on both? Are those fingers going in the same places on both? The bow and pick are not. You may want o make fiddle Instrument Number One. The advice to relax is good. For example, can you play the fiddle at 6:00 a.m. before coffee? Sometimes I find I play better when I am tired, at an evening gig. Some relaxation helps dissipate the tensions that often stifle the music, for me. I hear different things in the music at different times, then almost completely astounding me that I did not hear it previously. Sometimes I can carry it to a next level, other times it falls back, and can fall far back, and I have to re-approach. But the approach is always from a fiddle standpoint, and I came from a guitar, banjo, mandolin origin, to which I have not returned. So maybe fret baggage is in play for you.
-dogma
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by dogmageek
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Gee, I didn't think 10,000 hours was so much. But then I've played fiddle for 30 years now. And crazy_fingers took it more how I meant it--that 3.5 years really isn't all that long to be playing fiddle, so more time spent at it will likely be rewarding.
Maybe the more salient point made in the neuroscience book is that studies of music conservatory students show that what matters most in differentiating the best players from the rest is the amount of time spent playing. The "best" players typically spent twice as much time practicing as the students judged less capable.
In short, if you want to get good at something, do it, a lot. Paying attention to the quality of what you're doing.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I don't want to come off as judgmental or harsh, but I do want to ask the question: Are you playing the fiddle because you WANT to sound "impressive" or "amazing"? If you are, then you need to explain what you mean by that. And if it is that you want people who hear you to say that you are impressive and amazing, then maybe that's not the best reason to put in the time to learn to play the fiddle.
But if you're playing because you love the music and you want to be able to play the music on the fiddle, then what everyone else said applies. Get a teacher if you can. And play the music for your enjoyment. And keep at it. There is no magic about playing for 10,000 hours (i.e.; when you have played for 10,000 everything falls into place and suddenly, you sound like _________________ ((insert name of great fiddle player you want to sound like)). The point is, keep playing if you want to play Irish music on the fiddle.
"Impresisve" and "amazing" are really very subjective . Those words imply that it is other's opinions of your playing that have value to you. If you have gone from beginning to play tunes on the fiddle to "blandly compentent" in 3.5 years, and you know what "blandly competent" means to you, AND you are continuing to play Irish tunes on the fiddle, then I would say you're doing pretty good.
Are you pleased with your progress? Do you feel good about investing the time you have spent at this? Do you like playing the tunes on the fiddle? Are you having fun?
I think these are some questions you should consider.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by John Culhane
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hi. i think what you need to do is to increase your musical vocabulary. this means firstly identifying, and secondly learning the musical characteristics of players you find special.
for me, i´ve always loved dermot byrne for his smoothness, mairead mooney for her drive, ciaran tourish for the counterpoint and say mairtin o connor for his quirkyness.. so i took the aspects of these peoples styles and incorporated it into my own playng creating something new, and for me exciting to play.
now of course i have been influenced by many other musicians and by many other styles of music but that was certainly a good place to start. Like your character, it´s made
up of many different elements: some robbed, some which later turn out to be oRijioneL!
folk music, being an expression of folk/ people is in my opinion constructed in a like fashion to the people who play it. it is an expression of the self.
then of course if you want to be a "purist" (an incorrect term when applied to irish traditional music because an accepted definition of the genre has not yet been agreed upon) just go and learn how to play like michael coleman and your done.
if you want me to expand on anything i´ve said here, send me an email.
fair play for an interesting post.
martin tourish.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by martin t
P.s.
getting a teacher is an obvious answer but probably not the best one because teachers in trad 90 percent of the time only succeed in creating clones of themselves (unintentionally) as opposed to finding a pupils individuality through music which in my humble opinion is where it´s all at.
(oh and don´t shoot me for the 90 percent figure, and give me examples of brilliant teachers, i know they exist!)
End of rant. i can now sleep in peace! lol.
mt
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by martin t
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
C_f, you must feel reasonably happy with your own playing in the first place to feel you can move up a level, so that in itself is great- a place a lot of us are still striving to reach. Putting in as many hours as possible, as everyone says, is the only way.
To run with Michael's point about listening to as many different players as possible and trying to be open to the beauty of the music, one of the difficulties (at my level) is in recognising exactly what the players you admire are actually *doing* that makes their sound so special. The beginner can sometimes have difficulty seeing or hearing anything beyond the speed of their playing- and be tempted to emulate that with predictable results.
Secondly, even if you do get an inkling of what else they put in, it's not easy knowing how to translate that to your own playing.
Thirdly, developing your own (albeit borrowed) style can seem something of a luxury when you are in the process of mastering the basics and commiting tunes to memory, and are not that confident. Saying to a teacher (should you be lucky enough to have one specialised in Irish music) 'please teach me to play like so-and-so' seems pretentious and misguided.
The advice above of 'take one tune you love' and make that your platform for experiment seems a very good starting point to me.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Have to agree on working on one tune and turning stuff inside out and upside down and around and then adding subtracting, speeding up and slowing down, I'm doing this after 5 months fiddling on tunes like Boys of Bluehill, there can be enough material to play this tune 100,000 different ways, so I like that advice. You can get stuff like Eileen Ivers, Martin Hayes, Liz Carroll and Tommy Peoples and listen to them just for ideas first an dthen try to get the same sounds in to your tunes.
It's not a 5 year plan at least it shouldn't be, it should be a labour of love. Something you enjoy doing, keep measuring and you won't enjoy!
Regards
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Shylock
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There seems to be a lot of emphasis on practice here. What I was trying to say was to steer clear of practice. The 10,000 hours thing before you are out of your teens may well be necessary for a classical career. But bear in mind that you have an instrument in your hands with a range of six or seven octaves of 11 notes, though the vast majority of the time you only want just under two octaves of just 7 notes. Do the math ... as the yanks say.
My point is that a lot of practice is frustrating repetition of things you haven't quite got yet. Just don't bother with this, it's counter productive. Play only for your enjoyment and not only will the technique take care of itself, but you'll be staying in love with the music. And if you really do love the music, the one thing you'll have in abundance is patience
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Will, I'm very interested in this book and hunting a new read, would you mind giving the author and title? A friend is working on something similar although not specifically pertaining to music, he'd also be interested (his project is a take on history-meets-neurology).
