Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Natural Classical Guitar
348 views
Skip to first unread message
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 2, 2012, 5:45:58 PM10/2/12
to
wollybird
Oct 2, 2012, 5:57:42 PM10/2/12
to
> http://www.amazon.com/The-Natural-Classical-Guitar-Ryan/dp/0933224508...
It's ok. You are better off with Scott Tennant's book and DVD.
I bought it 20 years ago. I never heard of Lee Ryan. I wouldn't pay
$100 for it. I you will, let me know. I'll make a package deal with
the Segovia Technique.
It's ok. You are better off with Scott Tennant's book and DVD.
I bought it 20 years ago. I never heard of Lee Ryan. I wouldn't pay
$100 for it. I you will, let me know. I'll make a package deal with
the Segovia Technique.
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 2, 2012, 6:05:28 PM10/2/12
to
I'm now reading it here:
http://books.google.com/books?id=wUZwk41Q5agC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
http://books.google.com/books?id=wUZwk41Q5agC&printsec=frontcover#v=onepage&q&f=false
Douglas Seth
Oct 2, 2012, 8:34:20 PM10/2/12
to
> http://www.amazon.com/The-Natural-Classical-Guitar-Ryan/dp/0933224508...
No, just ok. For $100, that is 100 minutes of instruction from me. I
assure you, I could teach you more about your playing in that amount
of time than a book ever will.
No, just ok. For $100, that is 100 minutes of instruction from me. I
assure you, I could teach you more about your playing in that amount
of time than a book ever will.
Murdick
Oct 3, 2012, 8:41:29 AM10/3/12
to
Murdick
Oct 3, 2012, 8:48:09 AM10/3/12
to
Douglas Seth
Oct 3, 2012, 9:22:34 AM10/3/12
to
promotion. You could learn more from any good teacher 100 minutes than
most books. I was just saying the other day to someone about the
massive amont of excellent players to come out of APSU in the last 15
years. It's just crazy, but that's what a successful college program
does.
Benoit Meulle-Stef
Oct 3, 2012, 10:43:17 AM10/3/12
to
Personally I recomend this book:
http://stauffer-and-co.com/en/index2.html
Amazing book about the Viennese school of guitar making and players.
Benoit
http://stauffer-and-co.com/en/index2.html
Amazing book about the Viennese school of guitar making and players.
Benoit
Cactus Wren
Oct 3, 2012, 11:53:03 AM10/3/12
to
I met one of his students one time. His girlfried was an MD out in Sun City (an old retirement community here) and she hired me to play for his party since she knew he used to play CG. He said that he was one of Ryan's first students. I don't know if he could play, he eventually became a marine biologist.
This whole "where are his concert players" line is tiresome and way overblown. If Barrueco had elected to study with the "famous" Ryan, he would be awesome. He would have been awesome even if he had studied with me.
This whole "where are his concert players" line is tiresome and way overblown. If Barrueco had elected to study with the "famous" Ryan, he would be awesome. He would have been awesome even if he had studied with me.
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 3, 2012, 1:15:52 PM10/3/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 6:22:34 AM UTC-7, Douglas Seth wrote:
> You could learn more from any good teacher
> 100 minutes than most books.
I fear this is true. You've caused me to remember my astonishment when I took my first lesson from Jack Sanders. And that was within just the first five minutes.
> You could learn more from any good teacher
> 100 minutes than most books.
dsi1
Oct 3, 2012, 3:49:35 PM10/3/12
to
On 10/3/2012 5:53 AM, Cactus Wren wrote:
> I met one of his students one time. His girlfried was an MD out in Sun City (an old retirement community here) and she hired me to play for his party since she knew he used to play CG. He said that he was one of Ryan's first students. I don't know if he could play, he eventually became a marine biologist.
>
> This whole "where are his concert players" line is tiresome and way overblown. If Barrueco had elected to study with the "famous" Ryan, he would be awesome. He would have been awesome even if he had studied with me.
>
This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher. The one guy that
> I met one of his students one time. His girlfried was an MD out in Sun City (an old retirement community here) and she hired me to play for his party since she knew he used to play CG. He said that he was one of Ryan's first students. I don't know if he could play, he eventually became a marine biologist.
>
> This whole "where are his concert players" line is tiresome and way overblown. If Barrueco had elected to study with the "famous" Ryan, he would be awesome. He would have been awesome even if he had studied with me.
>
I taught should be awesome but his playing just makes me anxious and
tense. The guy's hand is so stiff that it resembles an eagle claw rather
than a human hand. OTOH, he don't roll his chords - he can't roll his
chords so that's good, right? That's the breaks.
OTOH, he had a dream of being a musician and gave up the easy life for
the hard. That guy was hard head and always believed in himself. He even
rejected my suggestion that he play a right handed guitar when we went
downtown to find his first guitar. He did it his way so I gotta hand him
that.
Cactus Wren
Oct 3, 2012, 4:59:43 PM10/3/12
to
This may or may not apply to your friend, but "being a musician" and "making your living playing music" are two different things. If someone wants to fulfill their potential as a muscian, that's different than thinking they can find enough money to pay rent, etc. with it.
That being said, you have to admire someone who puts his money where his mouth is!
That being said, you have to admire someone who puts his money where his mouth is!
dsi1
Oct 3, 2012, 5:07:08 PM10/3/12
to
On 10/3/2012 10:59 AM, Cactus Wren wrote:
> This may or may not apply to your friend, but "being a musician" and "making your living playing music" are two different things. If someone wants to fulfill their potential as a muscian, that's different than thinking they can find enough money to pay rent, etc. with it.
>
> That being said, you have to admire someone who puts his money where his mouth is!
>
>
Typically people with a lot of talent will have teachers that will want
> This may or may not apply to your friend, but "being a musician" and "making your living playing music" are two different things. If someone wants to fulfill their potential as a muscian, that's different than thinking they can find enough money to pay rent, etc. with it.
>
> That being said, you have to admire someone who puts his money where his mouth is!
>
>
them to turn pro and be famous so that they can live vicariously through
them but in this case, I thought him trying to make a living out of it
was a serious mistake. Life is sure funny.
