# Music by Genre > Orchestral, Classical, Italian, Medieval, Renaissance >  Bought "the Complete Mandolinist"

## montana

Got the Complete Mandolinist from mail order and I'm not too happy with it. I suppose if you are taking lessons in RI it would be pretty good but if you are not really knowledable about classical music it's not the best work. 
First the book was published in 2007 but the accompanying CD is a collection of recordings made in the past. Most of the pieces in the book have no recording or metronome markings so for someone like me out in the hinterlands it's pretty hard to judge your progress. I guess you just learn the play the pieces as fast as you can! I'm sure MS Mair is a noteed classical mandolinist but I think the book seems to have been rushed to publication to make a buck. This is only my opinion and what do I know.

----------


## demotlj

I bought it hoping to teach myself classical mandolin and found it works much better as an exercise book to supplement other instructions, particularly the Bickford Mandolin method (available as an eBook).  I suspect that mandolin teachers may find the Complete Mandolinist helpful in assigning their students practice material but I decided it wasn't really set up as a book to teach yourself.  (For example, it just throws all of the scales at you at once instead of teaching a key and then working with songs in that key for awhile.)  

Laurie

----------


## Rick Schmidlin

I loved it, worked well.

----------


## Travis Finch

Out of curiosity...those of you who have tried it, what did you like about it and how could you see it improved?

And for those that haven't, what would you hope to gain out of buying a method book like this one?

Thanks,
Travis

----------


## harper

I bought this book to learn solid mandolin technique, having previously taken a few lessons with Marilynn Mair in Summerkeys.  I play harp and accordion, but other than these few lessons, have not had a mandolin teacher.

The book fills my needs extremely well.  I think it is very thoughtfully planned and put together.  I understand it was at least 2 years in preparation.  The exercises are excellent for building both right hand and left hand technique, with attention to tone production.  Marilynn used carefully selected classical exercises from Pettine, Spohr, and others, in addition to composing her own. The section on tremolo is especially good.  Other excellent instruction is given in pick selection, holding the pick, striking the strings, and pick direction. The exercises are interspersed with related pieces that are often lovely and always interesting.  

I suspect those interested in classical, Celtic, and choro music might find the book very attractive.  My interests happen to fit these categories.

----------


## KristinEliza

I agree with demotlj...it's good for specific exercises.

As I've had a little bit of time to look at the book, here are my thoughts...

It does touch on many aspects on mandolin technique, but I feel as a teaching method, it should have more than one or two exercises specific to that technique.

I think there are too many scales - but I know my scales and the importance of playing them, so this isn't as important to me as it might be for someone else.

Also, I think the pacing is a little off.  Since I have it in arms reach...let me give a specific example...

Page 182 - preparing for Duo style.  The first three exercises are good basic beginning exercises, but I feel the pieces used in exercises 4 and 6 are much more difficult...a huge leap in difficulty assuming the student is supposed to be able to play these after mastering the first exercises.

But what the book does have is repertoire.  If you're looking for music, there's a nice collection of 'standards' and other pieces.

I think if you are looking for a method to teach yourself, you are better off with the previously mentioned Bickford, or others such are Branzoli, Christofaro, etc...

As always, just my 2 cents...FWIW.

----------


## demotlj

Pacing is a very good word to describe what was difficult for me.  If you have the benefit of a teacher, the teacher will take care of the pacing, making sure that you have mastered a step before moving on to the next.  Mair's book moves too quickly if you are using it in place of a teacher (which, for those in the boonies as I am, may be a choice forced upon us).  For example, in 16 pages she covers the notes of the fretboard, all the scales, tremolo, and positions up the neck.  With that quick intro, you are then thrown into page upon page of exercises.

For a purely didactic learner who is willing to play exercises over and over again, this is probably a fine style, but most people (and I am one of them) learn better by slowly increasing skills through applying a new skill to lots of songs before moving on.  I'm not inexperienced musically -- I am a vocalist, direct my church music program, have played folk guitar for 40 years, and I taught myself classical guitar.  However, to give you a comparison to Mair's book, the book I used to learn classical guitar, "Solo Guitar Playing", spent 30 pages just on learning the notes on the fretboard.  

Again, Mair's book is a great supplement or helpful for people who already know mandolin and want to improve technique, but I don't think it's the way to go if you are starting from scratch.

Laurie

----------


## John McGann

To get the most out of any book, concept, or idea:

• Start with ONE thing. Don't move on until you have really mastered the concept. That means that you don't have the book open- you've actually _learned_ the line/tune/exercise, memorized.




> ...in 16 pages she covers the notes of the fretboard, all the scales, tremolo, and positions up the neck.  With that quick intro, you are then thrown into page upon page of exercises.
> 
> For a purely didactic learner who is willing to play exercises over and over again, this is probably a fine style, but most people (and I am one of them) learn better by slowly increasing skills through applying a new skill to lots of songs before moving on.


it is possible for those 16 pages to keep you busy for a year- but you need to find ways to apply the scales (like playing intervallic patterns, arpeggios through the scale, etc), not just mindlessly running up and down the scales- and no one book (unless it is 2500 pages long and $300) is going to spell it all out for you! If you have really mastered all the concepts on those pages, then move on, but be honest about your progress.

• Use your metronome and play the thing at very slow speeds, medium, and all increments between, before chipping away at 'the wall' of faster speeds.

• Stay with it until you sound right- in tune, in time and with good focused tone.

• Use your ears-track down recordings of the pieces and listen how great players phrase them. Paper gives you only the roughest guide to actual music- it gets the pitches and rhythms across, but the important things like articulation, feel, dynamics etc. need to be heard.

• Realize that YOU are always your own teacher, whether you take 3 lessons a week with a master Jedi, or are living 500 miles from a teacher. Use your mind and all of the information available to you via books, DVDs, the internet etc...there's no reason to not take advantage of the fact that we live in a time where it's easier than ever to access information- so why aren't there more amazing players than ever?

Don't blame the books. Books are just part of the toolkit you need to develop as a well rounded player. Rather than complaining about what's _not_ there, use your natural curiosity to figure out how to use what IS there.

----------

CHASAX, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## JonZ

John McGann has absolutely no idea what he is talking about!

(I just thought it would be fun to say that.) :Laughing: 

I use CM as part of my learning regimen. I can't compare it to the other works mentioned, but it seems to be good for my level. When I started using CM, I could sight read fiddle tunes and wanted to build a solid foundation of sight reading, technique and overall knowledge of the instrument. I am about ten exercises into the book--so far so good. I imagine that it would probably overwhelm someone who has not yet made the jump from tab to standard notation.

I agree that recordings of each exercise would be nice to measure oneself against. Perhaps downloads could be made available?

Keep in mind that you are supposed to be working through all four sections of the book simultaneously; you aren't supposed to plow through the scales all at once.

People who are self-teaching might find the method I discuss in the Adventures in Super-Efficient Mandolin Practice thread useful. One thing that it does well is address the issue of pacing. It is also helpful in regard to breaking down large difficult pieces into manageable chunks.

Actually, one thing that I do disagree with John McGann on is the idea of mastering material before you move on. Memory research indicates that it is better not to work on the same material every day until you master it. It is well-documented in regard to learning spoken languages that systematically spaced repletions are more effective than daily repetition; I think the same applies to learning musical languages.

More on spaced-repetition in the above referenced thread. (If you read the linked article, you will also learn why Rosetta Stone is not the most effective way to learn a language.)