10,000 hours at 20 hours a week for 10 years, provided you've got that much time, also lends some scientific credence to Seamus Ennis' claim that a master piper took 21 years in the making. While the pipes are still here, by the time I master the new copier at work it will have been outmoded several times. I guess that's an encouraging difference between traditional music and life at the office.
To me, 'practice' only means playing the instrument with every available shred of time I have. Making it so regimented and stiff is looking too closely at a bigger picture, I think. I never started playing music because I had to.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by gravelwalks
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I'd empathise with Llig - 'play from the heart and for the heart '. Someone asked here once for advice on what to do when they got frustrated & fed up with their music making. The best reply imho or maybe the one that suited me best! was to go back to some 'simple' tune and play it slower and as beautifully as possible so as to fall in love with sound all over again. Sounds very soppy this ..... but I have perceived in several aspects of life that one often needs to go backwards to go forwards again. Maybe that's the case here?
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by the wounded hussar
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I only just got around to reading all the posts in this thread and without mentioning names, I have to say how impressed I am. Impressed with the relevance of the subject matter (to me at least) and impressed with the quality of the responses.
I am six years into the transition from guitar to mandolin and on to fiddle with two years on the latter.
Thank you to everyone.
Will, I would love to read that book on neuroscience - give us the title/author please.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Donough
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
On a different tack from replies so far, record yourself. (The quality needs to be decent so you can trust the results, not the built in microphone of an old cassette recorder.) Start with something that you know well and are confident about, not something "hard," keep the pace steady. Are you in tune? Is that pesky third finger "pinching" notes slightly flat? Is the time steady, how do the starts and ends of notes sound. Try again, working on the things you didn't like. Go round that cycle half a dizen times and the improvement can be remarkable.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by TomB-R
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
No, don't go recording yourself. It's just the kind of navel gazing you shouldn't be doing. You should be hearing all the stuff as you play. Listen to yourself live. All a recording (and lets face it, unless you have $10,000 of equipment, it will be a bad recording) will give you is a stark look at your technique, but you should be past this. I know people will chime in here and say how useful it is to hear yourself how others hear you, but you really shouldn't be bothered with this. Care how you sound to yourself, and how you sound to others will fall into place. Be ego free.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hussar- that process you mention rings true- forever taking a step back in order to progress.
I've just started recording myself and it's a rude awakening. Rarely does it sound as good as I think it sounds the rest of the time- and that isn't saying much! That could be explained by impatience, the urge to forge ahead, record everything just to see. Also being recorded can cause you to mess up through self-consciousness, so the net result *can* be disappointing.
Chad, I'm going to try that 'micro-learning' approach you suggest, especially the starts and ends of notes-concentrating on individual notes is something easily forgotten as you try to get the whole tune.
Michael- I like the idea of respite from 'the frustration of endless repetition of things you haven't quite got yet', but what to replace it with for, say, two hours a day? Is it better to head on with new tunes waiting to be learnt, or experiment/play around with existing ones? I don't begrudge the time spent practicing the pieces I (almost) know, but it would be nice to discover alternative, less frustrating ways of moving forward.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I acknowledge your view on this Michael, but if a player of 3.5 years experience is "past this" they're so talented, they don't need our opinions.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by TomB-R
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
If you are, say, a guitarist (I use guitar simply so I can speak from experience) who has been working on strumming speed and smoothness (among many other things) but can't seem to make progress, a teacher can say, "oh, if you hold your hand this way, and use your forearm more than your wrist as you strum, and play more lightly, etc, etc......" And all of a sudden, what was difficult doing it the way you used to do it becomes easy, and you make a breakthrough. Instead of using a technique that can't do what you want it to, you are using a new technique, and your playing mutates. That is the kind of thing a good teacher can do.
I highly recommend finding a teacher if you find yourself deadlocked. If you are specific about what you want, and approach the lessons as a collaboration, rather than a "tear everything you do apart so you can relearn everything and sound like me" experience, great things can happen--things that wouldn't necessarily happen either from unguided practice, or from simply playing out for fun.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Be patient. Don't keep looking for short cuts. Listening to yourself whilst you play is not as easy as listening to a recording, but it you will not progress unless this is second nature. It seems an odd thing to say, but plenty of musicians don't listen to themselves when they play. Too hung up on technique. Also, listen to others, recordings if you have nothing else. Take respite from your frustration and sit and really listen to some music. Don't potter about doing the washing up or driving or something. Sit and give it your full attention. An hour of this will do more for your playing than an hour of trying to do something you can't.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Michael's got it in one. Really listening to your playing as you play (and _not_ via a recording!) is the most difficult lesson for any musician to learn. When you've cracked that one then you'll really progress.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by lazyhound
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
"Active" listening to yourself, others and to recordings is great advice. One thing that I had to overcome, and I am not sure I have completely done it yet, is hearing how you really sound versus how you think you sound; or perhaps how you think you should sound.
I think that your mind can trick you, as you hold the music in your head, and then try to replicate that music through your instrument.
I have found recording to be a useful tool in showing myself that I do not always sound the way that I "think". Or perhaps I hear it differently while playing? Or perhaps I am not listening as closely as I should be listening.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Jode
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The book is "This is Your Brain on Music" by Daniel J. Levitin, 2006 Dutton Press or Penguin Publishing.
Just finished reading it last night, and I'm a little disappointed at the lack of depth--it strikes me as written more for the music listener than the musician. But then I've also been reading "The Developing Mind" by Daniel J. Siegel, and it goes into much greater detail on neuroanatomy and neural process (though it only infrequently touches on music and auditory processing).
I agree with Michael that learning to really listen--to yourself and other musicians--is essential and likely to be the most helpful. For me, this raises the question--what to listen for?
Everything, of course. But a few things jump out.
- Listen to how you articulate notes, in particular how you start and end them. Play with this--find as many ways as you can to vary how you start and end notes, and you'll have a tremendous vocabulary for varying your timing and expression.