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 3, 2012, 6:04:33 PM10/3/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
Otoh, the good teacher would say, "Yes, I know that your passion is to play the guitar. But friend, I'm sorry, you have little musical talent. You'd be wasting your time and hurting many ears. What's more, I'd feel like a robber if I continued to take your money. No, don't follow your passion. Now, I understand that you're an excellent writer, but you're not passionate about this so you've given it up. I urge you to reconsider. Write, friend, write! The passion will follow...."
John Nguyen
Oct 3, 2012, 6:07:06 PM10/3/12
to
On Oct 3, 6:04 pm, "Alphonsus Jr." <alphonsu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Otoh, the good teacher would say, "Yes, I know that your passion is to play the guitar. But friend, I'm sorry, you have little musical talent. You'd be wasting your time and hurting many ears. What's more, I'd feel like a robber if I continued to take your money. No, don't follow your passion. Now, I understand that you're an excellent writer, but you're not passionate about this so you've given it up. I urge you to reconsider. Write, friend, write! The passion will follow...."
I can't wait to hear Learnwell's response to this. :-)
> Otoh, the good teacher would say, "Yes, I know that your passion is to play the guitar. But friend, I'm sorry, you have little musical talent. You'd be wasting your time and hurting many ears. What's more, I'd feel like a robber if I continued to take your money. No, don't follow your passion. Now, I understand that you're an excellent writer, but you're not passionate about this so you've given it up. I urge you to reconsider. Write, friend, write! The passion will follow...."
Let the mayhem begin!!!!!!!
Murdick
Oct 3, 2012, 6:47:33 PM10/3/12
to
No and no to those two statements. If you know what you are doing (and most college/ university guitar professors don't), and you get a lot of talented, hard working students, you will crank out a lot of very fine players. My guess is that Barrueco would ave quit the guitar had he studied with Ryan.
Cactus Wren
Oct 3, 2012, 7:05:54 PM10/3/12
to
Barrueco could already play the Chaconne when he met Shearer. I don't see why he should get a medal for not making him quit the guitar. It's probably indelicate to say you quit the guitar despite studying with AS.
I also wonder where are these magical places where teachers get these processions of talented, hard working classical guitar students?
I also wonder where are these magical places where teachers get these processions of talented, hard working classical guitar students?
dsi1
Oct 3, 2012, 7:07:27 PM10/3/12
to
On 10/3/2012 12:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>
> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>
> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
they want.
Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>
> Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
and try to stay away from commenting on the student's progress. The
worst thing is the student that doesn't want to learn. They should be
dropped like an uncle that believes himself to be a duck. OTOH, you just
might need the eggs. :-)
dsi1
Oct 3, 2012, 7:30:37 PM10/3/12
to
On 10/3/2012 1:05 PM, Cactus Wren wrote:
> Barrueco could already play the Chaconne when he met Shearer. I don't see why he should get a medal for not making him quit the guitar. It's probably indelicate to say you quit the guitar despite studying with AS.
>
My teacher studied with Segovia. He could hardly hide his disgust when
> Barrueco could already play the Chaconne when he met Shearer. I don't see why he should get a medal for not making him quit the guitar. It's probably indelicate to say you quit the guitar despite studying with AS.
>
he was asked about it. He said nothing and turned his head as if to spit.
OTOH, he obviously loved his other teacher, Siegfried Behrend. He
brought Herr Behrend to this rock to play a concert. It was most
memorable. Afterwards, they were chatting away in German. That was a
shock since he never said more than a few words to me at one sitting.
I was invited to go have some drinks with the group at the Columbia Inn
after the concert but I didn't like doing that kind of thing and made up
some kind of lame excuse. Now that I think about it, that was a mistake.
As an instructor, Herr Behrend was highly respected and if my teacher
was any indication, beloved.
Steven Bornfeld
Oct 3, 2012, 7:37:45 PM10/3/12
to
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 3, 2012, 8:10:56 PM10/3/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 4:05:54 PM UTC-7, Cactus Wren wrote:
> I also wonder where are these magical
> places where teachers get these processions
> of talented, hard working classical guitar students?
Yes, I've raised an interesting ethical issue. Should a teacher who recognizes that his student possesses little talent nevertheless continue to take that student's money?
> I also wonder where are these magical
> places where teachers get these processions
> of talented, hard working classical guitar students?
I suppose it depends on the student's goals.
If the student wishes only to amuse himself, which is no small thing, then I say the teacher may rightly continue to take his money.
Or if a parent wishes the lessons to primarily serve as character training, I say again that the teacher can rightly continue to take the money.
If, however, the untalented student is deluded and consequently thinks he has the talent to become a concert musician, I say the teacher is duty-bound to cease teaching that student. Otherwise he'd do that person great harm.
The good teacher's credo is the same as the good doctor's: "First, do no harm."
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 3, 2012, 8:18:29 PM10/3/12
to
Of course, the possibly fatal rejoinder to me is that it's impossible to accurately determine whether a particular student has some latent talent that hasn't yet been uncovered. Thus one might say that a teacher may rightly soldier on even with apparently untalented students.
But really, aren't there some students who make it perfectly clear that there's no latent talent to uncover? And then one might say this: Even if there is such latent talent, if a teacher THINKS there isn't, this triggers the duty to no longer take that student's money.
But really, aren't there some students who make it perfectly clear that there's no latent talent to uncover? And then one might say this: Even if there is such latent talent, if a teacher THINKS there isn't, this triggers the duty to no longer take that student's money.
Murdick
Oct 3, 2012, 8:24:48 PM10/3/12
to
Murdick
Oct 3, 2012, 8:26:36 PM10/3/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 7:18:29 PM UTC-5, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> Of course, the possibly fatal rejoinder to me is that it's impossible to accurately determine whether a particular student has some latent talent that hasn't yet been uncovered. Thus one might say that a teacher may rightly soldier on even with apparently untalented students.
>
>
>
> But really, aren't there some students who make it perfectly clear that there's no latent talent to uncover? And then one might say this: Even if there is such latent talent, if a teacher THINKS there isn't, this triggers the duty to no longer take that student's money.
Hey Jackson, check you calender; it is no longer fucking 1965.
> Of course, the possibly fatal rejoinder to me is that it's impossible to accurately determine whether a particular student has some latent talent that hasn't yet been uncovered. Thus one might say that a teacher may rightly soldier on even with apparently untalented students.
>
>
>
> But really, aren't there some students who make it perfectly clear that there's no latent talent to uncover? And then one might say this: Even if there is such latent talent, if a teacher THINKS there isn't, this triggers the duty to no longer take that student's money.