----------


## John McGann

> Actually, one thing that I do disagree with John McGann on is the idea of mastering material before you move on. Memory research indicates that it is better not to work on the same material every day until you master it. It is well-documented in regard to learning spoken languages that systematically spaced repletions are more effective than daily repetition; I think the same applies to learning musical languages.
> 
> More on spaced-repetition in the above referenced thread. (If you read the linked article, you will also learn why Rosetta Stone is not the most effective way to learn a language.)


Well, there is more than one way to skin an apple (for you vegetarians); but given the choice of progressing forward or progressing sideways- sometimes sideways works, but eventually you have to progress forward  :Wink: 

Not everyone learns the same way, or at the same rate.

I am learning Irish with Rosetta Stone, and while it's not the optimal approach, it's effective for me...total immersion would be best, but not practical for me at this moment. Total immersion would be great for anyone buying "The Complete Mandolinist", but most people have jobs/families and are unable to totally immerse 8 hours a day the way we'd like to...so we pick our spots and try to get the most out of them.

As a teacher, when I have a serious* student, I have seen the 'take this one thing and digest it' work much better than the 'drive-by' approach.It doesn't mean 'practice this one scale all week', of course, there should be variety in one's practice menu, but the idea is to focus on one thing at a time as completely as possible..my own little empirical evidence study over the course of 30 years of teaching. YMMV.

_*my definition of "serious student" being someone really interested in developing both the art and craft of musicianship, and really growing consistently through a variety of facets of playing, something many casual players are not interested in (and it's not a value judgment; I was a casual player for a long time, and am not a natural 'type A' personality; good music can be made by folks with zero training, etc.)_

----------

Tommcgtx

----------


## abuteague

I'm not done with it but a couple months into it I could: 
I could memorize tunes quicker.my fingers knew where the sounds I was looking for were on the fretboard.I could improvise something that sounded cool with little effort.I could read faster 
I haven't had lessons and I tend not to do anything like the exercises in this book. I found the exercises to be really strange. I haven't really spent much time practicing scales. The exercises made me uncomfortable because they didn't sound like anything I listen to or play and they were in keys I don't play too. I found them really difficult and I struggled. They are not tunes I really like. I asked myself if I wouldn't learn better from just working on tunes I like and want to learn with a little more discipline and ditch this book. I'm not into classical. I like Celtic tunes. I can totally relate to how you can have this book in your hands and think to yourself, "why did I buy this?!"  :Mad: 

However, I've already tried doing whatever I like whenever I like and I'm plateaued big time.

I gave the book a fair chance by repeating exercises until I found them easy at a pace of 8 to 10 pages a week. I noticed returns after a few weeks. 

For example of a gain I made, my reading improved. I read slow. I taught myself with shortcuts where I knew what finger to use on which fret based on where the note is on the staff and what key it is in. As a result, my brain is doing all it can to go at 30bbm. It was an immovable plateau for me. I'm the slowest reader I know. Well, this book had me switching keys so often, I had to learn to just associate a place for a finger to go when I see a note and make it automatic. I suppose an instructor would have students doing this kind of thing first thing. I never did it until I hit this book. My reading speed sped right up.  :Mandosmiley: 

I loved how I could just think of a sound and find it instantaneously. After doing scales in all those keys, I just knew the fretboard so much better. My ears woke up and if I could hear a tune in my head I could play it. Fun.  :Grin: 
I could sound out tunes I'd never seen music for. 

I need to memorize tunes sometimes and after working with this book for a while, the process sped right up for me. I don't really know why. I can guess that skills mentioned above contribute to being able to internalize a tune.  :Confused: 

I've still got a way to go. I'm taking a break from the book now as I have a performance coming up and other commitments making practice time pretty lean. but I've come away with a real respect for this book. It happens to be just the thing I need these days. I'm glad I gave it the time I did. I figure once I get through it, I may have to find a way to just rotate exercises from it into my daily routine. 

When I'm not making progress, I know I need to mix things up. This book really helped.

That is me. Your mileage may be different.

----------

CHASAX, 

Tommcgtx

----------


## montana

My little review of this book was not meant to be mean in any way. I think that new instruction books being place before the public should be criticized if they do not use the benifts of the 21st century. An author of a book should take into account that the student might not have a teacher, This being said I think new instuction books, if thay are going to have anything new to say should have accompaning CDs with all the excercises and tunes performed and metronome markings of the finished tempos. I know in some cases these tempos can vary (fiddle tunes played for dancing are often played slower than in a bluegrass/irish concert). I just think when I see a book for sale with a CD I expect that that CD will in some way help me out for the lack of a teacher which this book does not. This book is a start, now the classical community can take it from here and use the techno tools of today to come up with something better. Most people are not using DOS anymore but it was a powerful beginning and still underlines our moderns op systems. So hopefully the classical community will put these new tools to use

----------


## Roland Sturm

I think it is a good book and is carefully done, although has its limitations. It is probably best if either a) you already have a decent grasp of mandolin playing and use it to detect and fill your technical gaps or b) you work with a teacher who can do that problem shooting for you. In my case, I find the more chromatic nature of the exercises, e.g. p. 122  useful to get the fingers a bit out of the usual positions at faster tempos; other people might find different rhythms valuable (e.g. p. 138). It helps you moving on if you are at a plateau, but it may not be the right book otherwise. The etudes are not comfortable, nor are they musically satisfying. 

As pointed out above, it is less useful as a self-teaching guide to work you through systematically because of the pacing and organization of material and more limited instruction. You need to figure out yourself what you need and how far you should improve on specific exercises. Many I played through once and was done, others (like the tremolo prep exercises p 107-109) I spent several weeks on. 

The text is good, although sparse and almost all of the text is essentially reprinted from previous magazine columns (which are all posted on her website). Metronome markings would be useful because many people wouldn't know what a reasonable target is, you can see that in many other discussion threads that show a lot of confusion about speeds for reels, hoedowns. Now, the "target speed" for actual music is easy to figure out by listening to recordings, for etudes is would be better to know what the composer or instructor has in mind. Knowing some of the classical etude books (Wohlfahrt, Kayser) for violin, I have an idea of what the standards are, but for somebody who never encountered them, either more specific instruction or sound examples would be useful. The CD is limited to more substantial music, few of the etudes and exercises are included. 

Now, here is something where I totally disagree with John McGann and, in fact, if a teacher insists on that entirely tedious approach (as is common among the suzuki crowd and classical players), time to find somebody else: 




> To get the most out of any book, concept, or idea:
> 
> • Start with ONE thing. Don't move on until you have really mastered the concept. That means that you don't have the book open- you've actually _learned_ the line/tune/exercise, memorized.


That is the "6 months of twinkle variations for you" attitude. Can you imagine something that would take out the fun of music more quickly? In a case like Mair's book, most of the exercises are of little musical value by themselves, these are etudes and exercises. Think of the suffering many violin students endure by spending years going through etude books "until you have really mastered the concept" . 

Technical exercises are a means towards an end, namely to play music, and I find it frustrating when teachers (apparently including John McGann) treat them as if they were an end in themselves. This is probably even less satisfying than superficially cruising through tunes without being able to play a single one competently. As usual, the middle ground seems best: Strive towards playing satisfying music.

----------


## JeffD

> To get the most out of any book, concept, or idea:
> 
> • Start with ONE thing. Don't move on until you have really mastered the concept. That means that you don't have the book open- you've actually _learned_ the line/tune/exercise, memorized.
> 
> 
> ..





> That is the "6 months of twinkle variations for you" attitude. Can you imagine something that would take out the fun of music more quickly? In a case like Mair's book, most of the exercises are of little musical value by themselves, these are etudes and exercises. Think of the suffering many violin students endure by spending years going through etude books "until you have really mastered the concept" . 
> 
> .