- Listen to your sense of phrasing. How do you "chunk" a tune--and how can you change your sense of a tune by grouping notes into longer or shorter chunks? What happens at the end of one chunk and the beginning of another? Where is the breathing space between chunks and withing chunks?
- Listen to the timbre of your playing. Is it round and full, or thin and whingey? How many ways can you vary the timbre of your instrument?
- Listen to the beat. Where are the strong beats, weak beats? How do good players push and pull the beat to create momentum and interest?
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Here's a thought---I spent the first few months of my fiddling career learning *not* to listen to myself. My intonation was so bad I couldn't bear it! If I hadn't learned to ignore most of the sour pitches and squeaks and crunches, I would have quit before I ever learned to make them go away. It's only lately that I can stand to hear some of what comes out of my fiddle, and that's only on the good days. So I have to learn to listen to myself all over again.
It's all a mental game, I swear.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by kennedy
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It would be interesting to test the recording thing objectively. Record your playing, write down your comments in detail, then listen to the recording and see if you agree, and/or have any other comments to add.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by TomB-R
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The difference between how you think you play and sound and how you see/hear yourself playing on a recording is interesting. My recorded timbre sounds thin and scratchy, but I kid myself that might to some extent be an effect of the cheap recording gear. What surprised me most, though, was that the pieces I know pretty well and was trying to play at a good speed came out on the recording as wooden, gutless and boring- as if I wasn't expending half as much energy as I should.
To make things worse, I have just spent this afternoon listening to The Bothy Band and watching the Altan 'John Doherty's Reels' clip on YouTube!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=EJDTQW87w-s.
It's not the speed I covert so much as the precision and vitality. What use a leaden fiddler in Irish music, eh? So I shall put away the recorder, as suggested, and concentrate on listening to myself and others. Envy is a terrible thing, though, isn't it?
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
In addition to the listen to yourself suggestions, which is spot on, I would add, watch yourself play. In a mirror if nothing else, but better still, have someone capture your playing on video.
You will quickly notice things you're not even aware you're doing. I've started doing this and I have noticed several bad bowing habits I'm trying to break.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by FiddleMeThis
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Kennedy- if it's a game as you say, maybe our fortunes will change in the second half !
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
A story worth repeating here: Kevin Burke tells of sitting down with an accomplished musician friend to play some tunes in the ktichen. The friend, a box player, soon is complaining that he's in a slump, can't play worth sh*te lately.
"No, surely," Kevin says, "it sounds grand from where I'm sitting." They go into another tune.
"Jaysus," wails the box player, "I can't do anything right. This is just pug-ugly noise."
"I can't hear what you're going on about," says Kevin. "Really, you sound fine. It's all in your head."
To which the box player replies, "Sure, but can you imagine a worse place for it to be?"
Over the years, I've noticed that some of the best players go through a phase of being their own worst critics-- they've learned to listen critically, realistically to themselves. But most of them move on to listening to and building on ***what sounds good*** in their own playing.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Right then, here's a u-turn. Go record yourself. Do the test. Record your playing, write down your comments in detail, then listen to the recording and see if you agree.
The only reason I say try this ... and I must stress you only need to try it once ... is to see if you are listening to yourself properly. It won't help you play better. How are you going to make your playing less wooden if you are not hearing the wood in real time? How is your intonation gonna improve if you hear your top B on a recording as flat, and estimate that you have to stretch your pinky a bit further? How is your estimation gonna be accurate if you are not listening for the correct pitch as you play
As for feckin videoing yourself. You wanna win a feckin beauty contest?
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Really? They have beauty contests where they feck? Suddenly the swimsuit competition seems so tame....
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Kevin Burke tells the best stories! I like the one he tells about Johnny Cunningham, when they were in Celtic Fiddle Festival---Johnny was a nervous wreck backstage---Kevin went out for the first set and when he came back, Johnny asked him how the audience was, and Kevin said, "Oh, they loved me, but they're going to hate you."
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by kennedy
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Michael, you're right- video is definitely a turn-off- in my case like watching a corpse playing jigs and reels at a wake.
Will- those bullet points about what to listen for are really helpful. Could you expand a bit on different ways to start and end a note?
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hmmm. Well, this will probably come out fiddle-specific, but here are some ideas, just off the top of my head. Mind you, it's a lot easier to show and hear these things in person than to scribble about them here.
Take the opening phrase of Rolling in the Ryegrass.
A2 AF DFAF|G2 BG dGBG|
This gets repeated throughout the A part of the tune, so to create momentum and interest, you'll want lots of ways to vary how you play these notes. At the most basic level, you can start by thinking about how crisp and clean--or slurry and smooth--you want notes to start out, especially the notes on downbeats.
Take that first A for example. One way to play it is with a sharp, crisp stroke--going from no sound, to an instant, clear open "A" string. You may notice subtle differences in how this sounds whether you do it with an up bow or down bow. And you can vary the abruptness of the attack by starting with the hair not moving on the string to a sudden draw, or coming onto the string from above.
You can also play the first A loud, as the main down beat, or come down louder on the second A, to create a bit of backbeat pulse.
Next, just for the sake of difference, try slurring onto that A by starting on a pick-up note--B. Play a down bow on the B and then keep the bow going down as you release your left index finger to the open A. Change bow direction to get the second A. Now try it starting with an up bow slur.
B-|A2 AF DFAF|
Also vary the amount of "pop" you get letting go of the B note--by varying bow weight and speed as you change notes, or as you stop on the A to change directions. Play around with it to see what sounds good to you.
For a totally different sound to that beginning, try slurring three notes together:
ABAF DFAF|G2 BG dGBG|
Take the ABA all on a down bow and "pop" the 2nd A as you come off of it. Start the F on and up bow.
Now, as I repeat this phrase in the tune, I'll find other ways to articulate the opening A.
bowed triplet
A/A/A AF DFAF|
bowed triplet starting on B:
B/A/A AF DFAF
slide into a drone with the fourth finger on the D string:
[A2A2] AF DFAF|
etc.
Bear in mind that with every variation, you can toy with bow weighting and unweighting, bow speed, and how much empty space to create before and after the notes.
And then you can go on to develop the same sort of articulations for the next bit of phrase.