Fadosolrélamisi
Oct 3, 2012, 8:30:03 PM10/3/12
to
Le mercredi 3 octobre 2012 16:07:30 UTC-7, dsi1 a écrit :
>
>
> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
>
> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
>
> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
>
> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
>
> they want.
>
>
>
> Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
>
> spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
>
> learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
>
> back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
>
> winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
>
> a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
>
> doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>
Yes I find this awesome too!
>
>
> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
>
> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
>
> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
>
> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
>
> they want.
>
>
>
> Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
>
> spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
>
> learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
>
> back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
>
> winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
>
> a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
>
> doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>
A lot of name dropping in this thread ... anywhoo ....
The amount of good ++ (yes that's good plus, plus) players will increase even more in the future ... but ... will the guitar remain à la mode enough to sustain all these wonderful players? IMHO a pragmatic approach is required to get one to play music to his heart content ... a good day job will lead to the acquisition of a good instrument, the possibility of buying as much music as one wants, the luxury to play whenever one wants and for whom he wants, and one will be able to contribute to the sustaining of professional players by attending their concerts and enjoying their performance and this without an inch of envy or regrets rather, they will rather come out of these events with a renewed determination to their chosen commitment ...
Let's face it ... teaching classical guitar is boring.
Alain
thomas
Oct 3, 2012, 8:34:31 PM10/3/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 8:18:29 PM UTC-4, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> Of course, the possibly fatal rejoinder to me is that it's impossible to accurately determine whether a particular student has some latent talent that hasn't yet been uncovered. Thus one might say that a teacher may rightly soldier on even with apparently untalented students.
>
>
>
> But really, aren't there some students who make it perfectly clear that there's no latent talent to uncover? And then one might say this: Even if there is such latent talent, if a teacher THINKS there isn't, this triggers the duty to no longer take that student's money.>
Taking the money is sometimes the only way to drive the lesson home and make it stick.
> Of course, the possibly fatal rejoinder to me is that it's impossible to accurately determine whether a particular student has some latent talent that hasn't yet been uncovered. Thus one might say that a teacher may rightly soldier on even with apparently untalented students.
>
>
>
> But really, aren't there some students who make it perfectly clear that there's no latent talent to uncover? And then one might say this: Even if there is such latent talent, if a teacher THINKS there isn't, this triggers the duty to no longer take that student's money.>
dsi1
Oct 3, 2012, 9:18:03 PM10/3/12
to
On 10/3/2012 2:24 PM, Murdick wrote:
>
> Neither Behrend nor Segovia knew shit for shinola about the classical guitar.
>
That might be so but Behrend's opening Bach piece was the most amazing
>
> Neither Behrend nor Segovia knew shit for shinola about the classical guitar.
>
playing that I've ever heard from any guitarist. He played it as
casually as flossing one's teeth. It was a great opening!
It all fell apart when his wife came on stage. Mostly, she was mouthing
syllables and making guttural noises. Her heavy breathing and moaning
made my body feel funny. I wanted to go home after that.
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 3, 2012, 9:20:06 PM10/3/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 5:26:36 PM UTC-7, Murdick wrote:
> Hey Jackson, check you calender; it is no longer fucking 1965.
I don't get it. Is this some kind of chronologically snobbish appeal to the myth of progress?
> Hey Jackson, check you calender; it is no longer fucking 1965.
dsi1
Oct 3, 2012, 9:21:19 PM10/3/12
to
On 10/3/2012 2:30 PM, Fadosolrélamisi wrote:
>
> Yes I find this awesome too!
> A lot of name dropping in this thread ... anywhoo ....
> The amount of good ++ (yes that's good plus, plus) players will increase even more in the future ... but ... will the guitar remain à la mode enough to sustain all these wonderful players? IMHO a pragmatic approach is required to get one to play music to his heart content ... a good day job will lead to the acquisition of a good instrument, the possibility of buying as much music as one wants, the luxury to play whenever one wants and for whom he wants, and one will be able to contribute to the sustaining of professional players by attending their concerts and enjoying their performance and this without an inch of envy or regrets rather, they will rather come out of these events with a renewed determination to their chosen commitment ...
> Let's face it ... teaching classical guitar is boring.
You like to finish with a zinger! I suspect that this might be true but
>
> Yes I find this awesome too!
> A lot of name dropping in this thread ... anywhoo ....
> The amount of good ++ (yes that's good plus, plus) players will increase even more in the future ... but ... will the guitar remain à la mode enough to sustain all these wonderful players? IMHO a pragmatic approach is required to get one to play music to his heart content ... a good day job will lead to the acquisition of a good instrument, the possibility of buying as much music as one wants, the luxury to play whenever one wants and for whom he wants, and one will be able to contribute to the sustaining of professional players by attending their concerts and enjoying their performance and this without an inch of envy or regrets rather, they will rather come out of these events with a renewed determination to their chosen commitment ...
> Let's face it ... teaching classical guitar is boring.
I'm glad you said it instead of me. :-)
>
> Alain
>
Fadosolrélamisi
Oct 3, 2012, 11:34:19 PM10/3/12
to
Le mercredi 3 octobre 2012 18:21:20 UTC-7, dsi1 a écrit :
Was there a zinger in the debate tonight? More boring than teaching guitar is definitely : American politic!
> On 10/3/2012 2:30 PM, Fadosolr�lamisi wrote:
>
> >
>
> > Yes I find this awesome too!
>
> > A lot of name dropping in this thread ... anywhoo ....
>
> > The amount of good ++ (yes that's good plus, plus) players will increase even more in the future ... but ... will the guitar remain � la mode enough to sustain all these wonderful players? IMHO a pragmatic approach is required to get one to play music to his heart content ... a good day job will lead to the acquisition of a good instrument, the possibility of buying as much music as one wants, the luxury to play whenever one wants and for whom he wants, and one will be able to contribute to the sustaining of professional players by attending their concerts and enjoying their performance and this without an inch of envy or regrets rather, they will rather come out of these events with a renewed determination to their chosen commitment ...
>
> >
>
> > Yes I find this awesome too!
>
> > A lot of name dropping in this thread ... anywhoo ....
>
>
> > Let's face it ... teaching classical guitar is boring.
