The Steel Guitar Forum

Clete,

Maybe if you can explain exactly how, what JD is wanting to be able to hear is going to help him in actual playing a tune he hears, that would be of interest?

Now! If it's in order to be able to explain to someone else in the band (or whatever) how to play whatever it was, (in a musically scientific approach) then sure it would be of value.

But if you could explain to me, in exactly what way it could have or would have improved on my playing, I'd sure like to hear, exactly why it would have?

And if a person can't answer that question, then it's of no value at all in actual playing "What you hear."

Intervals are simply distances between any two points, (and doesn't necessarily pertain to only music). An note is nothing more than a pitch that is either higher or lower in pitch than another note.

An inverted cord, doesn't change it from being the same cord, only it's voicings within that same cord.

Anyway, I'm truly interested in how it would have helped me and others who play/ed by ear and didn't know we were not suppose to be able to play that way. ......................

But yes! This isn't helping JD in his quest for what he wants to know. And yes! If he wants to know how he can learn to do that, there is a reason behind it too. So that's not to say it's a waste of time for him to learn. For me it would be. But to someone else, it may not be at all. It's whatever one is looking for, then, that person has valid reasons for wanting to know, and it would be an advantage to him/her in some form or another..................

Dave Mudgett wrote:... JD did ask if anybody had suggestions for methods to help him identify intervals, with the following comment:

I have never given much thought to train my ear/brain to identify (listen, hear, ID) intervals. I thought it'd come by itself. I really did. There was a time I could dedicate up to 8 hours a day playing... I thought that by HAMMERING it in, it would come. I did NOT.

So I really don't think that saying, "Just play and play songs and it will come." addresses his question.

I have a theory -actually, it's more than a theory to ME, it's a conviction- about WHY it did not happen by "just playing the songs":
When I started out on steel, I had previously dabbled with rhythm guitar and a little bit of key board (I was really INTO Jerry Lee Lewis at that time).
My parents had sent me to an evening guitar school. They taught TWO ways at once:

• play up the neck chords (on the first three frets (which does NOT show the distance relationship!).
• basic "reading" of melody lines.

I was just beginning to fall for country music while my parents had wished I'd pick up classical. I soon dropped out the classes and joined a group of equally clueless kids and went boom'chic'a'boom on my guit'tar.
I met a guy who quickly learned to play rock'n'roll piano, and since I had "discovered" JLL and Ray Charles, to the further horror of my parents, I traded my guitar for an old beat up Fender Rhodes piano and took "lessons" from my clueless piano playing buddy for beers. I left him as soon I had Jerry's left hand thing figured out and that was it.
Later I ran into a group of guys who were really starting to "get it" but they didn't need a piano, but suggested they'd like to add a steel (non-pedal, since they were playing authentic Hillbilly). So? I put a marker under my guitar's bridge, to to E maj. and used my blues harp (another failed experiment) as my first "slide". Three weeks later, we were on stage, mine only "knowing" how to play on 6 of their 20 songs... somehow... I don't remember how.
It was there, that a singer by the name of Hank Edwards told me "you ain't tuning that thang um rite!" and proceeded to mess with my tuners until he strummed it an proclaimed "back then, that's 'bout what'ya had on them thangs". And Boy did it sound like Hank Williams at once. I did NOT know ANYTHING about chords and 6ths... only years later I found out that A, C#, E, F# is... A6th.
I remember that I "discovered" that there was a "system" in music. That what ever key they'd play, there was 5 frets up and a further 2 frets up. I called the "key chord" the "5-frets chord" and the "7-frets chord: what "we" call the I, IV & V. Our bass player agreed... we had "invented" ourselves a little system!
Everything else was run by the basic principles of "seek, and ye shall find".

Then, I came to the States. Fist time! First time in the land of steel guitars! And... first time, finding INFORMATION. That was 1993, Al Gore had not yet invented the Internet... so it was BOOK... you know which books and you know the format. I will not mention it.
But what later became my 8 hours/day hammer it in routine was a routing of "learning" to play song after song from these books. I got REALLY good at that, but I forgot EVERYTHING else I had ever done before in my "hillbilly years". Different tunings (now a D10 PSG)... different approach. NO listening, just gobbling it up from the books.