While it's fun to play around with variations like this, getting the sound you're after really depends on being in control of bow weighting and speed and using those nuances withint the variations to get the tone and pulse you want in your playing.
Hope this helps.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
You can use that opening A2 A bit to find out just how much bow control you have. Play each A with a separate bow stroke, and vary the sharpness/smoothness of your attack. On one end of the scale, you want to be able to punch out two crunchy, distinct notes, with a bit of "crack" to the start of each. Also try leaving a little silence between them by cutting your stroke short on the first A.
On the other end of the spectrum, try to make the bow direction change as invisible as possible, almost blurring the two A's into one.
And then play everything in between these two extremes.
I might use a lot of sharp attack in a session or ceili band setting, where you're driving the tune, really pouncing on the downbeats. And I might smooth everything out when playing solo, looking for a light and whimsical mood from the tune. The key is to have that range available any time you want it.
# Posted on July 16th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Will, you know I am a fan of your elaborations, and your stuff above is typical good stuff indeed. However, and I hope you'll agree, I'd advise anyone against specifically practising your very specific examples.
I'd suggest to people that you take Will's examples as just examples. I don't want to tread on your toes Will. I just would like to emphasise that the whole point of this is that players should be looking for their own ways of articulating notes and taking Will's suggestions as direction, not specifics.
Will is a good teacher, but to get to "The Next Level" I think you should be discovering this on your own.
Will and I have different ways of looking at stuff and - correct me if I'm wrong, Will, his emphasis is on the minutiae. While mine eschews the detail in favour of the big picture. Will's approach is that if you master the minutiae, the big picture will emerge. My approach is the other way round. If you concentrate on the big picture, the minutiae will fall into place.
Maybe those who are getting hung up on the minutiae would benefit from my approach. And maybe those who are lacking overall direction would benefit taking it down to the minutiae?
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I can't remember who the guy was who, when paraphrased, said "perservence will prevail over talent". From someone who has struggled from the lowest rungs to slightly less low rungs on the metaphoric ladder with a marginal modicum of talent, I suspect this to be so.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by drone
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
A basic problem with the fiddle is that the player hears different sounds to what an audience would hear a few yards away. This leads me to suggest that if a fiddle player wants to hear himself playing in real time (not a recording) as others would hear him, and so that he can instantly correct in his playing what he hears, then he could fit up a decent mic and amp a few feet away and listen on good 'phones plugged into the amp. There shouldn't be any feedback from the 'phones to the mic because of the distance, and the player should have a better idea of what an audience would be hearing.
Alternatively (and a lot less expensive!), play into a corner of a room with acoustically reflective walls. You'll hear more of your "audience" sound coming back to you. Incidentally, this is a trick used by some classical guitarists when practicing, so that they can hear better what they are playing.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by lazyhound
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Heh, Michael, somehow I just knew that you'd weigh in on my novella.
No worries. Actually, I don't play this way at all. I come at the music from the bigger perspective of simply dancing along to the pulse, the timing within phrases, and how it all fits together.
So I agree with you, Michael.
But as a teacher, I can deconstruct what I'm doing, so I can explain it to someone else. P-K asked for more detail, so I provided it. The ideas I presented above are good examples of what it means to pay attention to how you start and end a note on fiddle. And some people will gain a great deal of understanding of how this fits into the music by playing through the examples.
If those examples don't resonate with you, don't worry. If they help, however, don't feel guilty that you benefitted from having it spelled out. You'll still have to do the work yourself of figuring out how to make the bow do what you want it to.
I've run into people who learn from the details up, and from the big picture down, and blends of the two. I don't know that it matters which way you learn, so long as you eventually end up with some wholistic, broad-and-deep understanding the of the music that informs your playing. There are many ways to learn.
At any rate, I've met plenty of brilliant fiddlers who can talk about these sorts of nuances and details, and who've clearly thought about them at length. Not that they're conscious of them while actually soaring through the tunes, but the subtle understanding and knowledge is there when they talk about it. I've also met brilliant fiddlers who can't explain a thing they do, and that's okay too. I wouldn't recommend them as teachers, though you can still learn a lot just by listening to them.
For me, playing music is all about being in the zone and just letting it happen. Teaching music is all about understanding what happens when you're in the zone and being able to explain that to someone else, particularly to someone who might be struggling to find the zone in the first place.
So playing and teaching are two vastly different things.
Playing, on the other hand, is a form of learning. So be open to that when you play. But don't discount more structured learning ***if that helps you.***
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
P.S. Sometimes I worry that people who stay focused on the big picture sometimes fall into ruts. They don't examine the details and subtleties, and so never realize that they play habitually--stuck in predictable patterns.
I've heard flute players say, "Don't worry about when you take a breath in a tune--it'll come naturally." And then you hear them play and they take a breath in exactly the same spot every time through a tune.
I've heard fiddlers say, "I've never concentrated on my rolls--I just do them." And found myself wishing they'd go find the woodshed because their rolls aren't rolls at all, just untimed mush.
Not everyone falls into these traps, of course. But even great players can wallow in predictable, less-than-inspired habits. Take Martin Hayes' penchant for single bowing jigs, for example (eh, Michael?
), or early Kevin Burke's over reliance on the Georgia shuffle bowing pattern in reels.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
(Now you've got me going...)
It also strikes me that this music is all about nuance. How many times have your ears perked up at just one note different in someone's setting of a tune, a note that makes a big difference?
Yes, with enough listening, these details tend to come out in our own playing, but is there really any harm in calling out these nuances and details?
It's a bit like learning vocabulary in school, on the road to becoming a better reader. Most of us benefitted by have grammar and punctuation and some vocabulary broken down and taught to us. Very few children learn to read well by simply sitting down with a volume of Samuel Beckett and diving in headfirst.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Just to be clear--I've also suffered listening to players who are so absorbed in the details that they aren't capable of making music.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It is just this kind of mix of advice that makes this site so great. Thanks, Will, for unfailingly taking the time and trouble to explain what things to try, and how precisely to try them- this is really invaluable to those of us who don't have or can't get a regular teacher (even if we could, I doubt there would be many who could explain things so clearly without physically being there). Michael's line of approach I also find valuable (when he isn't doing his snake impressions
) for constantly reminding us of the beauty of the whole, of the need for intuition, patience and respect, and how this isn't a race or competition.