>
>
>
> You like to finish with a zinger! I suspect that this might be true but
>
> I'm glad you said it instead of me. :-)
>
>
>
> >
>
> > Alain
>
> >
To my defense ... ([;o)) (Yes! That's a smiley in parenthesis)... Teaching classical guitar is only interesting if you take the time to know your student ... something that is looosing (yes, that's 3 o's for loosing big time!) ground in the latest technological direction it has taken ... online lessons with it's one method fits all approach ...
> > Let's face it ... teaching classical guitar is boring.
>
>
>
> You like to finish with a zinger! I suspect that this might be true but
>
> I'm glad you said it instead of me. :-)
>
>
>
> >
>
> > Alain
>
> >
Was there a zinger in the debate tonight? More boring than teaching guitar is definitely : American politic!
Douglas Seth
Oct 3, 2012, 11:46:14 PM10/3/12
to
Ds1
You are speaking with such authority about how students learn and how
CG teachers should teach. BTW, how many students have you taught in
your lifetime to substantiate your claims?
On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
You are speaking with such authority about how students learn and how
CG teachers should teach. BTW, how many students have you taught in
your lifetime to substantiate your claims?
On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
Douglas Seth
Oct 3, 2012, 11:56:57 PM10/3/12
to
has studied with a great teacher for more than a few lessons knows it
is --life changing as an artist. Bad teachers CAN ruin a great talent.
I have seen it happen. Great teachers can foster an average talent and
help them realize their full potential. I have seen this happen too.
The student always must do the heavy lifting and work, but excellent
instruction makes the process much easier--and faster. And yes, there
are still a lot of bullshitters is the CG community, but they are
becoming less and less because of the transparency of technology.
There is no where to hide. Politics and talk just won't cut it
anymore.
dsi1
Oct 4, 2012, 12:04:39 AM10/4/12
to
On 10/3/2012 5:46 PM, Douglas Seth wrote:
> Ds1
> You are speaking with such authority about how students learn and how
> CG teachers should teach. BTW, how many students have you taught in
> your lifetime to substantiate your claims?
>
One, and I don't like his playing. Your best bet is to point out
> Ds1
> You are speaking with such authority about how students learn and how
> CG teachers should teach. BTW, how many students have you taught in
> your lifetime to substantiate your claims?
>
anything that I have said that is untrue and I will address that. This
is gonna be good...
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 4, 2012, 12:04:47 AM10/4/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 8:34:19 PM UTC-7, Fadosolrélamisi wrote:
> To my defense ... ([;o)) (Yes! That's a smiley in parenthesis)... Teaching classical guitar is only interesting if you take the time to know your student ... something that is looosing (yes, that's 3 o's for loosing big time!) ground in the latest technological direction it has taken ... online lessons with it's one method fits all approach ...
>
> Was there a zinger in the debate tonight? More boring than teaching guitar is definitely : American politic!
You're a nut, sir. I love it!
> To my defense ... ([;o)) (Yes! That's a smiley in parenthesis)... Teaching classical guitar is only interesting if you take the time to know your student ... something that is looosing (yes, that's 3 o's for loosing big time!) ground in the latest technological direction it has taken ... online lessons with it's one method fits all approach ...
>
> Was there a zinger in the debate tonight? More boring than teaching guitar is definitely : American politic!
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 4, 2012, 12:07:49 AM10/4/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 8:56:57 PM UTC-7, Douglas Seth wrote:
> There is ALOT of bullshit in this thread-- even for RMCG. Anyone who
>
> has studied with a great teacher for more than a few lessons knows it
>
> is --life changing as an artist. Bad teachers CAN ruin a great talent.
>
> I have seen it happen. Great teachers can foster an average talent and
>
> help them realize their full potential. I have seen this happen too.
>
> The student always must do the heavy lifting and work, but excellent
>
> instruction makes the process much easier--and faster. And yes, there
>
> are still a lot of bullshitters is the CG community, but they are
>
> becoming less and less because of the transparency of technology.
>
> There is no where to hide. Politics and talk just won't cut it
>
> anymore.
I agree with you, maestro. Except for the part about "the transparency of technology" and consequently "nowhere to hide." Very naive, sir! Technology is one of today's supreme hideaways!
> There is ALOT of bullshit in this thread-- even for RMCG. Anyone who
>
> has studied with a great teacher for more than a few lessons knows it
>
> is --life changing as an artist. Bad teachers CAN ruin a great talent.
>
> I have seen it happen. Great teachers can foster an average talent and
>
> help them realize their full potential. I have seen this happen too.
>
> The student always must do the heavy lifting and work, but excellent
>
> instruction makes the process much easier--and faster. And yes, there
>
> are still a lot of bullshitters is the CG community, but they are
>
> becoming less and less because of the transparency of technology.
>
> There is no where to hide. Politics and talk just won't cut it
>
> anymore.
dsi1
Oct 4, 2012, 12:10:07 AM10/4/12
to
On 10/3/2012 5:34 PM, Fadosolr�lamisi wrote:
>
> To my defense ... ([;o)) (Yes! That's a smiley in parenthesis)... Teaching classical guitar is only interesting if you take the time to know your student ... something that is looosing (yes, that's 3 o's for loosing big time!) ground in the latest technological direction it has taken ... online lessons with it's one method fits all approach ...
> Was there a zinger in the debate tonight? More boring than teaching guitar is definitely : American politic!
>
Sounds like you're saying that teachers should have a good bedside
>
> To my defense ... ([;o)) (Yes! That's a smiley in parenthesis)... Teaching classical guitar is only interesting if you take the time to know your student ... something that is looosing (yes, that's 3 o's for loosing big time!) ground in the latest technological direction it has taken ... online lessons with it's one method fits all approach ...
> Was there a zinger in the debate tonight? More boring than teaching guitar is definitely : American politic!
>
manner. Beats me which is better. You'd probably know more about that
than I. I didn't watch the debate. I'm not sure that I would want to see
it anyway.
Cactus Wren
Oct 4, 2012, 12:10:44 AM10/4/12
to
One reason a good amount of excellent advice on RMCG goes ignored--it's free.
Cactus Wren
Oct 4, 2012, 12:15:45 AM10/4/12
to
The research by Ericsson, etc. on expert development shows that talent cannot be evaluated a priori (did I use that right?). Therefore, a teacher declining a student based on his unreliable prognosis would not be doing the student any service in that regard.