Just like so many else here, once the Internet and this esteemed Forum came up, I started to ask for MORE...

Then came a day with Maurice Anderson and ended up with me deciding to start from scratch again. Learn my tuning, learn where what was and why (NOT musical theory... really). Learning about progression (I was RIGHT, they ARE all the same! ). And so forth.

One thing I remember well, which impressed the heck out of me, Maurice had encouraged me to bring some tapes of music I like. I brought a bunch of tapes.
We "organized" each neck and then he said "let's look at what you like". We listened to the songs and as we did, he wrote down the progressions to each. He's point evidently, was to show me that they we all the same or very similar. My amazement was, that he could just hear them and write them down as we went, while I had to listen bit by bit and and try to hunt around for it on my guitar. I did that a LOT, so I had gotten pretty good at THAT... but not at listening alone.

Anyways, you may get good, but at what you practice!!

Only perfect practice makes perfect... etc.


Yes, we got some conflicting answers on here, even a few which I find I can say by EXPERIENCE are NOT leading to the result I am looking for.
But in general, it has been an enlightening discussion and I hope this is not the end of it.

Clete Ritta wrote:

Brint Hannay wrote:...

Here's a twist on interval training Don may take to:
Instead of naming the interval you hear, just sing or play it!
No theory involved, just ears.
Many teachers say "If you can sing it you can play it."

Clete

I tell you, it comes quicker than one would think initially.
I have been quietly doing my "interval ID" on the piano program I mentioned while this thread was running. Funny, I've come to level #3 (-2, 2, -3 and M3) in two note melody AND harmony. I get a 90% right average on these NOW... in just a couple of days.

Alternatively, I have, based on one poster's suggestion, started to try to do it the other thing around; singing an interval I randomly decide, starting with a random note I hit on the keyboard. I currently have a flu, hence sore throat... but besides, I can tell, that's a whole different discipline, but one I consider necessary in order to reach the goal I set myself.

Still, besides the sore throat, I am amazed at how I am progressing. I can now clearly tell a minor third harmony apart from a Major third. BUT, that is still only in a quite environment (no other notes flying around, blurring the "picture"!

It can be done! I think it was an issue of deciding to dedicate some time and effort to it and finding a somewhat guided routing (a good teacher or in my case a software program with levels to progress thru and a rating system). 10 minutes a day! One day, single note, next day harmony. More is not better, I've tried it, suddenly my success rate starts to drop, and one acquires incertitudes, a set back which has to be "ironed" out again the next day

... J-D.

JD,

I have no doubt at all that you will accomplish what you are after. Once again, the old addage comes into things, and that is: Practice, Practice and lastly Practice.......

Hope you're feeling better real soon........ Don

J D Sauser wrote:...I can now clearly tell a minor third harmony apart from a Major third. BUT, that is still only in a quite environment (no other notes flying around, blurring the "picture"!...J-D.

How many times have you seen a singer with a finger in their ear while singing on what appears to be a loud stage? Or in a studio with only one headphone on? The reason they do this is to help them hear the pitch they are singing in their head. Try singing a pitch aloud, then plug both ears and sing again. You will hear a huge difference, and it seems the note you're singing is now inside your head instead of coming up from the diaphragm, over the chords and out the mouth.

I think many folks who have a hard time singing in tune aren't tone deaf, but just don't hear the note in their head (or have a bad cold)

As a kid I was a helpless backseat singer, always singing along with the radio on long car rides. I still am I guess. I am not a great singer, but it's still fun. I like to sing harmony, or add one if there is none on the record.

The human voice is the original musical instrument, so in essence, our pitch based instruments are just extensions of that voice.

When you learn by ear, you are hearing those notes in your head, then attempting to recreate them by singing or playing them.

