Scale practice

[Mike Bunting]

This article may be of interest.
http://www.bulletproofmusician.com/w...ll-over-again/

[bart mcneil]

I cannot argue with the article except in the sense that I, and I suspect others, would simply quit playing rather than have to spend that kind of time playing scales. In fact I did quit my classical piano teacher for just that reason. They made no sense to a twelve year old. So I switched to an old bar room pianist who played Fats Waller style and told me about Django Reinhardt. I loved it but my mother hated it because she didn't allow smoking in our house so he, in the absence of ash trays would flick his ashed into his shirt pocket, or on the floor. I loved it,,, but my mother didn't.

I still don't play scales but spend usually three hours per day playing mando and banjo and often learning new techniques. Works for me, but of course I am not a professional. If I were it might be a different story.

[Jim Bevan]

Given the time (which I made sure I had when I was younger, and trying to build a career based on performance), I'll happily spend hours playing scales.

It's one of the reasons my kids didn't try to make a career out of playing music -- they could see that they weren't like Dad.

Scales are easier to focus on than pieces, 'cuz when I play a piece, the sum of everything that I don't do perfectly can be a little overwhelming.
Playing scales is much more relaxing.

[Ivan Kelsall]

Years back,i used to practice scales on my banjo just to hear how they sounded. I did the same when i came to mandolin 9 years back to 'hear the difference' on this instrument. Playing scales can be enjoyable & instructive,& it does give you a good idea what's going on when you hear a Bluegrass (for instance) mandolin player, play notes which sound as though they shouldn't be there - maybe Bill Monroe would have called them 'Blue' notes. However, when teaching ourselves,we do what we think we need to at any one time,
Ivan

[montana]

I think if you just learn fiddle tunes they will teach you every thing you need to know about playing bluegrass.

[SincereCorgi]

Mastery of fundamentals is a big deal, but I have on several occasions been surprised to read about legendary players who completely dismiss the need to practice scales. (Alfred Brendel, for one.) I also think that 'scales' get undue reverence, when arpeggios and long tones and dynamic contrast exercises etc etc are just as important for musical development.

[Mike Bunting]

Mastery of fundamentals is a big deal, I also think that 'scales' get undue reverence, when arpeggios and long tones and dynamic contrast exercises etc etc are just as important for musical development.

Of course. Those are mentioned in the article as part of the discipline involved.

[SincereCorgi]

Yeah, it was a good article, but everybody always says 'scales', which I think turns off a lot of students. John McGann on this site several times opined that scales in themselves weren't really worth that much practice.

[Jesse Weitzenfeld]

Replace "Practicing Scales" with "Playing By Ear" and I'd agree with him completely.

Scales are useful, but only in the sense that they enhance a player’s ability to make music. In and of themselves they serve no purpose. Scales have their place, and can be useful tools in the right hands, but that’s it. Scale worship is everywhere in music, and it’s something I’ve been fighting (ok, maybe not fighting…let’s say weakly slapping at) for years. Scales are NOT the key to improvisation. Mmmkay? They’re not.

I almost laughed out loud reading how the author was impressed by the cellist’s ability to play scales, and that he believes the true test of a musician is how well they know their scales. If I didn’t know better I would think this article was written as a joke...

[belbein]

Not trying to start a fight or anything, but I'm curious. Those of y'all who are giving scales the bit -1 ... do you include FFCP in that, or do you feel that is separate?

[mandocrucian]

The classical world can be quite authoritarian and fascistic, and that can be reflected in their teaching methodology. You can develop very high levels of technical ability doing it their way, as long as you realize that your goals are not "theirs"

It's really exploitive...take thousands of kids (and their parents' money for lessons), put them through hours and hours or repetitive training, and maybe you'll end up with a dozen or two, "worthy" of any serious consideration for potential "classical musician" status. The rest of you losers..... "you can't make the cut....so buzz off, and PS, thanks for all the fish."

These people don't improvise and have no interest in training you to "improvise". You are just an infantryman in the orchestral army following the orders of your generals and play whatever is on the sheet music they hand you.

The jazz methodologies can be just as technically demanding, but they also designed to (simultaneously) get you to think on your feet and be able to recycle ideas/motifs through various chord progressions/meters/phrasing and such.