That being said, even if talent/potential cannot be evaluated, current levels can--and they are often quite telling. For example, Barrueco hacking through the Chaconne at age 17 is a higher level than me hacking through the Cello Suite Prelude in D major at age 17.
That being said, even if talent/potential cannot be evaluated, current levels can--and they are often quite telling. For example, Barrueco hacking through the Chaconne at age 17 is a higher level than me hacking through the Cello Suite Prelude in D major at age 17.
Cactus Wren
Oct 4, 2012, 12:17:19 AM10/4/12
to
Did anyone say "Say it ain't so, Joe?" That was awkward. Are they calling each other "socialists" and "terrorists"? I bet they really got people all riled up!
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 9:10:09 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 9:10:09 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
JPD
Oct 4, 2012, 3:48:59 AM10/4/12
to
On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 5:30:03 PM UTC-7, Fadosolrélamisi wrote:
> Le mercredi 3 octobre 2012 16:07:30 UTC-7, dsi1 a écrit :
> The amount of good ++ (yes that's good plus, plus) players will increase even more in the future ... but ... will the guitar remain à la mode enough to sustain all these wonderful players? IMHO a pragmatic approach is required to get one to play music to his heart content ... a good day job will lead to the acquisition of a good instrument, the possibility of buying as much music as one wants, the luxury to play whenever one wants and for whom he wants, and one will be able to contribute to the sustaining of professional players by attending their concerts and enjoying their performance and this without an inch of envy or regrets rather, they will rather come out of these events with a renewed determination to their chosen commitment ...
1++
> Le mercredi 3 octobre 2012 16:07:30 UTC-7, dsi1 a écrit :
> The amount of good ++ (yes that's good plus, plus) players will increase even more in the future ... but ... will the guitar remain à la mode enough to sustain all these wonderful players? IMHO a pragmatic approach is required to get one to play music to his heart content ... a good day job will lead to the acquisition of a good instrument, the possibility of buying as much music as one wants, the luxury to play whenever one wants and for whom he wants, and one will be able to contribute to the sustaining of professional players by attending their concerts and enjoying their performance and this without an inch of envy or regrets rather, they will rather come out of these events with a renewed determination to their chosen commitment ...
> Let's face it ... teaching classical guitar is boring.
I loved teaching guitar. It was boring only when I found myself trying to teach someone who had an unfavorable attitude toward the endeavor. That was seldom.
I suppose if, in order to make a living, I had to take everyone who came through the door, it could be boring.
JPD
Oct 4, 2012, 3:58:28 AM10/4/12
to
It seemed to Philip, brooding over these matters, that in the true painters, writers, musicians, there was a power which drove them to such complete absorption in their work as to make it inevitable for them to subordinate life to art. Succumbing to an influence they never realised, they were merely dupes of the instinct that possessed them, and life slipped through their fingers unlived. But he had a feeling that life was to be lived rather than portrayed, and he wanted to search out the various experiences of it and wring from each moment all the emotion that it offered. He made up his mind at length to take a certain step and abide by the result, and, having made up his mind, he determined to take the step at once. Luckily enough the next morning was one of Foinet's days, and he resolved to ask him point-blank whether it was worth his while to go on with the study of art. He had never forgotten the master's brutal advice to Fanny Price. It had been sound. Philip could never get Fanny entirely out of his head. The studio seemed strange without her, and now and then the gesture of one of the women working there or the tone of a voice would give him a sudden start, reminding him of her: her presence was more noticuble?? now she was dead than it had ever been during her life; and he often dreamed of her at night, waking with a cry of terror. it was horrible to think of all the suffering she must have endured.
Philip knew that on the days Foinet came to the studio he lunched at a little restaurant in the Rue d'Odessa, and he hurried his own meal so that he could go and wait outside till the painter came out. Philip walked up and down the crowded street and at last saw Monsieur Foinet walking, with bent head, towards him; Philip was very nervous, but he forced himself to go up to him.
"Pardon, monsieur, I should like to speak to you for one moment."
Foinet gave him a rapid glance, recognised him, but did not smile a greeting.
"Speak," he said.
"I've been working here nearly two years now under you. I wanted to ask you to tell me frankly if you think it worth while for me to continue."
Philip's voice was trembling a little. Foinet walked on without looking up. Philip, watching his face, saw no trace of expression upon it.
"I don't understand."
"I'm very poor. If I have no talent I would sooner do something else."
"Don't you know if you have talent?"
"All my friends know they have talent, but I am aware some of them are mistaken."
Foinet's bitter mouth outlined the shadow of a smile, and he asked:
"Do you live near here?"
Philip told him where his studio was. Foinet turned round.
"Let us go there? You shall show me your work."
"Now?" cried Philip.
"Why not?"
Philip had nothing to say. He walked silently by the master's side. He felt horribly sick. It had never struck him that Foinet would wish to see his things there and then; he meant, so that he might have time to prepare himself, to ask him if he would mind coming at some future date or whether he might bring them to Foinet's studio. He was trembling with anxiety. In his heart he hoped that Foinet would look at his picture, and that rare smile would come into his face, and he would shake Philip's hand and say: "Pas mal. Go on, my lad. You have talent, real talent." Philip's heart swelled at the thought. It was such a relief, such a joy! Now he could go on with courage; and what did hardship matter, privation, and disappointment, if he arrived at last? He had worked very hard, it would be too cruel if all that industry were futile. And then with a start he remembered that he had heard Fanny Price say just that. They arrived at the house, and Philip was seized with fear. If he had dared he would have asked Foinet to go away. He did not want to know the truth. They went in and the concierge handed him a letter as they passed. He glanced at the envelope and recognised his uncle's handwriting. Foinet followed him up the stairs. Philip could think of nothing to say; Foinet was mute, and the silence got on his nerves. The professor sat down; and Philip without a word placed before him the picture which the Salon had rejected; Foinet nodded but did not speak; then Philip showed him the two portraits he had made of Ruth Chalice, two or three landscapes which he had painted at Moret, and a number of sketches.
"That's all," he said presently, with a nervous laugh.
Monsieur Foinet rolled himself a cigarette and lit it.
"You have very little private means?" he asked at last.
"Very little," answered Philip, with a sudden feeling of cold at his heart. "Not enough to live on."