C_F's original request for ways to move forward clearly reflected what a lot of us needed, and these different approaches come together to give us the tools to move on, practically and 'spiritually', so to speak.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
P.S. Naive question, but I assume 'popping' means letting go of the note very quickly- possibly on a slur?
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Lovely thread to lurk into. It can be self defeating to bash yourself up too much. Can't help with the popping question P-K. I thought it was what pipers did with the chanters on their knees - silly me.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Clear Drops
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I thought it was what a good snowboard does at lift off?
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Snowboards?- at my age? (at your age, etc., etc)
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
...best thread in AGES, this!
Lots of wisdom to chew on, (albeit showing different viewpoints) - THANKS!
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by domnull
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I think both Will and Michael are right, balancing each other like yin and yang. Making music is both a physical endeavor and a spiritual one. Michael gives us a description of the spiritual dimension of the pursuit, while Will gives us a description of the physical tools. Both important, and neither alone will carry us to the next level.
I agree with domnull--great thread! Thanks guys!
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
ha, big yin and yank
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Find whatever tunes make you smile without even knowing it, then if you can, listen to how others play that tune,and try to find what it is they put in that appeals to you and make a difference. Start small, one tune played in a way that makes you proud is better than one hundred that are not.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by stevecomputer
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Yes, that's good advice. Don't be seduced by the clamour for repertoire. I'm always coming across players who reckon they know 100s of tunes but can't actually play any of them. It's back to thing about, in the beginning, reading music being counterproductive. We talked earlier about training your ears to be able to hear yourself properly. To be able to hear all the little nuances of the many many ways a single phrase can be approached and the ways subtleties of rhythm build to make the music pleasurable. All the things that are not in the sheet music.
And to really appreciate the best tunes, learn to hear how unpredictable phrases turn in on themselves. How the intervals relate. Learn how to discern good tunes from boring ones. See if you can why the good ones are good
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
LOL at Michael's "big yin and yank."
I should point out that in giving specific, physical examples of how to play the opening A in Rolling in the Ryegrass, I didn't do the same for all the other notes in the tune. That's for each player to suss out on their own, eh? How you execute those articulations matters much less than imagining them in the first place. Playing music is ***play*** and it is 99.99999 percent imagination.
The "pop" I'm talking about comes from unweighting the bow abruptly to end a note. You can do it on a single bow stroke, or at the end of a slur. In fact, you can do it anytime--even in the middle of a slur that continues on to another note. Of course, you also have to synchronize your left hand fingering to suit the pop.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Thanks, Will, for explaining the 'pop'. Glad no cruelty to weasels was involved in making it (English joke!).
Good news about Michael coming out as Billy Connolly, though. No surprise to me- all that swearing was a give-away
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I think this music supports a wide range of approaches to it, from analytical to wholistic, without any one excluding the other. The simple fact that it has a well established set of labels for most of the nuances (cuts, slides, smears, slurs, long rolls, short rolls, crans, bowed triplets, drones, etc.) shows that players of previous generations thought and talked about these details.
On the other hand, it is music after all, not poetry or prose, and some of the best parts are ineffable. As they should be.
The danger in deconstructing the music and learning to play it by putting the pieces back together is that you will over-intellectualize it. That's the road to calculated, mechanical, predictable playing (and what passes for new classical music these days).
For me then, these ideas may "inform" my playing, but I want my playing to be ***inspired*** by happiness, sorrow, playfulness, anger, joy, etc., and by the thrill of actively listening to what my session mates are playing at the same time.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There are parallels, I would suggest, in the various possible approaches to literature. Many a time I've heard a young person say "I really liked that book when I read it, but deconstructing it for an essay has removed all the magic."
For the analytical mind, the deconstruction of a novel, play, or poem to see how it works is equally fascinating- though, like any tinkering, risks destroying the thing that fascinates.
Creative writing, in the terms of this discussion, could perhaps be seen on a par with playing (dare I say performing?) the piece of music, if only in the following sense: having honed the necessary skills over the years, the last thing to be thinking about as pen hits paper is technique.
At it's best, the writing 'performance' involved in the final version can be as inspired and holistic as the musical one- though usually preceded by a deal of drudgery (itself on a par with the musical practice we have been discussing above.)
For me, playing music now has the edge in that it leads to a direct sharing with other folk- the buzz of the 'ephemeral moment' as Guernsey Pete put it so eloquently in a different thread many moons ago.
In a sense, the 'level' is immaterial to the enjoyment- it's being involved that counts.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
A lot of writers do construct their work in a very analytical and measured way. Think of Joyce, for example with his maps of Dublin laid out on the floor and his stop watch. Very different from Jack Kerouac, but a lot of both feel like the stream of consciousness.
Music is different, because it happens in real time - or at least it used to before the invention of multi track recording and sequencing. But our diddley music is different, the repetitions exist for you to not make them repetitious. The stream of improvisation and variation that is the zone of playing well is the essence of it, not the regurgitation of what you have practised. And it all passes into the ether and there is no time to analyse it, just move on to the next set. (Except if someone recorded it, then you could analyse it like a piece of literature, but really, what a shame to freeze dry it like that?)
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
That's what I love about making music--it's spontaneous, ephemeral, transient even. I was a prof juggler for many years, and the same qualities are what I enjoyed most about that art form as well.
I suspect this is why both Michael and I are disinclined to recording music ourselves--it's antithetical to why we play music in the first place.
Writing (which is what I do for a living), even when it's fun, is drudgery compared to throwing objects at the sky or skirling a tune offf a bow. "Even a bad day at the fiddle is better than a good day of wordsmithing."
With music, I've always liked the thought that we cannot relive a tune, but we can re-enliven it. In other words, we don't just regurgitate what we've played before, but we re-create the tune, and it's a fresh, new experience every time.