Don Brown, Sr. wrote:...I'm truly interested in how it would have helped me and others who play/ed by ear and didn't know we were not suppose to be able to play that way...

Don, I learned most of what I know by ear too, so we are riding the same wave. I don't read music, don't use TAB etc.

The interval training is exactly the same way we both learn a tune, and why I suggested throwing theory out the window and just sing or play it. Hear it, then play it. Isn't that how we "play by ear"? When you say we are not supposed to be able to play that way, let's not forget that a vast number of very talented musicians play and learned just the way we do...by ear!

Studying theory won't make you a better player (practice is the only way to Carnegie), but it will open some doors mentally that might lessen the time it takes to hear and then play a tune.

Clete

Clete,

Now that's exceptable, and we are back with exactly what I way saying in the beginning....

I have been told there are people who actually can't hear a tune in there head, unless they are listening to the music while it's being played or heard over the air waves, etc. I can't even imagine anyone being that way.

All good ones,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, Don

JD, listening, recognizing and visualizing are all important parts of learning to play by ear. The missing piece of the puzzle, though, is understanding. I don't care who you are, at some point in your life you're going to want to understand why things work and why things don't. Knowledge opens up so many other doors for a player, especially in improvising. You can still play by ear and you can explore and find new things that sound great, but understanding helps you tie it in to what you already can do, therefor helping you build on your own style. There is no need to have a conservatory level education in music, but a cursory knowledge of scales and harmony will, take you a long way.

Many will tell you that this and that player doesn't know anything about music, but many players develop there own systems of understanding. I will give you one example, like him or not: Allan Holdsworth. His traditional theoretical knowledge is limited, but he created another way of looking at scales, etc.

I am an ear player. Even though I have a thorough understanding of harmony and theory, if I'm not hearing what I'm playing and just running through stuff that I know fits, then I am not playing well. It happens--but with much practice it becomes very possible to have complete command over what you're hearing internally and making it happen on your instrument. Having knowledge enables you to have control of sounds that are not so obvious, such as extended and altered harmonies.

Mike Neer wrote:JD, listening, recognizing and visualizing are all important parts of learning to play by ear. The missing piece of the puzzle, though, is understanding. I don't care who you are, at some point in your life you're going to want to understand why things work and why things don't. Knowledge opens up so many other doors for a player, especially in improvising. You can still play by ear and you can explore and find new things that sound great, but understanding helps you tie it in to what you already can do, therefor helping you build on your own style. There is no need to have a conservatory level education in music, but a cursory knowledge will of scales and harmony with take you a long way.

Many will tell you that this and that player doesn't know anything about music, but many players develop there own systems of understanding. I will give you one example: Allan Holdsworth. His traditional theoretical knowledge is limited, but he created another way of looking at scales, etc.

Mike, first let me say that I am glad you joined the discussion.

Now, I have to ask you, understand WHAT?

I can whistle JAZZ, or what ever music comes thru my mind. I can whistle, hum or sing (wordless) and IMPROVISE over ANY music which is natural/appealing to me.
I always could. Even when my father complained I was not humming what Mozart would have wanted me to (not the original melody, imagine, shame on me! ts, ts, ts..)... I was a kid and couldn't even spell the word "interval"!

If I know where things are on my instrument, and I know what I am hearing or what I want to hear... please tell, me, what else do I need to understand?

What did all the greats we use as reference understand? They created music. Some, if not many in recent music, probably without consciously knowing what they were doing. I obviously can't/couldn't or you would maybe be transcribing MY songs .
So, maybe you are right. But until you explain to me what and why, I feel that the void I needed to fill a long time ago is to gain consciousness of sound as much as I have consciousness of my instrument's layout.