"There is nothing so degrading as the constant anxiety about one's means of livelihood. I have nothing but contempt for the people who despise money. They are hypocrites or fools. Money is like a sixth sense without which you cannot make a complete use of the other five. Without an adequate income half the possibilities of life are shut off. The only thing to be careful about is that you do not pay more than a shilling for the shilling you earn. You will hear people say that poverty is the best spur to the artist. They have never felt the iron of it in their flesh. They do not know how mean it makes you. It exposes you to endless humiliation, it cuts your wings, it eats into your soul like a cancer. It is not wealth one asks for, but just enough to preserve one's dignity, to work unhampered, to be generous, frank, and independent. I pity with all my heart the artist, whether he writes or paints, who is entirely dependent for subsistence upon his art."
Philip quietly put away the various things which he had shown.
"I'm afraid that sounds as if you didn't think I had much chance."
Monsieur Foinet slightly shrugged his shoulders.
"You have a certain manual dexterity. With hard work and perseverance there is no reason why you should not become a careful, not incompetent painter. You would find hundreds who painted worse than you, hundreds who painted as well. I see no talent in anything you have shown me. I see industry and intelligence. You will never be anything but mediocre."
Philip obliged himself to answer quite steadily.
"I'm very grateful to you for having taken so much trouble. I can't thank you enough."
Monsieur Foinet got up and made as if to go, but he changed his mind and, stopping, put his hand on Philip's shoulder.
"But if you were to ask me my advice, I should say: take your courage in both hands and try your luck at something else. It sounds very hard, but let me tell you this: I would give all I have in the world if someone had given me that advice when I was your age and I had taken it."
Philip looked up at him with surprise. The master forced his lips into a smile, but his eyes remained grave and sad.
"It is cruel to discover one's mediocrity only when it is too late. It does not improve the temper."
dsi1
Oct 4, 2012, 4:03:23 AM10/4/12
to
On 10/3/2012 6:17 PM, Cactus Wren wrote:
> Did anyone say "Say it ain't so, Joe?" That was awkward. Are they calling each other "socialists" and "terrorists"? I bet they really got people all riled up!
>
I'd like to see Obama give Mitts one false crack. :-)
> Did anyone say "Say it ain't so, Joe?" That was awkward. Are they calling each other "socialists" and "terrorists"? I bet they really got people all riled up!
>
>
> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 9:10:09 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
Murdick
Oct 4, 2012, 7:57:35 AM10/4/12
to
I'm glad someone finally mentioned this. Teaching a full load of students is as bad as grading tests. Fortunately, the place where I work has hired a grader for me. Now, I just stand up there and pontificate, and everyone here knows what a blowhard I am.
Douglas Seth
Oct 4, 2012, 9:35:55 AM10/4/12
to
make it. You job is not only to teach, but inspire. Inspire them to
want to practice and learn. I have gotten better as a teacher from
students who aren't talented. For the interested talented ones, you
just have to do no harm and provide them with the right direction
(technically and musically) at the right time. If someone clearly
doesn't want to be there, I send them walking.
Douglas Seth
Oct 4, 2012, 9:52:31 AM10/4/12
to
On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>
> > I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>
> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>
> > I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>
> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
> they want.
Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
> they want.
stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
this.
>
> Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
> spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
> learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
> back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
> winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
> a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
> doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>
seen it. It is a teachers job to manage whatever they see fit
otherwise they are not teaching. If a student isn't doing something
correctly, it is your job to fix it. Otherwise, you aren't teaching.
>
>
> > Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
If someone enjoys learning the art, it isn't a waste of time and they
>
> > Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
shouldn't quit.
>
> I believe that teachers should just try to make the lessons interesting
> and try to stay away from commenting on the student's progress. The
> worst thing is the student that doesn't want to learn. They should be
> dropped like an uncle that believes himself to be a duck. OTOH, you just
> might need the eggs. :-)
WTF, teaching IS commenting on a student's progress!! Along with many
> I believe that teachers should just try to make the lessons interesting
> and try to stay away from commenting on the student's progress. The
> worst thing is the student that doesn't want to learn. They should be
> dropped like an uncle that believes himself to be a duck. OTOH, you just
> might need the eggs. :-)
other things!
Douglas Seth
Oct 4, 2012, 9:56:06 AM10/4/12
to
Your daughter is hilarious!! I laughed my ass off at the toilet video.
DS
Fadosolrélamisi
Oct 4, 2012, 10:35:18 AM10/4/12
to
grew up to be quite a character has you have ... heu ... discovered!
My theory in family education (and even after all these years I can say with authority that I have absolutely no experience!) is ... just let them be!
Douglas Seth
Oct 4, 2012, 11:00:55 AM10/4/12
to
really funny too!
David Raleigh Arnold
Oct 4, 2012, 12:43:36 PM10/4/12
to
On Tue, 02 Oct 2012 14:45:58 -0700, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> Is this a wonderful book?
No. Regards, daveA
--
Guitar teaching materials and original music for all styles and levels.
Site: http://www.openguitar.com (()) eMail: d.raleig...@gmail.com
Contact: http://www.openguitar.com/contact.html"
> Is this a wonderful book?
No. Regards, daveA
--
Guitar teaching materials and original music for all styles and levels.
Site: http://www.openguitar.com (()) eMail: d.raleig...@gmail.com
Contact: http://www.openguitar.com/contact.html"
dsi1
Oct 4, 2012, 1:06:45 PM10/4/12
to
On 10/4/2012 3:52 AM, Douglas Seth wrote:
> On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>>
>>> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>>
>> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
>> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
>> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
>> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
>> they want.
>
> Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
> stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
> this.
Icky! Sounds like you want to teach them how to act or fake playing music.
> On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>>
>>> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>>
>> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
>> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
>> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
>> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
>> they want.
>
> Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
> stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
> this.
>
>>
>> Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
>> spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
>> learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
>> back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
>> winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
>> a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
>> doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>>
> Wrong again! A bad teacher can and will ruin a great student. I have
> seen it. It is a teachers job to manage whatever they see fit
> otherwise they are not teaching. If a student isn't doing something
> correctly, it is your job to fix it. Otherwise, you aren't teaching.
already know that. They will not ruin a motivated student. They will not
ruin a student with great talent. You put too much stock in bad teachers.
>>
>>
>>> Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
>
> If someone enjoys learning the art, it isn't a waste of time and they
> shouldn't quit.
