It seems to me the difficulty here is the problem of learning to improvise well. The plain fact of the matter is that learning to improvise is extremely difficult work and very time consuming. But if you are really not interested in learning to improvise well, that's great, you've saved yourself a lot of work, and there are plenty of other big challenges for musicians. But don't pretend you couldn't do it if you really tried, because you could, it's just a hard problem to solve, perhaps a harder problem than you realized, and saying you couldn't discourages others from trying. It's a challenge, but you can do it.
Being a good instrumentalist, being a composer or songwriter, and being an entertainer are indeed three different (although not entirely unrelated) things. We can see plenty of examples among famous and not-so-famous people. And thinking about not being invited to a party that you didn't want to go to anyway is sometimes a sign that you want to be at a party, but not that particular one - or that you want to be with those people, but not in that way. You wouldn't be here if you didn't have a strong and enduring passion for the music and the instrument. And you wouldn't write these blog posts so regularly or so eloquently if you didn't have something unique to say. So, if I had any say in the matter, I would like to see and hear you being creative and entertaining in your way. Not the way of Grisman, Skaggs, or Steffey. Your own way. Writing your own songs or improvising solos may not be your way. But what about using your musical and verbal skills to weave something that is all your own? Perhaps by telling the story of the tunes you play (tune choice is an artistic choice after all), and sharing what you love about them? Or by infecting people with your enthusiasm for our little niche instrument? Or by bringing the thoughtfulness that goes into these blogs to bear on a journey into the life of a musician - a real musician, not the sort of musician that exists in the audience's preconceptions? Now, that's a party I'd want to be at.
Of course, by resolution I mean in terms of practicality rather than ideals - as in restoration, revivalism, rebirth, etc; it's clear we're talking transformation, degree, metaphor, for example, rather than the ideal - (at least in present times). So, grappling with dialecticism isn't going to be rare I certainly have my travails! Anyway fun blog Jeff - thanks
Originally Posted by JeffD ... maybe what we do in life is create for ourselves contexts in which what we want to do regardless and will do anyway do not seem ridiculous. Reconciling paradox seems to be a particular challenge of the Western mind. The world is rife with examples for resolution - if we care to make study..
I think about a short story by one of my favorite authors, Jorge Luis Borges, entitled "Pierre Menard, Author of the Quixote". It explores artistic endeavor, and how, on the face of it, what a real artist does can seem entirely ridiculous to those not having the context, and then, what is that context anyway. And maybe what we do in life is create for ourselves contexts in which what we want to do regardless and will do anyway does not seem ridiculous. But that would be a blog for a different forum.
Well it did eventually become more lucid, for me, and I thank you Jeff for not chastising me for clogging up your blog. I'm thinking this evening of some of these same things - I believe I hear Jeff saying. I've turned to lots of scored works - Satie, Carolan, Bach, the Villa Lobos and all the flamenco too for the most part .. and currently playing in some trad forms where melodies are scored as much as they're disseminated aurally.. I'm listening this evening to contemporary "mid-eastern".. oud, clarinets, doublebass...there's pathos in this ancient form that I can't shake. Musical "identity" (you might say) is something I've given some thought to .. (and still puzzled ) Well, it's an effective heuristic.
JeffD, I get this and find your candor quite appealing. Some people are, as you said, wired differently. I am an entertainer and creator or song, but not as technically great as some musicians. For an example, my brother is a technical guitarist and does a very good job on stage, but would rather stand behind the music stand and let his drummer introduce the band. His jazz guitar skills are well beyond my folk-rock guitar and mandolin, while I am an entertainer and songwriter. I love the give and take with a crowd. I find both, and many other styles and types of players, enjoyable. I am grateful for your open and well-written explanation.
Originally Posted by JeffD One of the reasons I am enthusiastically pursuing classical music is that I can whole heartedly get behind the idea of perfecting my playing in order to chase great beauty. It seem perfectly logical and without conflicting emotions, to go after the beauty in the composition of an acknowledged great artist, as a goal in and of itself, with no other ambition. It seems very reasonable to see the beauty as "over there" and I (not having the beauty) go after it. I think this is a good approach. And even the sound of this repertory on the mandolin may not be completely fulfilling; for me, mandolin didn't assuage many of my interests - it quickly led to other mandolin-family indulgences. But these, too, don't fully assuage my interests - I have to study/play other instruments that have the dimension (capacity and/or repertory) I'm needing.