I respectfully disagree with you Roland. I think John's advice is spot on. 

There are aspects to learning that are by nature not fun. Learning can be fun, learning can be not fun, but it is still learning, not entertainment. I think the expectation that its going to be fun all the time undermines the discipline to keep working at it.  The whole concept of focus, dedication, tenacity, discipline, is that one keeps at it long past the time it stops being fun.

Playing the mandolin is fun to me. Doing exercises, not so much. For me, it can be fun at first, but quickly bores me - (challenging my focus), and becomes tedius (challenging my tenacity and dedication), and I want to stop (challenging my discipline). 

Its much like the athlete who loves playing the sport, finds it a lot of fun, but doesn't find fun in all of the running laps and drills and what not. 

Now for most of us, playing the mandolin is an avocation. So the amount of dedication and discipline we can apply is limited. Our focus and dedication has to be towards our work and families, our church, our community. So I have no arguement with someone not wanting to "have to" apply the dedication and discipline it takes to get good.

But that doesn't change (unfortunately) the nature of learning the mandolin, or music, or indeed any skill at all, which is that there are aspects that are just jock work, running laps and doing drills. It is further irrelevant that we may not have a coach urging us on, or a team depending on our producing results, or a Sesame Street muppet there to make it fun. 


By way of disclosure, I got into Mair's book after I had been playing for many many (many) years, so I cannot say that I have "learned from it". But going through it a step at a time, and not moving on until I had acquired some competance with the step before, has really helped my playing. Those skills I had already acquired did not take as much time to master, and so I moved on more quickly. Others really took time. With much enthusiasm I recommend her book. It provides what you need to get good at the mandolin, except perhaps the motivation to push through when things are no longer fun.

----------

Tommcgtx

----------


## SincereCorgi

I posted before about my dissatisfaction with this book. I'm not trying to pile on, but I think it's an interesting discussion. This book was a real landmine for me-  I was all excited when it came out only a few months after I'd started mandolin, but it was extremely frustrating. I got bewildered and ditched it, had much better luck with Suzuki violin books and Bickford.

It's not a terrible book, but  there are so few modern classical mandolin methods (...in English ...that don't involve sending money orders to Italy) that its flaws get magnified. This is made worse by the title which over-promises that it's 'The Complete Mandolinist.' It really is very poorly paced and glosses over some of the things that are most difficult for beginners, like shifting positions (the topic gets a single page whereas there are entire violin primers on the subject). At the same time, it lulls beginners into a false sense of security with pages about how to read music and extremely simple scales. It makes a lot of sense to learn that it was mostly culled from magazine columns.

Now, I agree with John McGann that you'd need an extremely comprehensive $300 mandolin bible to avoid these shortcomings, but I think that even with that consideration in mind, this book  which does have some good content  can be a stumbling block for budding classical self-teachers.

----------


## swampstomper

Wow, John has really nailed it for me with his definition of a serious student, and I repeat:_my definition of "serious student" being someone really interested in developing both the art and craft of musicianship, and really growing consistently through a variety of facets of playing_. I am firmly in the serious amateur category. I enjoy the challenge of growing and developing my art and craft. I will never be a pro. but I can enjoy the journey. John is also right that the basics have to be really mastered. I do compromise however by dedicating some part of my practice to that aspect -- and it means coordination drills, fingerbusters, ffCp exercises etc. (and I vary these intuitively more or less like JonZ does with his systematic approach) -- and then I use the second half of my practice for fun -- which is still working on technique but not obsessing like I do in the first part.  A good compromise for a serious amateur, I think.

As for MM's book, I do not have it, but I do have the note-reading book, which I found quite well put together, with a logical learning sequence.

----------


## dj coffey

I bought it.  Never had any lessons with Ms. Mair or any experience with AMGUSS.

I think it depends on your point of arrival with the mandolin.  As I come from a background of classical piano, so, in my early instruction (started with self-instruction and a variety of beginner books, then got a teacher for some lessons) I found the books available at the time limited.  The Mair book filled in those gaps in a modern fashion. (I had also encountered Bickford by then, finding the material helpful but dated).

I also have the Greg Horne books.  Each bit provided different insights and angles on advancing on the instrument.  I really enjoy them all.

That being said, I have Caterina Lichtenberg's Highlights book (it's in German, and I read a little German so can get by).  Between she and Marilyn, I can see that there are much deeper waters to explore on the classical mandolin, but the materials are dispersed as are well-trained classical mandolin teachers.

That kind of makes it fun though - you never know when you'll run into a new gem that takes your playing to a new level!

----------

Tommcgtx

----------


## John McGann

> That is the "6 months of twinkle variations for you" attitude. Can you imagine something that would take out the fun of music more quickly? In a case like Mair's book, most of the exercises are of little musical value by themselves, these are etudes and exercises. Think of the suffering many violin students endure by spending years going through etude books "until you have really mastered the concept" . 
> 
> Technical exercises are a means towards an end, namely to play music, and I find it frustrating when teachers (apparently including John McGann) treat them as if they were an end in themselves. This is probably even less satisfying than superficially cruising through tunes without being able to play a single one competently. As usual, the middle ground seems best: Strive towards playing satisfying music.


Roland, go back and read what I wrote under the quote you extracted- you really missed the point altogther, though it's fine if you disagree with me, you are disagreeing with an incorrect premise. I have never advocated playing technical exercises as a means to an end- ask any of the 1000+ students I have taught...you make some sweeping pronouncements for someone who has never even met me, much less had a lesson with me...I am warning against the tendency that many students have of doing a 'drive-by' and not really absorbing the jist of what a task has to offer- to intimate that I advocate "six months of twinkle variations" is ridiculous!

----------


## KristinEliza

I know we're getting off topic from the OP a bit now and then...but I wanted to add my 2 cents and support for John McGann...

Your style of music and your goal is going to greatly influence your choice of methods and materials.  What works for one, may or may not work for another.

As a public school orchestra director, I know that the method book I use for my classes is not going to have everything I need in it...supplement, supplement, supplement.  No offense intended to Ms. Mair, but I don't think there can ever be a 'complete' anything.

As for Mr. McGann's comments regarding mastering technique, this is a very basic, tried and true approach to string (bowed) education.  If you have never played, or taught, a bowed string instrument, it is very difficult to undertand.  Years are spent on proper posture, hand shape, tone production, etc.  Bowed string instruments are an entirely different beast.  And a GOOD instructor will not just give students etudes to master techniques...they supplement, supplement, supplement! 

Do I still use boring etudes or exercises...absolutely...because they have their uses and I make sure my students know why they are using them...and give them something more exciting to apply those exercises to.  (FYI SincereCorgi - if you're looking for good shifting exercises, I highly recommend Harvey Whistler's _Introducing the Positions_ (two volumes) for violin - can be repetitive and boring...but very effective!)

Regarding Suzuki training...it has it's specific audience and specific goals.  While listening to _Twinkle_ a million times as an adult might be annoying, it's intended for 4 year olds.

But back to the OP...my review has already been submited.  For ME, the CM was not a very useful collection.  It might be just perfect for someone else.

----------


## Roland Sturm

Well, John, then your point is difficult to understand. The Mair book is primarily a collection of etudes to improve technique, not like Sevcik, but the Wohlfahrt type thing. This thread is about the Mair book, not about some abstract philosophy, and your statement is very clear that in order to get the most out of a book:

"Don't move on until you have really mastered the concept. That means that you don't have the book open- you've actually learned the line/tune/exercise, memorized."