That said, being able to identify and understand the tricky bits that are this music makes it easier to suss out what another player is doing and borrow/steal it for your own use. I've also had it happen in a flying session that something musical will come off my bow or out of my fingers that I've never done before, and two phrases later, part of my brain is trying to figure out what just happened so I can try it again or at least store it for later retrieval. Again, having a vocabulary and analytical understanding of the structure of this music can help, particularly if the whiskey gets in the way of simple muscle memory or visceral recall. hic.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Erm, all of which is to say that I try to be methodical and analytical when I write (mostly non-fiction), but that's not how I play music. Music, for me, is the antidote to days spent writing.
And what you see in my posts on these threads, obviously, is writing, "how to think about making music," not "the making of music."
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Indeed, you'll only go blind doing it on your own, more the merrier I say. If a banjo plays in the forest and no one is there to hear it.....
How do we learn but from others.
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by stevecomputer
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
"The repetitions exist for you not to make them repetitious."
That thought is heartening and enlightening, Michael- and, with Will's "recreating the tune", is not something any literal teacher will ever tell you.
Coming on here and reading you guys "thinking about making music" is the third part of the trinity, with listening and trying to play better. I keep reminding myself that this kind of global interchange has never been available to people in quite this way before.
Will, just whizz me over one of your "bad days on the fiddle". I'll settle for that!
# Posted on July 17th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Nope, I wouldn't wish my bad fiddles days on anyone. If they happen to land on a session, I switch to mandolin or banjo (where no one can tell the difference between a bad day and a good one)....
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Like Will, I was a professional wordsmith where being methodical and analytical were the order of the day, and playing music in the evenings and weekends was the essential antidote to my work.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by lazyhound
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
It is such a relief at the end of the day to pick up a fiddle and go non-verbal for a few hours!
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Seems we have a fair bit in common here guys- though I was at the free-wheeling, literary end of the spectrum, coming late to the wonders of the non-verbal- hence the endless, pain-in-the-arse questions!
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
On the question of recording yourself for diagnostic purposes, I tried that thing of Chad's- record, note your thoughts on how you played, play back, see if your thoughts correspond. It may be a blunt instrument, but it does focus the mind on a) listening to yourself attentively while playing b) getting some idea of how you fared tackling the whole tune- whether you kept a steady pace, bowed straight etc. I think if you then build on the things you did OK, used occasionally it could be a useful tool (I don't intend keeping the clips for posterity!)
For people who can really play though, I take all the stuff about freezing the moment etc., but don't you guys feel we would all be the poorer if, for example, someone hadn't recorded The Bothy Band live on camera and passed it down, making it available for all to see? It may be second best to having been there on the day, but it is inspirational and surely better than having nothing at all?
Or do you take the view that all such recording is like pinning the butterfly to the board?
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
For a few years, I tried writing in my spare time, got a few professional articles and even a science fiction story published. But then I got into trad, and got hooked on the immediate gratification. Why wait months for a check and for someone to comment on what you wrote, when you can produce something lovely that you enjoy producing, and get applause and pints the very same evening!!!!!
Very interesting thread here, without the sniping that often crops up and overtakes the topic!!
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by AlBrown
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Back again to say that I think recording oneself can be a good tool to help you get to the next level. Listening to oneself is very important, and will get you to play better. However, listening while playing forces you to listen to what you are doing now, at that very moment. It can be difficult to hear the bigger picture.
Recording yourself playing a few different kinds of tunes, and then listening back to it, allows you to analyze tendencies and places for improvement. It gives you both the bigger picture view, and the minutia at the same time.
I would recommend it to the original poster as a possible way of identifying working points. I would not recommend it as a daily, monthly or even yearly exercise.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Jode
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
For me, recording is indeed "pinning the butterfly." And recording oneself for others to hear (and buy) smacks a bit of ego, which is also antithetical to the enjoyment I get out of this music.
(Mind, I'm not condemning anyone else for making (or selling) recordings--it's just not something I myself need to do.)
Years ago, I videotaped myself and watched it one time. It was an eye opener--I realized that I looked and sounded far more relaxed and easy than I felt when playing, and that I might improve if I let my mind relax as much as my body apparenty was. It worked. But I also learned the same lesson from simply standing in front of a mirror.
Jode's right in saying that it's hard to hear the big picture--and to catch all the tricky bits--when simply listening to oneself in real time. Recording does make it easier to hear what you're doing. But Michael's also right--that sooner than later you have to learn to do this in real time, as you're playing, if you hope to have fluency as a musician.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Al, this thread reminds me of what the board used to be like on a regular basis--thoughtful differences of opinion that developed into real dialogue because people listened to what others were saying.
For example, Michael went to great pains in one of his posts above to make clear that he wasn't attacking me, while still challenging my analytical approach to deconstructing the music. Not the first time he's been so civil, either (despite what some people think about Mr. Gill). And that led to a good discussion on the distinction between thinkinbg about how to play the music, vs. actually playing the music. In short, Michael's challenge led me to clarify my thinking and comments here.
Thank goodness, the board seems to be headed more in this direction again. We can all help it along by engaging in these positive threads and simply ignoring the purely negative posts (they're Jeremy's bailiwick anyway).
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Though I'm not sure Jode was listening. Jode, The only thing that listening to a recording of yourself can give you is the knowledge of whether you are or aren't listening to yourself properly while you are playing. We know it's harder to listen in real time whilst playing than listen to a recording, but we all agree it's an essential skill.
I'm sorry to repeat myself, but, " recording yourself won't help you play better. How are you going to make your playing less wooden if you are not hearing the wood in real time? How is your intonation gonna improve if you hear your top B on a recording as flat, and estimate that you have to stretch your pinky a bit further? How is your estimation gonna be accurate if you are not listening for the correct pitch as you play." etc.
And this is not to mention why play in the first place if you are not listening?
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I find the argument similar to the, "Why should I learn to play by ear when I am already a perfectly good sight reader?"
If you lack the skill to listen and reproduce what you hear, what's the point.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
If all you helpful guys aren't already suffering 'advice fatigue', here is another question.
One of the main things that seems to distinguish players who have moved up 'the levels' is the ability to use ornamentation instinctively.