One of the reasons I am enthusiastically pursuing classical music is that I can whole heartedly get behind the idea of perfecting my playing in order to chase great beauty. It seem perfectly logical and without conflicting emotions, to go after the beauty in the composition of an acknowledged great artist, as a goal in and of itself, with no other ambition. It seems very reasonable to see the beauty as "over there" and I (not having the beauty) go after it. I have a long ways to go in this regard, but the satisfactions, and disappointments, are easier to understand.
Originally Posted by JeffD No what I mean is more straight forward, I can't (nobody can) go home and practice my way to creativity, or to showmanship. Of course you can. Maybe you don't feel that you're able. But, of course one can. Originally Posted by JeffD Dave Grisman, or a Ricky Skaggs, or Adam Steffey, and say well I am going to go home and practice, but one would be foolish, because the path to their kind of success is not achieved just by getting better. The difference between them and me... ...differences in ability Yes, that's true. But is there value in playing at a level inferior to theirs? But, I can understand and even empathize with what you're saying. Perhaps you're an aesthete who doesn't particularly enjoy the music/sound that is produced by your efforts (on the mandolin, presumably). Totally understandable - I'm there myself, often. One reason why I switch-up instruments all the time is because I get bored with a particular genre or sound. I love to listen to music/sound. Often, my playing is NOT what I want to listen to. I suggest using the playing of others as inspiration. So, what I do is find the value in the music that I'm playing... Originally Posted by JeffD ...the path to their kind of success is not achieved just by getting better... "Getting better" is going to require further elaboration. When I was 16-17 years old, and disillusioned with my playing (although I had the best ear of any of my peers), I asked a cohort, "what avenue of music should I pursue - where my transcribing skills would be a benefit?" My friend replied - "just use it to your advantage in general musicianship...etc." Have no idea if any of this would be helpful to you. But I can relate. I would say, follow where it leads you..
No what I mean is more straight forward, I can't (nobody can) go home and practice my way to creativity, or to showmanship. That one can look at a Dave Grisman, or a Ricky Skaggs, or Adam Steffey, and say well I am going to go home and practice, but one would be foolish, because the path to their kind of success is not achieved just by getting better. The difference between them and me is much different than merely the differences in technical mandolin playing. Those differences in ability, though monumental, are only one dimension of the difference. You can't learn to fly by going home and trying to run faster. And that fact is driven home, in my experience, as I notice local success of folks not immeasurably better at playing than me, but much better in these other areas, perpendicular to playing well.
Originally Posted by JeffD I guess its one of those cases where I look over there and see where someone is, and some natural competitiveness starts to drip into my brain, and say hmmm, what does he have that I don't have, and then I think through and write this essay to say, oh, that's what he has that I don't have. OK. Now the follow up question is, now that I know am I satisfied and happy with that? That is a question for a therapist I suspect. ----- I am also commenting, obliquely, and as in my blog about the movie, that going home and practicing more is not always the right answer. Depending on the goals and life satisfaction it may be enough, but don't use practice to solve the wrong problems. Maybe that is what I should have written about - but the blog that did come out came out so fast and furious I think it is more compelling as is. I'll try to read that blog at some point. So, it seems you are saying - you are desiring to achieve some level of proficiency in some type of activity (presumably music-related) that you find (and/or you see others finding) appealing? And perhaps speculating about whether you could possibly achieve this? I'm still somewhat puzzled - if you indicated the nature of the "wrong problems" to which you refer, we could probably get somewhere. But, totally if it's persona/ not something to discuss here, do talk to someone confidentially instead. *I want to clarify something above about all that art stuff. Artist can mean many different things - and the parameters of art are vast. Musician can be a type of artist, or not so particularly. I don't intend any pretense by it - merely that, one who dwells in art all day, is likely an artist; one who dwells in music (exuding music, providing music, relating musically, experience life through music..) is likely a musician. (If one applies oneself to music as with the endeavors and values of art, then one likely has an artistic orientation or approach to music, etc.)
Just saw that I'd posted minutes after you. Thanks for replying to my posts - it's fun.
dl
I am also commenting, obliquely, and as in my blog about the movie, that going home and practicing more is not always the right answer. Depending on the goals and life satisfaction it may be enough, but don't use practice to solve the wrong problems. Maybe that is what I should have written about - but the blog that did come out came out so fast and furious I think it is more compelling as is.