... J-D.[/i]

In your whistling improvisations, are you able to improvise using anything other than diatonic or simple melodic phrases that are obvious to the harmony? Can you whistle over more modern harmony, such as Giant Steps, or at a high level using tension, release, etc. and not just by luck? I am not suggesting that this is what you are ultimately after, but if you are humming melodies that are not harmonically challenging, then you are just scratching the surface. To be able to play at a high level, you have to hear at a high level, which ultimately boils down to understanding what you are hearing. If you learn a lick from a player because it excites you, then to incorporate it into your own playing, it becomes necessary to understand it so you can manipulate it or change it to suit the harmony and use it at the right time. It is not just harmony that is important to understand, but also the rhythm.

Actually, the most important element of learning how to play jazz is to get the jazz feel inside of you by learning to sing the solos of the greats. Lennie Tristano was the first musician to come up with a system of teaching jazz improvisation, and this is exactly what the first step was (it often took over a year): learn to sing solos by Lester Young, Louis Armstrong, Charlie Christian, etc. Until a student could sing every nuance of the solo, he wouldn't be allowed to play it. This was coupled with many other technical exercises which focused on the students' sense of time (learning to incorporate polyrhythms), facility with scales in every interval, chords in every inversion, unadorned melodies, etc. all at a very slow tempo with a metronome. Yet in the end the message was: Get into your own music, however you heard it. Take chances and without thinking or judgment.

Just a couple observations and my opinions..

Musical theory is knowledge and that can only help a good player to be better at playing and communicating his thoughts.

If I tell a bass player to play a 1 6 2 5 turn around in A and he asks what chords I mean, we have found his level of theory knowledge and communication. I can deal with that..
if he has no idea what I am talking about, I may play it for him if he still doesn't understand, it's time for a new bass player.

Steel players and good ear players can get away without the theory but they would be better musicians with the knowledge.

You learn to tune up, you learn the physical techniques necessary to play as well as you can (limited physical ability, bad posture, and bad techniques will hold you back as much as bad equipment), you learn to play in tune (that's tough if you don't have an ear) and you listen to every great steel player and other instruments in all styles of music to get inspiration, and you practice, play, and learn the neck and you keep doing that to keep your chops up until you stop booking gigs.

Tab has its place as a communication tool as does musical notation. But I think tab was developed to teach non ear players their way around a steel.

Big E didn't get to be the maestro by learning tab, and he was an amazing player at what, 17 years old?

Paul Franklin wasn't born an incredible player, he sweated over famous players licks and practiced while everyone else was playing games. He didn't need to know studio techniques but the knowledge sure has helped him.

I think they call that over achieving!

It's time for me to go back to my steel

Mike Neer wrote:In your whistling improvisations, are you able to improvise using anything other than diatonic or simple melodic phrases that are obvious to the harmony? Can you whistle over more modern harmony, such as Giant Steps, or at a high level using tension, release, etc.

Yes, I think so. Obviously all single note, even thou in my brain I can hear my chords or harmonies.
I think it's pretty close to a sax. Tensions? Sure, at least what I feel as such.
Obviously, both whistling and singing is technically limited and I am by all means not a singer. I can do more IN my head (without being held off by technical limitations) and I truly believe I hear polyphonic in my head.
And that's everything and at times, beyond what I ever would like be able to play intuitively. Yet, I am not trying to claim that it would satisfy your personal standard for modern jazz... There are things I don't like to hear. I will not try to sing, hum, whistle or play them.

Let me add something to this. I believe most who pickup a musical instrument like the steel, are or could easily be able to do all the above. You can't be unmusical and have been attracted to steel guitar... I mean come on! The days of steel guitar being "cool" (well, back then it was "hot") are looong gone.

I get that many times, when I said; "HUM it first before you try to play it!". Especially to those who try to get out or beyond tab.