Will gave a list of the nuances above (cuts, slides, smears, slurs, long rolls, short rolls, crans, bowed triplets, drones, etc.)
I know roughly what most of these are (except smears!)- but can only manage the slur and the odd feeble cut.
I remember reading on the board a while back the opinion that, in essence, ornamentation in tunes needed to be learnt from the beginning with the tune, but what if- and I assume this may be/have been the case for a few other people- that hasn't happened?
What is the best way back from this situation, and can anyone suggest the first few steps?
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Everyone has their own method of learning ornamentation.
When I´m learning a tune, I learn the bare bones of it first. Then, when I can play it reasonable well by memory (I don´t sight read), I start adding the ornamentation which is conditioned by the instrument I play (concertina) and my style of playing.
When I learn a tune from the Tunes section here, by listening to the midi sound file, I sometimes have to unravel the ornamentation to find out what the basic tune is.
If the tune was submitted by a fiddle player, then the ornamentation will be appropriate for a fiddle, and so on.
I know from previous threads that Will is in favour of submitting tunes complete with ornamentation, and I respect that, it´s just that we have to work harder to find out what the tune is !
I don´t think ornamentation should be written in stone, rather it should depend on the player, his/her skill and style, and the instrument being played.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by murfbox
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
The problem with so-called "bare bones" versions of tunes is that they aren't really the music. How you articulate the notes is a significant part of what sets this music apart from other genres. They're *not* "ornaments" or embellishments, but integral to the rhythms and melodies.
An easy example is the B part to Last Night's Fun: |d~f3 a~f3|d~f3 agfe| Without rolls, bowed triplets, or some sort of articulation of the pulse on the f3s, you end up with Muzak.
This also reveals the hazards of learning from the dots or abcs--I rarely if ever play a tune "as written" (I hear Michael muttering "You CAN'T play a tune 'as written' so don't bother trying.")
You have to aurally know the music-tradition-genre well enough to hear how articulations fit, regardless of what the dots show. If you can't hear that, I'd advise against sight reading tunes.
P-K, let me think a bit on your question--I can give an example of how to layer interest on a tune skeleton, but I'm not sure how much that would actually help. I''ll think on the larger principles and get back to you shortly.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
I like the submission of tunes here as it normally is - tunes laid out plainly in crotchets and quavers for the most part, with the odd triplet, normally standing in for a crotchet that clearly needs "something doing to it", be it a triplet or a roll.
The triplets themselves make it that bit harder to read the music, and tend to jam in the midi - not that these are serious impediments to learning the tune, but they don't help much, unless they indicate a descending or ascending run of notes, as opposed to rolls. I'd be happy if rolls and crans were just indicated by a symbol such as the little curve over the note that you get in some music books.
I suppose this system can't handle the notation of long notes and crans note for note. Anyway, as stated or implied, I prefer it simple, with triplets only where really necessary. I have no problem reading off a tune from The Session database and "translating" it into an ornamented tune on the whistle as - or if - I get it properly learnt.
I didn't learn ornamentation when I started whistle, but after years of trying to play the thing like a recorder (!) I found myself able to learn to read music, and whistle ornamentation, at one and the same time from a tutor. I found myself able to apply this very quickly - mind, I was young and enthusiastic.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by nicholas
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Maybe the "principles of articulation" in this music boil down to two:
(1) The twiddly bits are how we enhance a tune's innate interest, lift, pulse, suspense, and momentum. They serve primarily a rhythmic purpose.
(2) The twiddly bits can also add flesh to a long note or chordal/modal passage. In this way, they also serve a melodic or even harmonic purpose.
Of course, they usually do both at the same time.
Look at the opening phrase of Duke of Leinster (a reel I just learned from Zina and Pete down in Colorado).
M: 4/4
K: G
Basic melody:
G2 BG dGBG|dBeB dBAB|G2 BG dGBG|dBAB GED2|
Right off, I see this as most small arppegios around the notes in a G major chord (G B and d). I know I can add interest and a sense of momentum by using other notes in the G scale. That pattern of |G2 BG dGBG| is a really common one in Irish reels, so let's try a more linear melodic line:
G2 BG dGBc|dBeB dBAB|
or
GABG dGBe|dBeB dBAB|
or
DGBG DGBc|dgeB dBAB|
Or, since this is basically just "noise in G," why not try some rolls and triplets.
An obvious place to use a triplet is the first G2.
G/G/G BG dGBc|dBeB dB B/B/B|
But that doesn't add much lift or momentum. It could set up something more interesting:
G/G/G BG dB B/B/B|dBeB d/d/B AB|
Now the first triplet falls on the strong beat, the second triplet comes after the weak beat, and the third triplet comes on the weak beat of the 2nd bar, but it moves down in pitch as it goes. All of this plays with our expectations (compared to the fairly straightforward approach of the basic melody).
Rolls, maybe?
G2 BG d~B3|dBeB d~B3|
or
G~B3 d~B3|gdeg dB c/B/A|
In the early stages of such exploration, you might want to figure out a few variations that sound good to you and play them enough to get them under your fingers at session speed. Mix them in with however you used to play it before. But don't forget to come back to the same phrases and suss out other ideas.
Seeing the possibilities can also encourage you to polish up your cuts, rolls, triplets, etc., so that they really are available on the fly, and you can let your imagination loose as you're playing the tune. Frankly, it's easier to hear where a tune wants lift when you're already playing it at tempo, in the thick of things. With the articulations comfortably at hand, they tend to insert themselves.
# Posted on July 18th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Reckon only one trick at a time, try it in one or two of your best tunes. Don't try and pack everything in everywhere. Try to record yourself and compare.
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by stevecomputer
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
There is a hell of a lot of talk about decoration/variation verses tune and skeletons and versions etc etc on this web site - a decent proportion of which may well have been generated by Will and I.
I think the most important lesson to learn about all this is to take the many conundrums and inconsistencies on the chin.
For example:
"This is how it goes, if you don't have it this way, you have it wrong"
&
"This is also how it goes"
&
"And it can go this way too, just so long as you remember how it actually goes."
All these statements clearly contradict each other, and yet all are true. It's not rocket science. It's not science at all.