I guess its one of those cases where I look over there and see where someone is, and some natural competitiveness starts to drip into my brain, and say hmmm, what does he have that I don't have, and then I think through and write this essay to say, oh, that's what he has that I don't have. OK. Now the follow up question is, now that I know am I satisfied and happy with that? That is a question for a therapist I suspect.
"I don’t have musical ideas that aren’t obviously derivative." You should understand that most of this - indeed, most everything in life - is fundamentally derivative. I'm still not sure what you're looking for. What do you want? - I mean musically.. We can certainly give you general encouragement. Or if just kvetching, that's okay too.. It sounds like you're looking for something rather specific. Does it matter whether you (or others perhaps?) consider yourself a musician, or not? What if someone - who enjoyed playing a musical instrument - referred to him/herself as a short-order cook, rather than a musician...? Why not just consider yourself a guy who likes to play the mandolin? I spend most all my free time playing music. I don't often need to call myself this, nor that...others may refer to me as "musician," but I'm rarely in a position that I need to identify myself in terms of what I do. I DO what I do - it's axiomatic. Do what it is you like to do - don't worry so much about what others may think.
What appears to be confusing to you cat is the contradiction of seeming complaining about the impediments to further success, and the seeming disdain for that success anyway. And the contradictions are evident. I go back and forth. Its like not being invited to a party I didn't want to go to anyway. Or something.
According to the Oxford dictionary, a musician is "a person who plays a musical instrument." So, sorry, you are a musician whether you accept that or not. You may not be a composer, or an entertainer, or an improvisationalist (it's a word, I checked!). But so what? It is a minority of musicians who truly good at being any of those. I have tried all of them, and while I can claim I got by, I can't claim I did it well enough to be satisfying. After years of angst thinking I should care, I've finally realized I don't care and it's not sour grapes. I finally realized my purpose in playing music and I have decided to not only be satisfied with it, but truly happy and fulfilled with it. That decision has brought me a lot of peace and it has actually increased my enjoyment and improvement in playing. I think letting go of what I thought a musician should be and embracing what I needed it to be made all the difference. I won't say in this post what my purpose turned out to be, because I don't want muddy the waters. But I encourage you, or anyone, to accept that whatever motivation you have for picking up the instrument, it is right, and complete, and enough. There doesn't have to be anything else.
What are you looking for? You say, "I can play entertainingly enough." - Isn't this enough? You say, "And, let’s face it, I don’t care. Or care enough, I guess. I [what] to play what I want to play." - If this is so, then why all the complaining about an uninterested or disengaged audience? Too many contradictions to understand what you're saying.. You're right - a musician with chops but no "insights" is akin to reading a well-written essay with little content. But what of scores? Isn't there scored material that is of merit? Plenty of others find sufficient inspiration in written material (often, sufficient enough on which to base a career). Plenty of folks don't possess showmanship nor improvisational wherewithal...and still ostensibly enjoy music. But you say you don't care -
There are some definite advantages to jams with real human beings.
I have a laptop & synth rig where I can compose weird, complex & far-out electronica to my heart's content. But first I would have to spend 1/2 hour plugging things in, checking cables, waiting for my computer software to boot up, and of course, Troubleshooting. I missed the spontaneity of acoustic instruments. Simple: 1. Pick it up. 2. Play it. I kept telling myself "you don't need a mandolin. You won't have time to play it. You should concentrate on your (expensive) electronica rig. Didn't you already go thru that Bluegrass phase in 1974?" Finally I couldn't ignore the urge anymore & I bought a mandolin. (mandola actually). I'm so glad I did!! I can't compose any far-out symphonies with it...all I can do is move my fingers around & play Irish & bluegrass tunes that a million other people have played. But there IS something I can do with it: I can take it outside & play. Hopefully soon I can even get out from my computer & go to jams & hang out with real human beings! So yeah, I definitely needed an acoustic instrument in my life!
You bring up some excellent points, Jeff. It seems to me about the only way someone could truly spend the $300 and be done with it would be to read up here, buy the mandolin, and then never return to The Mandolin Cafe again. This place is a killer if a person is striving for musical instrument contentment.
First time checking out your blog, Jeff. You're a gifted writer, and if you don't believe you have anything original to say with music, you certainly do with words. I'm a decent mandolin player and I also make up tunes a lot. I don't do it to try to inch my way into the world of composing,but I do it because I just hear melodies a lot and try to get them onto the fretboard. It's a lot of fun, but at first I did almost feel as if I needed permission. To each his own, though, I say.