And one more thing:
I am very aware that there are and apparently, always will be those, who make it their argument that TRUE Jazz can only be plaid to it's fullest extent by knowing the appropriate scales and how to use them. While being 100% incapable and also indisposed of dealing with that approach even only remotely, and thus probably better advised to keep my mouth shut about that subject, I think I can say this:
Well first, let's define "Jazz"... let's define music!
My definition of Jazz includes only a certain range of dissonance and experimental fiddling. Others may have an even narrower range of acceptance or a very much so wider one. It's so personal, I don't think it's debatable.
I can also share with you, that when I was a kid, and only and exclusively exposed to classical music early on, I found Mozart utterly boring. I remember getting into arguments with my dad who claimed sublime ingenuity on Mozart while I felt that he could STOP the record just anywhere and I could go on for the next few bars predicting with 90% certainty what was to come... it's purely mathematical to me... there is a schematic which becomes SO obvious I get bored almost instantly. I liked Tchaikovsky, Brahms, Smetana much better... I could close my eyes and let it take me on a journey. We didn't have TV (was not an accepted for of amusement) so I appreciated the entertainment.

TODAY, I hear some of these "Jazz" scholars power-noodling away at amazing speeds and with the most impressive technique... but again... half way to thru what ever they are doing, I seem to "see" a schematic being followed semi-randomly and it bores me to death... and it happens a LOT with some of our steel guitar jazz greats when they yet again go into one of solos... it takes seconds and I virtually hear a pattern but little or nothing said.
I thing, and this is personal, that this technique, while it may have it's validity IF it's only used to very briefly to connect parts which have SIGNIFICANCE ("SAY" something, as blues players would call it), but as a genre or way to do jazz, I consider it musically fake.

I got a two or three cassette Video collection of interviews made with BB-King. By all means, just from listening to his records, I don't think he is the Alpha & Omega of musical improvisation. But in these videos, just playfully answering questions made by a guy who obviously knows "his stuff", with the guitar instead of words at times, I have come to discover that he can play about anything he WANTS, even Django Reinhardt etc.
ANYWAYS, at one time, he tries reluctantly to give in to the host's repeated desire and questions as to his playing POSITIONS (like BB has a "BB-King"-scale", find it et voila, you can do "it" too ). So BB plays something monkey and the guy interrupts him and says "Oh, now I see, you are playing an XYZ-scale over blah blah!". BB, appearing somewhat befuddled only mumbled something to the take of; "well, erm, I don't know... but if you say so, I am sure you must know your STUFF?"

Anyways, I am not BB-King... not even close (I watch my weight! )

Oh boy... did I overshoot this time (again!).

... J-D.

Bo Borland wrote:Just a couple observations and my opinions..

Musical theory is knowledge and that can only help a good player to be better at playing and communicating his thoughts.

If I tell a bass player to play a 1 6 2 5 turn around in A

Jeff once went around a seminar class, asking just that: "Gimme the chords I IV V in the key of so'n'so!"... Some could, some scrambled and yet others could not answer at all. And he kept going on and on, randomly pointing the finger at his next victim.
When he came to me "JD, quick now... key of D, I VI II V!"

I am NOT good at math under pressure! So, I just said jokingly: "Key of D, Jeff? Erm... I VI II and V!"

And you know what? To my amazement, he didn't call me a smart ass but went exclaiming: "FINALLY! Does anybody get this?"

I could find that on a bass too btw.
But what is missing is clearing hearing that "we" are going to a VI and then to the II and so forth. THAT's what I am working on.

... J-D.

JD, I just want you to understand that I'm not trying to be provocative or disrespectful in any way, just trying to get to the heart of what you're saying in an honest and open way.

From what I can recall, you are into earlier jazz, like Big Band and Swing, correct? I know you know that Jazz has certainly evolved and that the language of it is much different today. If that does not excite you, I can certainly understand that. But I think there is also a sense of alienation for you because it is difficult to understand. One of the quickest ways to bore someone is top play them something they don't understand.

With regards to early styles, it would be incredibly difficult to write and even decipher those arrangements without a knowledge of harmony. Just the simple methods of modulating from one key to another were done so cleverly using real musical strategies and yet sounding so natural because the arrangers know the applications of harmony. If you wanted to understand why and how these arrangements worked and how to do it yourself, you'd be best served by learning. There really aren't any worthwhile shortcuts that I can think of. It's all an accumulation of things learned through studying, listening, playing and exploring.