Scale practice is a whole lot more than running up and down scales, or playing them in 3rds, or patterns (1231 2341 or 1234 2345 etc.). Any melodic fragment can be practiced as a pattern, starting the lick on successive degrees of pitches in the key/scale you are applying it to. Take the first (or first two) measure(s) of any tune and keep moving it up (or down) starting it on the next scalar pitch. The notes in the phrase don't need to be consecutively scalar , there can be gaps between the pitches; it's just that you keep moving the whole phrase up or down the scale. ("The Blarney Pilgrim" GAG GAc ded d3 |ABA ABd efe e3| BcB Bce... etc )

Besides the "finger work" you are training your ear to move motifs around, and isn't this a common feature of many 'fiddle tunes'? You are still practicing your scale, but also other things simultaneously. You can write these down as exercises, but it's even better (more beneficial) if you can just think it through without a cheat sheet.

It's always good to put whatever major key exercise into parallel minor . G major, then as G minor. Then repeat in other keys: A / Am, B / Bm etc. etc.

Though not a "scale exercise", transposing the lick , starting with "around the circle of 5ths", is a great exercise. Now you are applying the lick/motif to fitting a chord progession. In the Jerry Coker Patterns For Jazz book, he uses these

• a) circle of 5ths (C F Bb EB etc
• b) up (or down) in minor seconds (i.e. C C# D D# E tc
• c) up (or down) in major 2nds (C D E F# Ab Bb C or Cm Dm Em etc
• d) up (or down) in minor 3rds (C Eb Gb A, C# E G Bb, D F Ab B)

Here'a PDF of these ideas using a simple scalar lick used in Jethro Tull's "Thick As A Brick"

Niles H

[Pasha Alden]

A refreshing take on scales!

[Jim Bevan]

I agree with Niles, I regularly practise all those methods on mandolin (years of jazz piano training got me thinking that way), but I don't quite agree with his take on classical training.
My classical piano teacher wanted to hear a few scales before we got into Beethoven just cuz, well, if ya ain't got the control to play a scale fast and evenly, then you won't be doing Beethoven any justice.

Anyways, ya can't dis just playing scales (and arpeggios et al) as a good way to warm up your fingers for a gig while saving your head and your heart for the performance.

I seem to be in the minority here, but I love playing 'em, and could do so all day long.

[Pasha Alden]

In my understanding scales improve fretting and impart knowledge of the fret board. In that sense it could probably be said that they allow you to become more proficient and perhaps with greater knowledge of the fret board improvisation is more likely to take place. However, with my little knowledge, I believe improvisation is also something separate one works on. It is in a sense for me the ability to change a pattern, play around with parts of the melody, explore different elements thereof and become daring and creative. In order to do this with confidence and freedom the knowledge of the circle of fifths and of course the fret board will assist.

[Mike Bunting]

Most of the replies here seem to equate playing scales as a way of learning the notes etc. whereas to me the gist of the article was about articulating those notes for maximum tone and expression. I practice scales with all down stokes, and then up downs, triplets etc. all the while by focussing on right hand and pick technique in order to draw out the best tone from the mando. Of course playing by ear and the rest is important, but it doesn't amount to much if you can't produce your ideas in a listenable way

[Jim Bevan]

Mike's right -- learning your scales and practising your scales are two different tasks, on completely different levels.

I learned my scales 50 years ago, but my execution of them today still leaves room for improvement;
any improvement in my scale execution will be reflected in my overall playing.

[Pasha Alden]

correct learning and practicing different tasks. I think what I made reference to was learning scales and also learning about the fret board.
I always try and use scales as an opportunity to work towards a good sound. At present also working in tremolo when playing scales.

[Jon Hall]

When I'm learning scales, arpeggios, intervals, etc., I find it helpful to hum or sing the notes I'm playing.

[Mike Bunting]

When I'm learning scales, arpeggios, intervals, etc., I find it helpful to hum or sing the notes I'm playing.

That is a really good thing to practice.

[GuitarDogs62]

playing scales for me has increased my speed and allows me to learn and apply a little theory in to boot. I play scales a minimum of twice a week and now play the scales in position. Scales do everything this thread has said and allows me to do some ear training as well. I play a scale in lets say G and try and sound out a break / lead to an easy song and then repeat this for more diifficult songs. I also do this in position as well and it has helped me in ear training and fretboard knowledge greatly. Scales can be boring, but the trick is to spice them up once in awhile and have fun with them instead of making them repetative boring work.

[mando on the side]

The classical world can be quite authoritarian and fascistic, and that can be reflected in their teaching methodology. You can develop very high levels of technical ability doing it their way, as long as you realize that your goals are not "theirs"

It's really exploitive...take thousands of kids (and their parents' money for lessons), put them through hours and hours or repetitive training, and maybe you'll end up with a dozen or two, "worthy" of any serious consideration for potential "classical musician" status. The rest of you losers..... "you can't make the cut....so buzz off, and PS, thanks for all the fish."