Seems very much the 6 months of twinkle philosphy, because novices can't master them that quickly. Mr. Suzuki was a stickler for perfection. Certainly one way of teaching, not necessarily the most effective one. Not even necessarily for children. Unlikely that you would really advocate that, but then, the quote are  your words, not mine. 

I think the value of etudes has long disappeared before one would have memorized them (not that anybody would want to memorize them). Take as an example exercises 1, 2, 3 (p. 37-39), some of the more melodic ones. The purpose for those is fairly obvious - getting comfortable with the key of C, dealing with accidentals (especially in Am), extensions to reach the high C (it appears, not an easy thing).  But if the book actually were used by a novice, "mastering" exercise 2 would take probably a bit longer than the twinkle variations. It seems a lot better to me to move on to use those concepts in a different setting (maybe some actual music).

And as I said, I found the book very helpful for myself, spent plenty of time with it - enough that the binding disintegrated. Excellent in many ways, but as supplemental material, like an etude collection, not the best self study guide.

----------


## John McGann

Ok, Roland, here's my point:

To get the most out of any piece of information in a book, one has to understand what the point of the piece is, be it an exercise that illustrates a technique, or an musical concept that one can use in improvisation or other areas of musicianship.

If a student plays through something once and say 'feh', they may not be really "getting" what is being presented. Especially 'novices' (and how many novices you taught that you know the timeline?)

Does a person (especially a novice) need to memorize _every_ exercise in a given book? No, if they can cop on to what the exercise is about and execute it...or they can just move on and do something different, but maybe be missing something that _could_ be helpful (or for all they know, crucial) to their development.

I'm trying to say that folks who criticize teaching methods have as much right as the next guy to criticize- it's a free country- but there is a risk of 'missing the bus', as in 'missing the point' of why a musician like Ms. Mair, who really does know what she's doing, presents things the way she does. She's not a ham-and-egger.

My comments were also directed at people who are serious about learning- and novices can be serious, but I don't think this book is directed at total novices.

Lastly-disagree with me all you want, but don't make public assumptions about me or my teaching when you don't have the first idea about the subject. 

Happy music and happy trails to you, though  :Mandosmiley:

----------


## SincereCorgi

I'm sure people are taking things the wrong way- memorizing exercises doesn't necessarily mean grinding them to death for six months.

It does get at an interesting question of when you can allow yourself to move past an exercise. I've actually been memorizing the Wohlfahrt etudes because I feel like I don't get them clean- and loud- and toneful-enough unless I do. At the same time, I don't want to waste time trying to polish to death an etude when I've already absorbed the concept it was trying to get at.

----------


## John McGann

> I'm sure people are taking things the wrong way- memorizing exercises doesn't necessarily mean grinding them to death for six months.
> 
> It does get at an interesting question of when you can allow yourself to move past an exercise. I've actually been memorizing the Wohlfahrt etudes because I feel like I don't get them clean- and loud- and toneful-enough unless I do. At the same time, I don't want to waste time trying to polish to death an etude when I've already absorbed the concept it was trying to get at.


Yeah, I'd rather spend my time playing music too  :Wink:  but exercises have their place, especially in the first 50 years of one's development  :Mandosmiley:

----------


## mandocrucian

From all my observations, in the classical music realm, it is usually assumed that the student is working with an instructor of some type.  The "do-it-yourself/do-it-on-your-own" process is  contrary to the classical educational systems/traditions.

Though the student is the one who purchases the various "textbooks", the materials are usually selected by instructors.  Books sell if they fit in with the approach(es) of the instructors, and if they are a convenient source of weekly assigments.  Gaps, and more detailed explanations are things the instructor are expected to provide and fill in.

Marilyn Mair has come up through an established "system" of mandolin pedagogy.  It isn't a haphazard assemblage of odds and ends.  There are various schools of classical violin instruction, just as there are various schools (of thought) for all the other orchestral instruments.

(I find a whole lot to like about the Kodaly approach/system, which is not confined to any particular instrument)

Most of the other "classical/art music" around the world  (classical Indian music, Persian classical, Japanese classical, etc) have all developed their own training regimens, requirements for each level, etc..  

Jazz instruction too has evolved over the years, into systematized approaches, but with the emphasis on improvisation, there's always plenty of the do-it-yourself spirit.  Berklee is an example of jazz taught within a more formalized structure.

Another thing to keep in mind is that formalized teaching systems have evolved with particular aesthetics and goals and purposes. Orchestral players must achieve sight-reading and technical proficiencies. Depending on the instrument (probably all of them) they must also learn to tweak their intonation as the situations require to play "in tune" with other type of instruments (which may have a tendency to intonate slightly different than theirs). Orchestral (classical) players have demands that may be totally irrelevant to someone playing popluar or folk music in a quartet setting.  And their educational/training materials are going to spend time on those issues, whether someone from a bluegrass or jazz or celtic background likes it or not.

I try to avoid commenting on other mando instructional materials. In the case of the Mair book, I have not worked with it, though I have looked through it.  (In the past, I have used numerous standard classical violin materials, and studied, albeit on mando, for several years in the late 70s/early 80s with a classical/jazz violin player who was one of Venuti's buddies.)  

It's not skimpy, being 225 pages long, and, with a CD, for $25.  How does that compare to what you would pay for an hour-long lesson?  Well, keep looking on the net, maybe you'll find something to download for free, but for some, that price _still_ won't be right.

NH

----------


## JonZ

I actually posted the following on the Adventures in Super-Efficient Mandolin Practice thread, because I was hoping for comment from some of the more renowned mandolin educators on the Café:

"John McGann, Ted Eschliman, Mike Marshall, Marilynn Mair--any mandolin educators interested in commenting [on the following article excerpt]?"

"Ebbinghaus showed that it's possible to dramatically improve learning by correctly spacing practice sessions. On one level, this finding is trivial; all students have been warned not to cram. But the efficiencies created by precise spacing are so large, and the improvement in performance so predictable, that from nearly the moment Ebbinghaus described the spacing effect, psychologists have been urging educators to use it to accelerate human progress. After all, there is a tremendous amount of material we might want to know. Time is short."

"However, this technique never caught on. The spacing effect is "one of the most remarkable phenomena to emerge from laboratory research on learning," the psychologist Frank Dempster wrote in 1988, at the beginning of a typically sad encomium published in American Psychologist under the title "The Spacing Effect: A Case Study in the Failure to Apply the Results of Psychological Research." The sorrowful tone is not hard to understand. How would computer scientists feel if people continued to use slide rules for engineering calculations? What if, centuries after the invention of spectacles, people still dealt with nearsightedness by holding things closer to their eyes? Psychologists who studied the spacing effect thought they possessed a solution to a problem that had frustrated humankind since before written language: how to remember what's been learned. But instead, the spacing effect became a reminder of the impotence of laboratory psychology."

Full article.

Now, I know that this is a thread about CM, but it is also evolving into a discussion of self-instruction and learning theory. So I am interested in what John has to say about the topic.

In my original post on this CM thread, I wasn't suggesting a "drive-by" approach. Just because you do not practice a piece daily does not mean that you do not continually work on it until it is mastered. I was suggesting that non-daily practice on a specific schedule is actually a better way to master information than daily practice of that information. Or, more precisely, that spaced repetition is a faster way to master a large body of knowledge and skills than working on one piece of that knowledge every day until you master it.

John, I would be really interested in your thoughts on the article (it is worth the time to read; it was in _The Best American Science Writing of 2009_). I think it would be thought provoking for any teacher.