Well said Sir, well said!
For the present... but maybe one day...!!
This is a really good read. Thank you. I'm a newbie - playing all of two months. I have one ambition with my mandolin - I want to play well. I'm not quite sure what 'well' actually means. But I'd like to be good. I've already made the acquaintance - all be it he was on a stage and I was 80 yards away - of Mr Thile and his talented friends (Punch Brothers live in London). As I make my slow progress in learning what my mandolin and I can actually do together I do find myself hunting for that 'Holy Grail' nugget of information that will allow me to learn faster, better etc. I read web/blog posts, I watch youtube videos, I buy the occasional book (Don Julin mainly), in a search for my Grail. But I have enough insight to know that in the end it's just down to hard work. There is no Grail, no magic bullet. And my genes are firmly set in stone! So at the age of 47 I shall plod onwards on my Mandolin Journey. Mr Thile can sleep soundly with his beautiful February 1924 Gibson, knowing that for the present I pose no challenge to his place in the world of Ace Mandolin Players. But maybe one day............ !!!
Yea, but nobody every, no-matter how hard they work at it, can ever sound like you. You will always be the best at that.
So you are saying, that there is little chance that I will ever play like Don Stiernberg? Well, nuts. I gave up on playing Guitar like Clapton but I don't know if I can let this one go
I agree. There is a moment where you are no longer the student, you no longer have a master. You become a collegue. Like Kwai Chang Caine in Kung Fu you take the pebble from his had. <showing my age with that one eh.> And that moment has to come from within. One does not ask for permission to be independent.
I watched it Saturday night and came away with a slightly different message. The protagonist never really moves "forward" or breaks through until he lets go. I'm trying to explain this in a spoiler free way, and I can't. After the "event" he effectively stops playing. Additional events happen and the protagonist says f-it. Then the break through happens. I've experienced this. Practice, practice, practice and not much progress gets made. Life gets in the way and I don't play for a nontrivial amount of time. When I do come back, I knock the dust off and I'm playing better.
I don't know about contentment - but my disappointments and struggles are more realistic and relevant. Its one thing to motivated by not being as good as you would like to be, but quite another to be frustrated because your not inhumanly genetic-anomaly awesome.
Sound like you have found contentment in your mandolin playing, a good place to be.
You are the only one in the world that can be you. Ever.
For my money, you were right both times. Two good reads, two enlightened opinions. I would probably want to be more like you rather than being more like Chris Thile.
This was great JeffD. I think you've hit upon one of the fundamental questions we have as humans: following other's paths vs. creating our own, and that's why it is such a tricky thing to nail down and discuss. Thanks for the beautiful post, it really made me think, and I believe that is the best that can be hoped for when debating deep philosophical questions.
i retire this may and will be officially an "an old guy". i too have started may things long ago. the only thing i didn't start was the mandolin.i started last May with lessons and have been making up for lost time since. i get looks from the others who are taking guitar,cello,piano lessons etc(probably because most of them are between 7-12 years old) and usually accompanied by mom.when i break out my loar 600vs they all want to hit a lick.the age barrier disappears and the music begins.
JeffD, I just tumbled into this beautiful essay...I must be an old guy: It has only taken me five years to figure out the past ten years. When I was young, it generally took just five months to figure ten years into the future. I enjoyed your writing and the mood it evoked. Thanks. Randolph
Beautiful, enjoyed and loved your article. Play on "old guy" and write too.
I hadn't thought of it as a normal distribution, but the analogy holds. I would only add that its not random, or arbitrary, that the standard or the "central tendency" of the distribution, is that technique which yields the greatest effectiveness for the most people. It is the thing to shoot for, absent any good reason not to. (And "its hard, I don't want to" is not among the good reasons.)
Great post! Since I teach a bit of statistics, I think an alternative way of describing what you mean would be to use the concept of a normal distribution. There is more than one way of doing things, so there is a distribution of methods rather than a single one. But all methods aren't equally popular in some sort of big free-for-all (which would result in a flat distribution). Instead, there is a "standard" way of doing things, which is the central tendency of a bell-shaped distribution ... and deviations from that standard caused by individuality, habit, anatomy, and all manner of similar reasons. This applies to almost all activities, such as the angle at which you hold the mandolin, the angle at which you hold the pick, the force with which you hold the pick, and so on. Some of these activities will vary only slightly between individuals (giving the distribution a small variance), others will vary more widely (large variance). As you say, the extreme statements "There is only one correct way" and "Everybody does it differently" are both wrong. There are ways of doing things that work very well for quite a lot of people; and other ways of doing things that work better for some. When new players try to look for the way that works for them, it makes sense to start looking in the place that works for most people.