These people don't improvise and have no interest in training you to "improvise". You are just an infantryman in the orchestral army following the orders of your generals and play whatever is on the sheet music they hand you.

Niles H

To say that classical training is exploitative is just wrong. It's not just about playing pieces or submitting oneself to a fascist regime of technical perfection. There are many classical teachers that teach that way, but if you're lucky the great teachers teach their students to think, to dive deeply into the music of the great composers. The great teachers teach their students to analyze the music both theoretically, physically and emotionally. To perfect a piece of music isn't just for the sake of learning a piece; it's to connect yourself to the past, connecting with your audience and finding it in yourself to work hard striving for perfection. I understand how you might think that if you've had experience with a bad teacher...there are plenty of those. But I've been blessed enough to have had really inspiring teachers.

Yes, the professional classical world is cut-throat, but how many of us here on the Cafe are great performers? To say that there's no place for those who trained classically is also wrong; there are many many opportunities to play in community orchestras, small chamber ensembles, and there are hundreds of thousands of pieces of all levels for the soloist.

For me, the hours and hours of training was mostly practice; do you not practice for yourself? It just so happens that once a week my practice was guided by a teacher. TOTALLY worth it. I'm not saying that improvised music or any genre other than classical has no depth, but those pieces of music that took years to compose have so much information in them that it does require years and years of training to appreciate them. Besides, where do you think the music that we call play here came from? Hundreds of years of evolution, much of it (obviously not all) evolved from the western tradition.

Also, classical musicians CAN improvise. Most of them just spend more time learning their classical pieces and have no time to practice for improvisation; although nowadays many pedagogues are encouraging that lost art. Back in Bach, Mozart and Chopin's time every keyboardist knew how to improvise. It was just a part of their study.

If I could do it again, I would spend MORE time with my classical training, (yes, more $$!), and I would gladly spend the money on my child(ren) for lessons as well. Of course, that begs the question...would I have enough money to buy myself mandolins then???

Ed

[mandocrucian]

Read it again. I didn't say that "classical training" is exploitive. Etudes and exercises have no politics in themselves, the same stuff can be used within other genres as a "means" by other instructors with another outlook. Most of the neck navigation issues of tuning in 5ths have been addressed with the violin materials.

I've got plenty of the usual violin stuff (Sevcik, Kreutzer, etc.) on the bookshelves. I studied with a violinist ('79-83) who was at one time the only approved Leopold Auer violin instructor in the US. But, then again, he was also one of Joe Venuti's buddies and could play other stuff, which is why my fiddle-playing brother hooked up with before me. So while I went through a lot of technique building, he knew, and I knew, the purpose was not to turn me into a classical player. And it was real good - gave me enough technique that I could start playing Hendrix and rock/electric guitar stuff on a mando and not sound "corny" doing it.

And I've seen countless classical players who couldn't improvise their way out "The Farmer In The Dell."

And the mentality in the classical area seem to be highly authoritarian and dictatorial. On a (primarily classical) flute listserv, that had the same 3rd party Yahoo mailing isses as the Café did, months later after all yahoo originating posts would be automatically rejected by listserver, I sent a test message to see if it would go through (since I'd gotten a PM from the Café, which meant the same issue was not a problem here anymore). And for that I got (privately) chastised by the list Nazi (moderator). And working orchestral players will actually put up with being treated as if they are still in grade school by these jerks.

[mando on the side]

Read it again. I didn't say that "classical training" is exploitive.

....um maybe you should reread what you wrote...it seems that you implied it.

[PaulBills]

....um maybe you should reread what you wrote...it seems that you implied it.

I got the impression he was saying teachers who only get their pupils to practice scales in their lessons week after week were exploitative...

[SincereCorgi]

I think Niles was absolutely right in saying that classical training can be authoritarian and fascistic. Thing is, it's not necessarily intentional or conscious, it's just a part of the system as it has evolved. You can have great and inspiring teachers, but the system is still set up in such a way that the end goal is understood to be that that of being paid to interpret written music in a formal concert setting, and all practice aims toward that point. Any serious player of an ensemble instrument will eventually find themselves practicing 'orchestral excerpts', which are just the hard parts of orchestral pieces, the understanding being that these are what will eventually be asked for at the audition. You end up with this bizarre situation where you've got players that can tear through Mahler passages but only manage a very tentative version of 'Happy Birthday'.