I am finding that the "Spacing Effect" is helping me to learn the mandolin faster than "practice it every day until you master it" did.

----------


## KristinEliza

Again, I'm going off the intention of the original post...please excuse me, but I can't let these go by without comment...then I will try to shut-up.

Suzuki method

I don't think many people understand what this really is.  Look it up...it is a specific teaching method meant for very young children that is very effective if taught properly (I am not a certified instructor, nor was I taught in this fashion). 

Memorization

I am a TERRIBLE 'memorizer', but the idea behind memorizing pieces is so that you can step away from the technical constraints of a piece of music and concentrate on the musicality of it.

Ok...I'll shut-up now.
 :Grin:

----------


## billkilpatrick

i'm in the "first 16 pages keep you busy for a year" category.  i'm using it as an entree into the wonderful world of notation - if i can pick up a few tips on technique, all the better.  i feel that mair has given us the real deal.

----------


## John McGann

Jon, thanks for the article, thread and invitation! I added a post to the thread so as not to veer too much further off topic here.

----------


## John Flynn

I ordered the book from Mel Bay. First off, it violates a pet peeve of mine for method books in that it has "perfect" binding. I cannot understand why publishers use perfect or saddle-stitch binding for method books. They won't easily stay on a music stand or lay flat on a table. What good is that? By contrast, I have a Mel Bay "Complete Jetro Burns Mandolin Book," which is about the same size, and it is spiral bound, so I know they can do it. 

As to the content of Mair's book, I had high hopes and it seems well thought out and well done, but I have to say I just couldn't get into it. After a short try at it, I realized that if I have to put myself through that level of tedium to be a "complete mandolinist," I'll just quit and take up knitting. But I won't quit, because I know that the majority of mandolin players I like to listen to, and would like to emulate, didn't learn that way and wouldn't put up with those exercises either. You guys can argue "pedagogy" all you want, but if you have a student who is in earnest, who has some skills and will put in the time, and that student can't get in to it, what good is all that "science?"

I also think her page on pick selection is just wrong. It flies in the face of what I've been taught by every instructor and workshop leader I've ever had as well as personal experience. It is her opinion/personal preference presented as an absolute truth.

So  can see why someone would like the Mair book. It's not a bad book, but it was a waste of money for me.

----------


## mandopops

I got Marilynn's book as soon as it came out. I think it has a lot to offer. I've never worked my way through as a whole. I've got lots of other methods & materials & it is a useful addition.

I also have been lucky to have had private instruction in the past so I can apply the material to previous lessons learned.

Now, here's my bit. The Choro stuff. I guess since her book is called the "Complete Mandolinist" Choro music can be included. Her column in Mandolin Magazine is a"Classical" column & sometimes it is about Choro. I personally am not into the Choro scene. That's fine for the people that are,but I look forward to a Classical column for Bach,Beethoven, Stravinski or works by from Mandolinists of the past, like Calace. You get my drift.


Now one can say look it the music more broadly. I am always disappointed when her article is about Choro. At this point in my life I don't give a damn about Choro. I also don't believe it belongs with the Jazz heading in this sight, World music maybe??

Anyway this is a side-bar, I think her book has alot of good stuff. It may not work for everyone.

----------


## joebrent

As an instructor, I am usually loathe to wade into discussions like this one. I find I spend a lot of time telling my students that there are approaches that will work for them that might not work for me, or for my other students. I believe it is the teacher's responsibility to be fluent in several different approaches in addition to your own in order to fit the pedagogy to the student. My own technique is certainly majority-Italianate, which comes from the fact that I began on violin when I was a kid, and from my studies with Carlo Aonzo. However, I have learned a great deal from my friends in Germany, who have entirely different approaches to technique, tone production, even equipment. So when I get the sense that a student would prefer a more German approach to their studies, I'm more than happy to build their technique along those lines, recommend them Seiffert-style instruments as opposed to Neapolitan/Roman, and to recommend recordings by Annika, Caterina, etc.

However, my experiences in academia, not merely studying but now instructing at a conservatory, have led me to some other conclusions as well. I think we can learn from the violin world in that they have a pretty clear definition of 'desirable' tone, 'efficient' technique, and so on, even though there are as many schools of violin technique (Galamian, Russian, etc) as there are mandolin technique (Italian, German, etc). I don't think it would be a bad thing for all schools of classical pedagogy to agree on a few things:

It is always better to expend less energy to produce the same tone. Therefore, a technique with fewer moving parts is preferable.Good tone is a matter which includes not merely the contact between pick and string(s), but also the ability of the player to variagate their tone between ponticello and tasto.An advancing student must be exposed to the pillars of the mandolin repertoire, i.e. Calace, Munier, Vivaldi, etc. But to be a complete musician, they must be exposed to music from all periods, from Renaissance to modern, including a thorough immersion in the music of Bach.

I think we can all agree on these points, but I have a few that some will disagree with: 

I believe that it would be a tragedy for the instrument to become homogeneous as the violin has. Therefore it should be agreed that the Italian, German, American, and Israeli style of mandolin making, and all subsequent, represent different approaches to the same instrument, and to tone production, and there isn't such a thing as 'better' or worse, 'Preferable' is a matter best left to the performer's/listener's discretion.It is preferable to hear more wood than metal in the tone. The instrument cannot be judged on its projection alone; it should be able to produce pleasing tones whether you are up close or in the last row of the auditorium. A metallic tone is not desirable, and the best instrument is the one that produces the best combination of tone and projection. Likewise, the best technique is the one that affords the performer the greatest palette of tone colors, with the greatest dynamic range, and the least extraneous energy expended.Technical facility (what some call 'speed') is a means to an end, and NOT an end unto itself. Playing fast -alone- is not desirable; playing consistently at any tempo is. Facility allows the performer to play easy music effortlessly, and difficult music consistently. Corollary to the above: a fast tremolo is not always desirable. The tremolo is another color on the palette, and a good tremolo is to be judged on its consistency and the dynamic/color control the performer has over it, not by how fast it is.

I'm familiar with Ms. Mair's book. There are many things in it with which I disagree, but I try to remind myself that music is an art, and not a science. If a student feels as if they gain from the knowledge in Ms. Mair's book, who am I to disagree? This is not what the job of a teacher is. Similarly to the point I tried to make about the instrument itself before, I feel as if it would be a tragedy if my students all sounded just like _me_. My job is to decipher the goals of the individual student: what kind of music does the student want to make, what approach will work best, what regimen will the student best respond to, etc. It is important to maintain a gentle hand if the student has bad habits, or has been given what I feel to be erroneous information by a previous teacher, or if I feel they can maximize their talent via a path they are reluctant to follow. 

On a personal note, my teacher before I went away to school was a disciplinarian, the exact opposite of the teacher I just described above. He was Hungarian, and studied with Mischa Mischakoff, who studied with Auer, who studied with Joachim. He saw me as the next in that lineage. He was coarse, profane, and unrelenting in his criticism if I did something not to his liking. He sat me in front of a tv at the end of our hours-long lessons and forced me to watch Heifetz concert videos while he shouted, "Look at him, he's a ******* machine, you must play like this!" When I played a wrong note, or if he thought I wasn't giving 100% effort in performance or practice, his rebuke reduced me to tears on many occasions. However, when I came to him, I was very raw and undisciplined, and I responded to his methods. It was his brand of pedagogy that wrung the most out of what talent I had; aside from Carlo, I have never learned so much or given so much to one teacher.