Learning to identify intervals is easier if you're playing only 2 notes at a time, but what happens when you stack them into chords? When you understand harmony, not only can you define chords more easily, but you also can pretty much tell where they are going, even when it isn't so obvious, such as with the modulations of the big band arrangers.

Anyway, I've probably gone off the track, but I'm trying to honestly tell you why it is important for musicians to understand music beyond just with your ears. Music has so many facets to it--to be a composer, arranger, improviser, etc. it helps to know as much as you can.

Mike Neer wrote:JD, I just want you to understand that I'm not trying to be provocative or disrespectful in any way, just trying to get to the heart of what you're saying in an honest and open way.

I do and I welcome your comments, as I said earlier.

Mike Neer wrote:From what I can recall, you are into earlier jazz, like Big Band and Swing, correct? I know you know that Jazz has certainly evolved and that the language of it is much different today. If that does not excite you, I can certainly understand that.

"Dixieland Jazz" was the fist thing I remember hearing besides classical. My parents were not amused!
Imagine, it was the 70's, I could as well have been going around screaming "ain't got not, satisfaction!"

Anyways... to me that was the BOMB. Hit me like Bill Haley hit Germany. I almost trashed my room.
An aunt started to slip me some big band Swing and hoped my parents would accept Gershwin as classical (did not). I listened to Gershwin for hours in a row at my neighbors who let me use their turn table until they about HAD IT with Gershwin and got me an old "suitcase" turntable I could hide under my bed.

I discovered Ray Charles, whom I consider more Jazz than Blues... but that's me.

Then came the time to be a teenager and be "cool". I got lucky, Rock'n'Roll enjoyed a quick but intensive revival in Europe and my parents were happy I went to study abroad, with my "noise".
From that, I did linger a lot around the hillbilly and Western Swing things but nevertheless enjoyed listening to EARLY Dizzy Gillespie... that's as "far" or "free" I can take it. What I can take, I can play in my mind.

Mike Neer wrote: But I think there is also a sense of alienation for you because it is difficult to understand. One of the quickest ways to bore someone is top play them something they don't understand.

I have heard that "explanation" many times. Apparently, those who have a tendency to "push the envelope" a little over the "border" get that often.
I think it's an unnecessarily snobbish way of trying to say: "hey, you don't get it?". Even my father would tell me that if I didn't like Mozart, it was because I sadly did not have what I took... guess what, HE could not tell a half note from a octave, but he sure loved Mozart. Hey, there's nothing wrong with Mozart... commercial music always had a place in it's time?
It's as far off as suggesting that I might have the stuff to a terrorist because I enjoy to listen to Arabic music! I know, that's pushing it... but no, that dawg ain't huntin'.

It bores me because seems too evident. I am not trying to brag or put modern or free jazz player down... it's not my bag, I don't like the approach!
I am sorry, but I clearly identify scale players from classical to bebop. It bores the heck out of me because it does not keep me motivated to listen, because, there is no surprise! There are some styles, I just can't stand at all. THESE I may not even "see" anything but feel the urge to leave. I think, everybody knows of some music style on can't stand and which does not necessarily have to be intentional cacophony without having have doubts about one's mental capabilities.
I am an engineer, I think I would be ideally predisposed to be able to learn the scale and mode approach. But I don't want to. I don't like the result, and as I said it long before, I believe that the last batch or initially uneducated jazz geniuses did NOT knowingly play using scales or modes... but that it was the ensuing annalists who later found that large parts DID in fact match up to a high percentage certain scales and modes and began to SELL the "Secret" handle to "creativity". I say "snake oil"! Creativity can not be inverted. And I do not wish to be a scholar of that system. I do not.

Mike Neer wrote: Learning to identify intervals is easier if you're playing only 2 notes at a time, but what happens when you stack them into chords? When you understand harmony, not only can you define chords more easily, but you also can pretty much tell where they are going, even when it isn't so obvious, such as with the modulations of the big band arrangers.