Jeff, What an interesting and well thought out essay. I appreciate the knowledge and thinking ability to write something this interesting takes. You are a gifted writer and made me and others really think about how to communicate something in a discussion/forum format to a newer musician in response to their questions. Thanks. Five stars in my humble opinion!
It's just if it were a bit more complicated, everybody would revert to "get a teacher" as the admiral's answer. NFN Bagpipes, although the brunt of every musical joke globally, are darn hard to play. To a man, when the question is posted, "how does one play the pipes?" The answer is, "Get some pipes, and get and instructor." So that the rest of the forum is threads on terrestrial experiences.
My focus is what to say to newbies. I think your points are spot on for experienced players. We all have individual "geometries" as you say, that we have to figure out how to accommodate. But even the phrase "try things out, find out what works best for you" is, I think, not helpful for a newbie. If I was told that when I first asked how to hold a bowl back, I would have given up. What would have worked best for me is to have someone else play it. I needed to know how to do it. I admit in many cases there are a range of acceptable hows. I suppose the "Italian school" and the "German school" are examples of what happens when there are large difference in acceptable hows. A radical thought: I don't think a serious newbie is in a place to make the accommodation decisions. It is all uncomfortable, and a certain maturity is needed (in the sense of experience playing) to be able to say what is better for me. Especially if the newbie is asking specific questions. "How do I hold a pick." "Well try things out and see what works best for you." It will be pure luck if such a person nails a good technique early on by literally following that advice. More likely the beginner will wander on and try and emulate some player that seems popular or cool. OK so here is an even more radical thought: I suspect that the majority of non-ideal techniques are not alternatives adopted to accommodate unique physical geometries and abilities. Many are, I readily admit, but I would bet the majority are bad habits that have become comfortable. Bad in the sense that they are motivated by the desire to take an easier way, and bad in the sense that they clearly limit further progress. And, tragically, the limited further progress is experienced as lack of talent.
If any "standard" exists, I think it's just an imaginary ideal held in some people's minds, and it's not universally the same amongst people, as the examples of Mike and Pete clearly show. With regard to instrument playing technique, which violin school is the "standard" - is it the Russian? the Italian? the French? They all differ quite noticeably. I maintain there is no actual "standard" to speak of, in violin or mandolin technique. Likewise, there is no such thing as a "standard" human being. Although the "ideal" proportions for body and face have been calculated by Leonardo et. al., how many in the population exactly correspond to them? Ever look at peoples hands? As different as snowflakes. Not to mention arms, shoulders, bellies... you get the picture. Even if there were a "standard", I still think you're creating a false dichotomy. Nobody is advising to just "do whatever you want, it doesn't matter". That's not the same thing as "try things out, and find what works best for you." Not at all. No one would advocate picking up any old combination of acquired habits, good and/or bad, and trying to make the sow's ear into a silk purse. But our essential physical differences, and sometimes our background experiences as well, will necessitate different approaches in our playing. bratsche
Pete does have it much much less of an angle. Parallel or almost. Well in this case I think Mike is to be preferred. It seems to get the angle of the fingers to the frets right. I like what Pete says about the instrument being off parallel with the chest. Mike doesn't address this. I don't think Mike and Pete differ enough to call it two schools of thought on mandolin holding. That there are teacher's who differ on some points is normal and expected, and doesn't mean there isn't a standard. It means that teachers disagree as to what is best in some instances. What I mean is, just because Mike and Pete have some differences doesn't mean one should recommend to newbies "do what ever you want, it doesn't matter."
Pete Martin, with his emphasis on ergonomics, seems to hold the mandolin parallel to the floor: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0mDNJnKVO6A. Mike Marshall, by contrast, advocates positioning the instrument at a decided angle: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=NmagoBQunZI. Which standard is standard?
As I said: •It doesn’t mean the standard isn’t evolving, or that everyone agrees on every point. Actually I haven't looked into it point by point but I haven't found gigantic differences. That might be a neat thread to start, though. Listing or explaining the differences.
Although Pete Martin and Mike Marshall teach very different "standards."
Peter Martin has some excellent videos up. As does Mike Marshall.
Blog Categories
Recent Visitors
Archive
Go to Profile
Mark as Read