>>
>> I believe that teachers should just try to make the lessons interesting
>> and try to stay away from commenting on the student's progress. The
>> worst thing is the student that doesn't want to learn. They should be
>> dropped like an uncle that believes himself to be a duck. OTOH, you just
>> might need the eggs. :-)
>
> WTF, teaching IS commenting on a student's progress!! Along with many
> other things!
effective? I don't know.
Douglas Seth
Oct 4, 2012, 1:24:02 PM10/4/12
to
On Oct 4, 1:06 pm, dsi1 <d...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
classical instrument is taught this way. Clearly, you know next to
nothing about how the tradition of how classical music is taught. Pure
ignorance.
>
>
>
> >> Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
> >> spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
> >> learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
> >> back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
> >> winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
> >> a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
> >> doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>
> > Wrong again! A bad teacher can and will ruin a great student. I have
> > seen it. It is a teachers job to manage whatever they see fit
> > otherwise they are not teaching. If a student isn't doing something
> > correctly, it is your job to fix it. Otherwise, you aren't teaching.
>
> There are good and bad teachers. Bad teachers ruin students every day. I
> already know that. They will not ruin a motivated student. They will not
> ruin a student with great talent. You put too much stock in bad teachers.
Yes, they will and can ruin a motivated student. A bad teacher can
easily keep a great talent from realizing their potential, discourage
them, lead them down the wrong path, etc.. Impressionable minds
especially young minds can be easily swayed. You are a nice guy, but
clearly you don't know enough about teaching classical music for me to
continue wasting my time in this discussion. Your lack of experience
shows.
>
>
>
> >>> Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
>
> > If someone enjoys learning the art, it isn't a waste of time and they
> > shouldn't quit.
>
> >> I believe that teachers should just try to make the lessons interesting
> >> and try to stay away from commenting on the student's progress. The
> >> worst thing is the student that doesn't want to learn. They should be
> >> dropped like an uncle that believes himself to be a duck. OTOH, you just
> >> might need the eggs. :-)
>
> > WTF, teaching IS commenting on a student's progress!! Along with many
> > other things!
>
> Some teachers are cheerleaders and some are not. Which are most
> effective? I don't know.
Cheerleading and encouraging are always part of an excellent teacher's
repertoire. Read Berg's "Virtuoso teacher", this guy gets it!
> On10/4/20123:52 AM, Douglas Seth wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
> >> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>
> >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >>>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>
> >>> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>
> >> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
> >> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
> >> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
> >> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
> >> they want.
>
> > Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
> > stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
> > this.
>
> Icky! Sounds like you want to teach them how to act or fake playing music.
It is called teaching classical music and interpretation. Every
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
> >> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>
> >>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>
> >>>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>
> >>> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>
> >> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
> >> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
> >> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
> >> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
> >> they want.
>
> > Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
> > stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
> > this.
>
> Icky! Sounds like you want to teach them how to act or fake playing music.
classical instrument is taught this way. Clearly, you know next to
nothing about how the tradition of how classical music is taught. Pure
ignorance.
>
>
>
> >> Most students, however, are passive learners and either they get the
> >> spark and take off or they remain passive. The reality is that an active
> >> learner will learn to excel on his own and teachers cannot hold them
> >> back. A passive student will be blown around by the teacher and the
> >> winds of chance. I don't think that a teacher should try to micro-manage
> >> a student's hand position. Any damage or poor habits will come from
> >> doing this. That's just my opinion although, I gotta say, it is awesome.
>
> > Wrong again! A bad teacher can and will ruin a great student. I have
> > seen it. It is a teachers job to manage whatever they see fit
> > otherwise they are not teaching. If a student isn't doing something
> > correctly, it is your job to fix it. Otherwise, you aren't teaching.
>
> There are good and bad teachers. Bad teachers ruin students every day. I
> already know that. They will not ruin a motivated student. They will not
> ruin a student with great talent. You put too much stock in bad teachers.
easily keep a great talent from realizing their potential, discourage
them, lead them down the wrong path, etc.. Impressionable minds
especially young minds can be easily swayed. You are a nice guy, but
clearly you don't know enough about teaching classical music for me to
continue wasting my time in this discussion. Your lack of experience
shows.
>
>
>
> >>> Possibly even more disastrously, the less than good teacher might erroneously give a student with little talent the impression that said student should do something other than quit. He might tell him, for example, that he should "follow his passion." This would be bad teaching.
>
> > If someone enjoys learning the art, it isn't a waste of time and they
> > shouldn't quit.
>
> >> I believe that teachers should just try to make the lessons interesting
> >> and try to stay away from commenting on the student's progress. The
> >> worst thing is the student that doesn't want to learn. They should be
> >> dropped like an uncle that believes himself to be a duck. OTOH, you just
> >> might need the eggs. :-)
>
> > WTF, teaching IS commenting on a student's progress!! Along with many
> > other things!
>
> Some teachers are cheerleaders and some are not. Which are most
> effective? I don't know.
repertoire. Read Berg's "Virtuoso teacher", this guy gets it!
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 4, 2012, 1:50:44 PM10/4/12
to
On Thursday, October 4, 2012 12:58:29 AM UTC-7, JPD wrote:
> Two months passed....
This is a priceless excerpt, and a great reminder to read this particular work of Maugham. Millions of thanks to you for offering it. The following very anti-romantic, thoroughly Aristotelian passage is especially attractive to me:
> Two months passed....
This is a priceless excerpt, and a great reminder to read this particular work of Maugham. Millions of thanks to you for offering it. The following very anti-romantic, thoroughly Aristotelian passage is especially attractive to me:
dsi1
Oct 4, 2012, 3:20:12 PM10/4/12
to
On 10/4/2012 7:24 AM, Douglas Seth wrote:
> On Oct 4, 1:06 pm, dsi1 <d...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>> On10/4/20123:52 AM, Douglas Seth wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>>>>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>>
>>>>> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>>
>>>> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
>>>> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
>>>> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
>>>> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
>>>> they want.
>>
>>> Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
>>> stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
>>> this.
>>
>> Icky! Sounds like you want to teach them how to act or fake playing music.
>
> It is called teaching classical music and interpretation. Every
> classical instrument is taught this way. Clearly, you know next to
> nothing about how the tradition of how classical music is taught. Pure
> ignorance.