Funny things, I hear many chords... many times, I can intuitively hit them on C or B6th. I don't know why (yet)

Mike Neer wrote: Anyway, I've probably gone off the track, but I'm trying to honestly tell you why it is important for musicians to understand music beyond just with your ears. Music has so many facets to it--to be a composer, arranger, improviser, etc. it helps to know as much as you can.

Music is physics. We are subjected to physics. We can try to prove physics wrong... but it usually never ends up with a very survivable result.

Thanks Mike! ... J-D.

I don't think I articulated my points very well, but anyway, I'm not suggesting the whole chord scale thing. I don't really believe in that too much myself.

If you feel you can improvise great solos in your head, then you need to sit down and slowly sing them and work them out on your instrument. Take a tape recorder and sing into it. Learn what you have sung. Use Jamey Aebersold or some kind of play-along track to do this with. Get the music out of your head and onto your instrument. For me, the fact that I know all the stuff I know helps me to do this very quickly. Usually I can just hear something once and tell you what's going on.

One more thought: The process of practicing is an intellectual one. You break things down, you look at them, you analyze, strategize, and then unlearn for your performance. To me, that is how music is best served.

Mike Neer wrote:I don't think I articulated my points very well, but anyway, I'm not suggesting the whole chord scale thing. I don't really believe in that too much myself.

If you feel you can improvise great solos in your head, then you need to sit down and slowly sing them and work them out on your instrument. Take a tape recorder and sing into it. Learn what you have sung. Use Jamey Aebersold or some kind of play-along track to do this with. Get the music out of your head and onto your instrument. For me, the fact that I know all the stuff I know helps me to do this very quickly. Usually I can just hear something once and tell you what's going on.

Maybe I read some into to. I am a bit sensitive about the subject of scales of modes.
Then, many who seem to preach the musical superiority of more modern of Jazz, seem to nowadays incidentally also to push the scale/mode doctrine. I would have been surprised you would be one of them.

Mike, musically I don't have anything to tell you. After all, it is ME who buys YOUR courses. Even though I can play 4WD and make up my own versions... in my HEAD. What I need is to bring that down on the fretboard without dabbling. Dabbling sucks.

Yes, I am going to get some Abersold tracks. I had some, but I think they must still be in boxes somewhere in Spain.

I still think, that the learning approach you suggest here, requires or would lead to a sound-visual linkage being built up. Interval consciousness?


Talking about music being physics:
One can certainly sit under an apple tree and marvel at the fruits falling to the ground one by one all day long like good ol' Isaak. Still, it is certainly nothing wrong with just getting up, grab a nice big ripe apple and EAT it and enjoy that thoroughly.

Maybe the same with music.

Fascinating thread! It just shows how many different approaches there are to the same goal. I play strictly by ear. I know precious little theory. I'm completely self taught and have played so long I don't remember actually learning any one thing at any one time. For instance I have no idea when I started to incorporate slants in my playing. I know when I'm playing my best,thinking has nothing to do with it! Quite the opposite. Stevie Ray once said,"It's when I start thinking is when I get in trouble". I know what he meant! Or as Yogi put it, "I can't think and hit at the same time". I never worry about theory, I depend on technique. With better technique I can get closer to playing what I hear. Works for me.

This is a wonderful thread. I am a newbie at PSG, but a good guitar player. For decades I avoided learning theory (scales, arpeggios, intervals, etc.) like the plague because it was painful and I already "got it" untuitively (or so I thought). Then, after decades, I finally decided I was going to suffer and learn theory and what it was I had been doing and why it worked. After doing all that, now I get it much more logically. It's a different perspective of what I already knew... a logical, explanatory framework that makes the intuitively sensible logically sensible. Going through the pain of "theory" opened many fun new doors for me. I look at learning theory as just another perspective to layer on top of the intuitive perspective. "Knowing" music for me is looking at it from every angle I can. Completely getting it is an unattainable goal. That's why it's fun.