One time, when I was 13, he liked the way I was playing Sibelius. So he growled, "You played very ******* well today. Here's a piece of candy." That piece of candy molds away, untouched in its wrapper, in my case two decades later.

But I was one of just a few of his students who responded positively to his methods. Most left after just a few lessons. The few that remained either hadn't the confidence remaining to perform in front of people, or wound up hating music itself. Only three of his students, to my knowledge, became professionals. One is the concertmaster of the Moscow Philharmonic. Another is in the Philadelphia Orchestra. I'm the third.

It's because of this experience that I came to the conclusions I have regarding teaching methodology. If I inspire the desire to become a better mandolinist -alone-, I have failed at my duties. I want to make my students better musicians, and to inspire in them the love for music I have, which I hope anyone can see when I play. I have to be versatile, so as to best communicate this love to whatever student comes my way. If that means using Ms. Mair's pedagogical methods as opposed to my own, then so long as they jive with the positions I advocated above, so much the better.

I welcome the thoughts of others, particularly those that disagree with me.

----------


## Ali

Just a little addition to this fascinating debate.
I think Marilyn's only error of Judgement was to use the word "method". It is not a method. It is a companion/study /technique book. As such I believe it to be a very valuable addition to any mandolin teacher's (or student's) arsenal.
I use it regularly for sight-reading and for a "change of scene" when warming up for the day. I am also increasingly using it as a supplementary book for my medium level students.
Ali

----------


## Bob A

One of my best friends in college was there on a track scholarship. The coach, a Hungarian Olympian, was pretty much a slave-driving brute, not unlike Joe's teacher. He'd run the guys into the ground; many of them were physically ruined as runners after a year or two on the team.

Those who survived set world records.

Sometimes it's not about the individual; however, the individual should be aware of the big picture, and be in a position to decide for themselves whether to sign on to the regimen.

----------


## billkilpatrick

> I am also increasingly using it as a supplementary book for my medium level students.
> Ali


... (gulp) that's pretty intimidating - what's recommend for those of us still in nappies, so to speak?

- bill

----------


## Alex Timmerman

Hi Joe,

Although I am not sure by what you mean with 'wood' in the sentence _"to hear more wood than metal in the tone"_, I would like to compliment you on your excellent explanation on teaching Music. And in particular with regard to our instrument, the mandolin.


Thanks and greetings, 

Alex.

----------


## KristinEliza

> I think Marilyn's only error of Judgement was to use the word "method". It is not a method. It is a companion/study /technique book.


That's an excellent point.

I, like possibly others, bought this book because, at the time, I didn't know where to find the other mandolin methods that were suggested to me.  I was happy with the collection of tunes, but as a 'method' book, it wasn't what I was expecting.

John Flynn - I agree with you about the bindings...grrr.  I have some large plexiglass clips I use to hold my books open.  However, I am lucky to have the use of a comb binding machine at one of my schools, so I have been going to the drastic measure of disassembling my books and rebinding them for easier use!

----------


## John McGann

> Sometimes it's not about the individual; however, the individual should be aware of the big picture, and be in a position to decide for themselves whether to sign on to the regimen.


One's life is about the individual- you are all you've got! Not all of us are cut out to me first chair soloists or olympic medalists- and music or sports in one's life shouldn't be ruined by not 'making the bar', IMHO, YMMV etc. I agree that it's good to be realisitic about signing onto the regimen (or is it regime?)

The drill sargeant approach might help develop some amazing performers, but it's too bad about the broken psyches in their wake...

----------


## Schlegel

I have to agree with John.  We're perilously close already to the average person already thinking there's no point in playing music (or sports) if you can't make a living off it.  There's no point in teachers or coaches leaving them utterly convinced!

----------


## JeffD

> because I know that the majority of mandolin players I like to listen to, and would like to emulate, didn't learn that way and wouldn't put up with those exercises either. .


I am no educator but I would bet that this is mostly if not entirely untrue. No professional musician, especially one making a living outside of classical music, is going to tell you about the hours upon hours of practice they put in every single day, the amount of pure jock exercises they work through or worked through. And the step by step instruction they put themselves through to learn the basics of any new direction they pursue in the music.

It takes one heck of a lot of work making something look easy. And nobody shares the hours of woodshedding with those in the audience.


I do not believe that anyone becomes excellent at anything without doing a lot, a daunting amount, of hard boring work. Work that is not nearly as fun as the end result.

So if your criticism of Mair's book is that it is hard, or boring, or takes too long, or requires too much work... the problem is not with the book, it is with your expectations of what it takes to become excellent.

I mean no disrespect to anyone, and folks can judge rightly that they have no need to become that good, and so Mair's book is not needed. I quite understand. But if one thinks one is going to become excellent, and not do someone's methods, someones boring and seemingly pointless exercises, if not Mairs someone elses, well then one is really mistaken.


Perhaps what is needed is an explanation - if you want to have a lot of fun, you can get started this way, and thats fine. If you want to take things up more seriously later, then this over here is what you need to do.

----------


## John Flynn

> No professional musician, especially one making a living outside of classical music, is going to tell you about the hours upon hours of practice they put in every single day, the amount of pure jock exercises they work through or worked through. And the step by step instruction they put themselves through to learn the basics of any new direction they pursue in the music.


One look at MTV for 10 minutes will tell you that's not true. There are lots of people making a living as professional musicians outside of classical music that have unfortunately put in way too few hours of practice!

I stand by my statement. My favorite all-time favorite mandolin player, and no, I won't mention his name, told me flat out that he never did a single scale or exercise in his life. I have come to understand that he is telling the truth. Yes, he practices, for hours on end, but he practices tunes, and only tunes he wants to play, no "etudes" or "jock exercises." He does not know "formal" theory, although his gut-level understanding of theory is amazing. He does not read music or tab. But as far as I'm concerned he is as "excellent" a player as you will find. Here's a kicker, one of his CDs got a very favorable review in a article written by...Marilyn Mair!!! And he is no "prodigy" either. He's just a guy who likes to have fun playing and has kept at it.

He is not an isolated case, just the best case I know of. I've heard some similar stories from several good players I admire. Hey, I'm not putting down formal training. I've had some, I know theory, I read music OK, yadda, yadda. I'm not even opposed to method books. I have one right now (Enda Scahill's Irish Banjo Tutor) that does have me practicing scales and picking exercises and I'm enjoying it! And I'm improving! But Mair's book is just too tedious ("jock") for me. And I don't believe classical method books in general are the only route to excellence. There are just too many examples to the contrary.

----------


## mandocrucian

> _I stand by my statement. My favorite all-time favorite mandolin player, and no, I won't mention his name, told me flat out that he never did a single scale or exercise in his life. I have come to understand that he is telling the truth. Yes, he practices, for hours on end, but he practices tunes, and only tunes he wants to play, no "etudes" or "jock exercises." He does not know "formal" theory, although his gut-level understanding of theory is amazing. He does not read music or tab. But as far as I'm concerned he is as "excellent" a player as you will find._


 :Disbelief: 

And *obviously* this individual is *not* a "classical player", since he lacks many of the skills *required* for performance within that genre of music. No doubt he functions well within his genre (old-time, or bluegrass?), but it doesn't follow that he is still an "excellent player" in another genre, especially one as demanding as classical music. Ask someone like Mike Marshall about how much more work and effort and practice he had to put in order to play all that Modern Mandolin Quartet repertoire.  "Limerock" is a nice contest tune, but it isn't Paganini.