But it's very very important not to interpret the above as freedom. One of my biggest bug bears is lazy eedjits who who like to camouflage their poor ears under the umbrella of what they refer to as the "folk process" - that spurious linking of traditional music with chinese whispers.
I've said this before and will not apologise for repeating it:
People often learn tunes a little bit wrong, substituting phrases that are fresh and imaginative with similar, but wrong, phrases from other tunes they already know. This unfortunate dilution has the inevitable consequence of fertilising that old maxim that it all sounds the same.
However, back to P-K's question and I'll answer it twice, in contradiction:
1 - Its impossible to use ornamentation instinctively. An instinct is something hot-wired into you dna. Humans have very few of these and playing diddley music is not one of them. If you try to fake it by practising over and over all the different ways you can possibly play a phrase and trying to pick them at random on the hoof, you will merely sink yourself into the torments of technique.
2 - If you listen and play diddley music regularly with intelligent concentration, you will, by default, be listening to and playing phrases with a kind of instinctive creative inconsistency. I say inconsistent because you will be constantly experimenting and pushing the boundaries of what you already know.
Confused? good
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
And for god's sake, don't nrecord yourself and compare. Bloody listen to yourself while you play
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by llig leahcim
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Yes, "if you're not confused, you're just not thinking clearly."
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
OK,OK, enough already, I surrender
...but....
Let me try to clarify my question a little. I was thinking of something like Amrhan Na Leabhar (Song of the Books)- (of which there are about five entries in the Tunes section, all apparently with the same midi- don't get this-why?).
Anyway, having learnt the 'bare bones' (midi) version, you have a beautiful tune, which some, however, might term 'banal'. So you want to add in some of the twiddly bits from the Matt Cranitch version, say (bear in mind I still have the L plates on).
How best to tackle this- a) one by one within the tune, or b) set out to learn how to do rolls etc. outside the tune and then try to apply them?
I suppose that is what I was getting at with the 'instinctive' thing. If you take the b) route, and practise them in the abstract, so to speak, is this a better way of 'having them available on the fly' to apply in the longer term in other tunes?
(What I really want, of course, is for someone to wave a magic wand and make twinkly stuff descend on my playing. Sad, really- but then I'm just a kid ;) )
P.S. 'Instinctive inconsistency' - now, that I do have.
PPS. I'm listening, Michael, lord knows I'm listening!
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by P-K
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hi Michael and Will, how are you these days? I haven't been around the board too much recently. Sorry I was not more in the mix here to make it seem as if I was listening.
Michael, I do agree that we need to learn to listen, and that it is a prime skill, a necessary skill. You said:
"The only thing that listening to a recording of yourself can give you is the knowledge of whether you are or aren't listening to yourself properly while you are playing. "
If recording yourself teaches the types of things you are hearing and not hearing, it does help then, doesn't it?
The last time I did this was about 3 or 4 years ago, when I was making a CD of tunes for my Mom. There was a jig that I thought I was playing well. When listening back, there was a run of notes crossing strings. I was hearing a smooth sound in my head, but was bowing it singly, and it actually came out rough.
Now, you will say that I was not listening to myself well enough. That's OK. But, I did not discover this tendency until I examined that tune. In fact, I did note this about my playing overall. That it was rough in spots where I wanted it to sound smoother.
Now I know what to listen for, and concentrate to hear those sorts of things while I am playing.
I am not saying that this should be a form of practice. I just think that hearing yourself from a different perspective can be a useful tool.
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by Jode
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hey Jode, we've missed you--though many of us old timers here now come out of the woodwork only for good threads like this one.
I agree--listening to a recording of yourself can be a powerful wake up call. Once in a great while is probably enough (and as much as some of us can stomach).
P-K, how your learn the actually twiddly bits, and how you learn to fit them into your playing of the tunes really is up to you. If they seem physically difficult to do--just to coordinate the fingers, bow, and whatever--then maybe it'd be best to single them out and do some serious woodshedding on the basic technique for each type of twiddly bit.
Also, if the twiddly bits are a struggle, realize that you can work your way into them through building blocks. For example, to play rolls well, you'll want to be able to do simple cuts cleanly and with a sense of timing that adds lift when you use cuts.
So you could practice playing a cut to separate two B notes on the 2nd string: | AB{d}B2 |, using your ring finger to flick the string (not actually landing on "d"). This then sets the timing for doing a roll: | A~B3 |
A roll on the beat would need a cut more like: | B2{d}BA |, where you hang on the first B before starting the cut. The roll would then be | ~B3A |
Similarly, with bowed triplets, it helps to get very comfortable with single bowing jig phrases, and also triplet runs in hornpipes. Try single bowing all the way through a jig like Lilting Banshee, just to get those nerves firing in patters of down-up-down and up-down-up.
Then learn a tune like the Belfast Hornpipe. The C part is a long series of triplets--good warm up for bowed triplets.
Then bowed triplets follow, making the down-up-down or up-down-up motion as small and "close to the stick" as possible while keeping all three notes distinct and clear. Work on the triplets within a tune--say the opening to Silver Spear.
FA A/A/A
where you down bow the F, up bow the first A, and then do the triplet down-up-down (assuming that direction feels comfortable to you).
As you realize, there are no shortcuts, no magic wands. But once the twiddly bits feel familiar to you--by sheer dint of doing them a lot--they will be "easy."
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by Will CPT
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
You put it well Jode, that perspective can also cheer you up and realise you are progressing, I know you should be able to do this in real time, or shoud I say Reel time, but that's a skill some of us are still developing. Perhaps try to find someone to play music with, it's more fun for sure for learning, don't forget to enjoy it.
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by stevecomputer
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Thanks everybody for contributing. This has been a great thread and has given me a lot to think about.
# Posted on July 19th 2007 by crazy_fingerz
Re: The Next Level (Or Substitute The Cliche Of Your Choice)
Hi Will, good to converse with you again. Yes, I agree about the "great while" part too. It just seemed decent advice for someone who feels like they are stuck on a plateau.
I don't want to come off as some advocate for recording a tune, listening back to it, recording it again with changes...
Good luck crazy_fingers!
# Posted on July 20th 2007 by Jode