> ...._And I don't believe classical method books in general are the only route to excellence. There are just too many examples to the contrary._


But if you want excellence in classical music, you're not going to get it by playing through collection of fiddle tunes, or from a bluegrass mandolin method. 

And, isn't Mair's book one that is clearly classically mandolin orientated?  And, BTW, isn't this the discussion area for "Classical, Medieval, Renaissance" music?   If you want to complain about how the book "stinks" in relation to making you a better bluegrasser, or old-timey picker, ....well, those genres have their own spaces on the Cafe.

----------


## JeffD

> One look at MTV for 10 minutes will tell you that's not true..


They work a lot harder than you and I might think. The competition at the top is so fierce, and the rewards so great, I am convinced there are a minscule few if any at all who don't work regularly at some exercises or scales or licks or something.

I am sure they are working harder than me.  :Grin:

----------


## John Flynn

> And, isn't Mair's book one that is clearly classically mandolin orientated?  And, BTW, isn't this the discussion area for "Classical, Medieval, Renaissance" music?   If you want to complain about how the book "stinks" in relation to making you a better bluegrasser, or old-timey picker, ....well, those genres have their own spaces on the Cafe.


Nope. Mel Bay's description of the book does not even use the word "classical." It says this is a "comprehensive mandolin method...with examples that range from fiddle tunes and Brazilian choro to Vivaldi concertos and Beethoven sonatinas." So I knew there was some classical in it, which I was not opposed to, as well as Choro, etc. but it was not billed as a purely classical book and if it was, I would not have bought it. I thought, per the title, that it covered the whole waterfront. 

Also, I never said the book "stinks." In fact I said I thought it was a good book, it was just a waste for me. My post was a honest reaction to the OP, regardless of its section on the Cafe'. I believe that is within the posting guidelines. I think we should leave it to the actual moderators' judgement as to whether I'm allowed to post in the this section.

----------


## Travis Finch

Wow...this thread has really taken off. There have been some really good points made by some very insightful folks here.

The intent behind my original question: 'What people liked about the book and what they could see improved' was to get a rough feel on what worked for you in a 'method' book and what your experiences have been with learning in general. 

One of my frustrations when first taking up the mandolin was the relative scarcity of instructional materials for the self-educator. I've since found out that there are quite a few books and methods out there, the problem is finding out which ones are available and where to get them. 

Btw...if you have any Pettine to unload, PM me  :Smile: 

In light of that, I think that Ms. Mair should be recognized for putting a book out there that players can easily get ahold of and get their teeth into. As with all books and methods, some will get more out of it than others and opinions will vary. 


As to the repetitive nature of practice and the joyless grind of repetition...

I am currently in my last year of studies at Trinity College of Music and I have a couple of things to say on this topic.

(Hi Ali...just to warn you, you will be mentioned here  :Smile:  )

Needless to say, I am lucky enough to be heavily invested in learning to be a better musician (N.B. not just mandolin player...) on a full-time basis. With this comes work, a hell of a lot of work.

Much of that work takes the form of exercises targeting one or more weakness in my technique, or at least techniques that I want to maintain. The genesis for many of these exercises come from passages in specific pieces I may be working on at the time. i.e. multiple-course tremolo, duo style, arpeggio technique, etc., etc. 

Where Ali has been incredibly helpful has been in helping me to become a better 'self-educator'. In other words, she has given me (and continues to give..for a little while, at least) the tools to look out for my own areas of improvement and work out solutions more efficiently in order to work smarter. 

Also, while she has never taken the hard-nosed 'drill instructor' route, she isn't afraid to call me out on my shortcomings. Usually in a very kind way, but calling me out on areas in need of improvement is part of the job! Great teacher and an amazing person, as any of you who have read the interview may have gleaned. I guarantee that she's all the much more impressive in person. 

(Enough now, or she'll think I'm trying to butter her up for the next lesson...)


There needs to be a line drawn between playing and practice. Playing should be a joy..it's playing...play...fun...you get the idea. Practice is the work you put in to gain the skills to push back the boundaries on your playing in order to make it more rewarding. Not to say that practice can't also be fun; sometimes I find myself really getting into the challenge of some tedious exercise or the other. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. 

From the amateur to the professional, practice time is always a luxury. What any good teacher, book or method should provide is the guidance to get the most out of your practice. 

Oh, and as to the player who hasn't done any scales or 'jock' exercises...I have no doubt at all that they are truly impressive and have achieved quite a bit. You are right, there are always several means to an end. What I am sure of is that as impressive a player as they may be, there are roads that they will be cut off from. 

There's absolutely no sin in choosing one path and sticking with it but there will be elements of playing the instrument that will always be foreign to them. Good for them for doing well on their chosen path but calling something a 'jock' exercise seems to me slightly derisive. If they don't find it useful, fine. As with anything, we are all free to make our own choices as to how to spend our time behind the instrument. What we should avoid is permanently closing our mind to what may work for others.

With that said, I should probably mention...at least to clarify my position on these things...I am also taking a second study 'world and jazz' with a very fine violinist here at Trinity (I just bring my mando...) named Joe Townsend. Sometimes we just end up bashing through tunes too.  :Mandosmiley:

----------


## John McGann

> One look at MTV for 10 minutes will tell you that's not true. There are lots of people making a living as professional musicians outside of classical music that have unfortunately put in way too few hours of practice!


Although they sometimes intersect, entertainers should not be confused with musicians- those instruments are often fashion accessories  :Popcorn:

----------


## Roland Sturm

Amazon sells the "complete mandolinist" for $16.47. That might be the best bargain in the mandolin world. Maybe there are as many people on this message board who have paid twice as much for a single pick in the hope of becoming an improved mandolinist as there are people who have bought this book. 

Even if all you discover is that you don't care about most of the exercises, it seems at least as good an investment as trying out a boutique pick.  

Ali and John Flynn characterized the issue well: The title, exacerbated by Mel Bay marketing hype, promises a lot more than a book that is essentially an etude collection can deliver. A more accurate descriptive title, for example "A collection of classical etudes for intermediate mandolinists", would have been a dud from a marketing perspective. 

Think of it as cross-training, even if playing tennis is your thing, nothing wrong on a rainy winter day to run on a tread mill. Whether you want to follow the advice of a coach that recommends you do sprint exercises in your first 50 years of development is another thing.

So fine material for technical cross-training (if you are not a classical player), like a treadmill, not necessarily comfortable or rewarding and. It's not easy, but not that difficult either. No Pagannini here, what you get is Wohlfahrt and co.. That's the stuff middle/high school violinists have to grind through to be in the orchestra, just like the basketball players get exercises not involving balls. Jock exercises. But if your goal is playing other music, it doesn't necessarily require that you do such exercises, even if they aren't harmful and can help overcome some limitations.

----------


## JeffD

> Amazon sells the "complete mandolinist" for $16.47. That might be the best bargain in the mandolin world. I wonder if on this message board. Maybe there are as many people who have twice as much for a single pick in the hope of becoming an improved mandolinist as people who have bought this book. .


Really good point.  :Grin:

----------


## billkilpatrick

"étude" propelled me to the dictionary ... grazie!

- bill (still on pages 13,14 and 15 but it's getting much better)

----------


## JonZ

Regarding the binding, many music publishers bind books in the "paperback" style because it is the only way that libraries will stock them. Libraries want their patrons to be able to read the title on the binding.

It would be great if publishers offered a choice of bindings. Most print shops can spiral bind a book you own for a few bucks.

Regarding the joy, or lack thereof, of practicing--I recall a study the indicated that professional musicians reported no more pleasure from practice than your typical amateur. (Yes, I am aware of the problem with studies that measure subjective experiences.) Professionals practice more because they are driven to achieve the desired result.

Finally, here is an interesting article by Malcom Gladwell on the subject of Physcial Genius , which discusses the attainment of "physical genius" among surgeons, basketball players and musicians.

----------


## mandotopia

The Complete Mandolinist is a very good instruction book. I have been a classical mandolinist for 30 years now and have a pretty good idea of what other method books are out there. Though it is difficult to find most of them, and many of them are currently out of print, there is far too much information to fit in one book.  Marylinn's book covers alot of ground for one book. I'm sure Marylinn could have written a multi volume set that would have been more comprehensive. For a single book, this one does a great job of covering  basic and intermediate skills. I have never understood why so many players don't like/won't play scales, exercises etc. I spend about 1/2 of my playing time on improvisational music (bluegrass, folk-rock, space jamming, jazz etc.). I practice scales, arpeggios and other exercises specifically to improve my improvisational playing. I believe that playing these exercises trains you brain/hands to have the ability to move fluidly in any direction (rythmically and tonally) and this allows me to play well in any genre. I have a great quote from my late mandolin teacher Herman Von Bernewitz. A prospective student came to him for mandolin lessons and asked him if he could teach him to play bluegrass? Herman told him " I'll teach you to play mandolin and you can play what ever you want."

----------


## Manfred Hacker

> The intent behind my original question: 'What people liked about the book and what they could see improved' was to get a rough feel on what worked for you in a 'method' book and what your experiences have been with learning in general.


Travis, here are a couple of points I could see improved:
First, the pieces on the CD are not counted off, so I always struggle to get in sync with Ms. Mair. 
Second, I have found a few passages, where note values are wrong, i.e. dots after notes are missing and such. I have thought about sending Ms. Mair a mail to get these corrected in a new edition.

I like the book, although I am not striving to become a classical mandolinist. I like to dabble at many genres.
Also, I am not going through everything in strict order (too old for that  :Frown: ). I love the dexterity exercises, which I think many mandolinists from all walks of music could benefit from. And there are not just etudes: The tremolo sections with prep exercises and pieces like 'Valse' 'Star of the County Down' 'Romance' 'Dark Eyes' 'Sheebeg Sheemore' etc. are some of the pages I revisit on a regular basis. 
And, by the way, one of the first things I did was to get the book spiral-bound for the equivalent of about $3.
Just the two cents of dabbler.
Manfred

----------


## Jim Garber

> Nope. Mel Bay's description of the book does not even use the word "classical." It says this is a "comprehensive mandolin method...with examples that range from fiddle tunes and Brazilian choro to Vivaldi concertos and Beethoven sonatinas." So I knew there was some classical in it, which I was not opposed to, as well as Choro, etc. but it was not billed as a purely classical book and if it was, I would not have bought it. I thought, per the title, that it covered the whole waterfront.


True Mel Bay did not describe it as such on their web site or promo material, however, if you read pages 2 and 3, Marilynn (this, BTW is the correct spelling of her first name) describes her background which is largely classical having studied in the US and Europe. In addition, in her intro she says:



> I present my path to good technique here, building on the great American mandolin methods of the early 20th century, and including exercises that go back to the 18thcentury. I've poured the insights of my teachers and my own quarter-century career into this project, and I intend for it to help you gain the skill and vision you'll need to become your own version of a great mandolinist.

----------


## Explorer

> (Quoted from JM) "Don't move on until you have really mastered the concept. That means that you don't have the book open- you've actually learned the line/tune/exercise, memorized."
> 
> Seems very much the 6 months of twinkle philosphy, because novices can't master them that quickly.


I had to laugh at the reference to using "Twinkle" over an extended period, because it actually is one of the pieces I use to teach another instrument. I use it for all kinds of purposes, including reharmonisation and chord substitution. Depending on the student, it could be around much longer than six months.

Specifically regarding "The Complete Mandolinist," I bought it to work on my sight reading, picking and tremolo. I also bought "Getting Into Jazz Mandolin" and a swing violin method to cover a few other things I wanted to master. I do spend as much time as it takes to master a particular section... because if I can't master the section, then anything after it will suffer. 

*If you don't have enough time to do something right in the first place, when will you have enough time to go back and fix it?* *laugh*

To say it would take six months to learn and memorise any of the pages the CM sounds a little off. I'm curious which of the sections really gave you that much trouble. I know that I make good progress in the book by investing perhaps 20 minutes a session, and I'm surprised at how much the book has improved my ability to use other resources.

Again, using perfect practice and directed time, what in the book have you not gotten down in even a month? Or is your point purely rhetorical?

----------


## mandopops

I like the spiral binding as well. My local Kinko's will spiral bind & put plastic covers on the front & back for $5 or 6 bucks. I've brought in several books .

I like what mantotopia said about Mr. Bernewitz comment. It reminded me of Giovanni Vicari's comment to me. I had taken lessons from Jethro & it did not require reading(although he said he did read music.) My dad thought I should learn to read music. I said Errol Garner(the Jazz Piano Great) didn't read music. My dad said "So you think your Errol Garner?" He just nailed me.

 When I moved to New York I wind of Mr. Vicari. Heavy Classical Dude I thought. I called about lessons and asked if he taught Classical . He said "I teach music & Mandolin. If you know music & Mandolin you can play what ever you want." Sold. So I learned to read & practiced the scales etc.. it helped me.

I know alot of people don't read,don't play scales, don't use method books, don't play etudes etc... they do well for what they want to play. Great. For me, I need all the help I can get. 

I've taken lessons, I've figured out Monroe tunes off records, I've read Bach pieces from books, I've worked on Charlie Parker transcriptions. I'll just sit on the couch off the top of my head pick out an old Sam Cooke tune, or improvise a couple chorus' of Blues.

I think Marilynn's Book is a good book. I refer to sometimes as well as my other books, Methods, Fake Books,& books of compositions. It's one piece of the puzzle.

----------


## JonZ

I think one thing people should be aware of about CM is that it is not a method that will take you from beginner to advanced. It assumes intermediate sight reading ability. If you have only been playing fiddle tunes, the variety of rhythms presented will frustrate you. If you can handle counting doted and tied notes in a variety of time signatures, working through the book will be very fruitful. Again, remember to do what the books says: work on all four sections at once.

----------


## catmandu2

> Ok, Roland, here's my point:
> 
> To get the most out of any piece of information in a book, one has to understand what the point of the piece is, be it an exercise that illustrates a technique, or an musical concept that one can use in improvisation or other areas of musicianship.





> I'm sure people are taking things the wrong way- memorizing exercises doesn't necessarily mean grinding them to death for six months.


What John is saying is that these materials are aides to learning.  To the degree that a student is able, they should teach themself.  Teachers, books, methods...facilitate the process.  As s-corgi points out, a lesson is "memorized" when it is assimilated and becomes part of the student's lexicon.  Of course the goal is not to execute Twinkle, Twinkle flawlessly.  But a creative student may find enough material in that piece for years of study.  Then, as John said, with book closed, that lesson re-emerges again and again from the student's skill set and psyche as they move on.  John Coltrane was inspired by the changes in My Favorite Things to perform a 20-minute version at every gig for years.

With some basic knowledge of theory, a devoted student with reasonable intelligence can structure and assimilate their own technical exercises to attain proficiency.  Take your elements, combine them, revise them, invert, deconstruct and reconstruct...with imagination, creativity, objectives, and a keen ear.  If you have the motivation to do this, you will learn much faster, and derive much more from your materials.

----------