You're stuck in the past man. The reality is that your goal is to mold
> On Oct 4, 1:06 pm, dsi1 <d...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>> On10/4/20123:52 AM, Douglas Seth wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Oct 3, 7:07 pm, dsi1 <ds...@eternal-september.invalid> wrote:
>>>> On10/3/201212:04 PM, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 12:49:42 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
>>
>>>>>> This is true, it's always the player, not the teacher.
>>
>>>>> I can't agree. A good teacher is able to identify and cultivate what talent a student has. A less than good teacher can't do this.
>>
>>>> I know a couple of people with talent. They do their own thing and do
>>>> not wait around expecting teachers to spoon feed them instruction. They
>>>> are active learners. For these people, all they need is to learn the
>>>> basics of reading and then stay out of their way and let them do what
>>>> they want.
>>
>>> Wrong! They are not going to teach themselves general musicianship or
>>> stylistic interpretation. Even the most talent need coaching for
>>> this.
>>
>> Icky! Sounds like you want to teach them how to act or fake playing music.
>
> It is called teaching classical music and interpretation. Every
> classical instrument is taught this way. Clearly, you know next to
> nothing about how the tradition of how classical music is taught. Pure
> ignorance.
the guitarist in your own image. I think that's reprehensible in this
day and age. Call me ignorant - see if I give a hoot.
Speaking of which, what's the deal with teachers saying that their
method and teaching is the best? I have to believe that it's some kind
of inside joke. It simply isn't possible that so many blowhards in this
tiny newsgroup could come up with the same outrageous line. It's a
schtick, right?
Murdick
Oct 4, 2012, 5:23:50 PM10/4/12
to
Bad teachers do ruin good students by not showing them what they need to do. I saw Manuel Barrueco play when he was 16 and it was not a pretty sight. IMO, he was going nowhere.
Fadosolrélamisi
Oct 4, 2012, 8:18:47 PM10/4/12
to
Ok ...can we go back on topic now! You've been pretty kind ... other's might not [;o)
Fadosolrélamisi
Oct 4, 2012, 8:23:02 PM10/4/12
to
Fadosolrélamisi
Oct 4, 2012, 8:41:32 PM10/4/12
to
Le jeudi 4 octobre 2012 14:23:50 UTC-7, Murdick a écrit :
> Bad teachers do ruin good students by not showing them what they need to do. I >saw Manuel Barrueco play when he was 16 and it was not a pretty sight. IMO, he >was going nowhere.
We tend to forget how long it took to get to where we are ... IMHO bad teachers are the one that teaches things that are too advance for the level in which the student is in ... like all brain do not develop the same way and in the same time ... Blaming the teacher is an easy cop out... there are to many complexity in the process of learning to pin point a unique cause for failure ... a developing life has always an unknown component in it and to present an instrument teacher as being the sole responsible for the musical education of a pupil is ridiculous. There is more to music than just moving fingers! Inner ear, a sense of form, history, inner pulse, rhythm, harmony, dictation, solfege, counterpoint, and through in to that the basic life skills (because the time taken to learn (not browse) all these topics can definitely disfigure one's social capacity to survive in this harsh world). I would not be surprise that these heros from which we see only their ultra developed guitar side are all divorce! Nothing wrong with that by the way ... just that I am sure that the result of such a survey would be revealing ... ) Will soundboard please make a survey on this!
> Bad teachers do ruin good students by not showing them what they need to do. I >saw Manuel Barrueco play when he was 16 and it was not a pretty sight. IMO, he >was going nowhere.
Murdick
Oct 4, 2012, 10:31:54 PM10/4/12
to
The time to get your technique together is when you are young. Then you keep up a practice routine and develop yourself as a musician. You can't fooling around with technique when you are over 20 (or maybe over 16).
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 4, 2012, 11:13:27 PM10/4/12
to
On Thursday, October 4, 2012 7:31:55 PM UTC-7, Murdick wrote:
> The time to get your technique together is when you are young. Then you keep up a practice routine and develop yourself as a musician. You can't [be?] fooling around with technique when you are over 20 (or maybe over 16).
I don't think we can rightly agree to that last sentence.
> The time to get your technique together is when you are young. Then you keep up a practice routine and develop yourself as a musician. You can't [be?] fooling around with technique when you are over 20 (or maybe over 16).
I don't think we can rightly agree to that last sentence.
Cactus Wren
Oct 5, 2012, 12:56:27 AM10/5/12
to
Sure, in a perfect world where we must be concert virtuosos or nothing at all, we should certainly have our technique taken care of by 16!
The barbarity of specialization, you know...
The barbarity of specialization, you know...
lzimm...@hotmail.com
Oct 5, 2012, 1:05:25 AM10/5/12
to
On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:45:58 PM UTC-7, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> Is this a wonderful book?
>
>
>
> http://www.amazon.com/The-Natural-Classical-Guitar-Ryan/dp/0933224508/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1349214326&sr=8-1&keywords=The+Natural+Classical+Guitar
> Is this a wonderful book?
>
>
>
I have this book and have read it several years ago. I thought it had some good ideas. I saw his presentation at GFA 1985. I better keep it in good condition.
Carey
Oct 5, 2012, 3:18:24 AM10/5/12
to
On Oct 4, 10:05 pm, lzimmer2...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:45:58 PM UTC-7, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> > Is this a wonderful book?
>
> >http://www.amazon.com/The-Natural-Classical-Guitar-Ryan/dp/0933224508...
> On Tuesday, October 2, 2012 2:45:58 PM UTC-7, Alphonsus Jr. wrote:
> > Is this a wonderful book?
>
>
> I have this book and have read it several years ago. I thought it had some good ideas. I saw his presentation at GFA 1985. I better keep it in good condition.
I think Mr Ryan's book has many good ideas, along with some '80s
> I have this book and have read it several years ago. I thought it had some good ideas. I saw his presentation at GFA 1985. I better keep it in good condition.
chaff.
It's available through SBM for less than $30 new.
The notion that a teacher can ruin a great student is laughable, and
only fits the
agenda of those who set themselves up as_great teachers_. Heh..
Murdick
Oct 5, 2012, 8:12:36 AM10/5/12
to
Murdick
Oct 5, 2012, 8:15:50 AM10/5/12
to
Carey says, "The notion that a teacher can ruin a great student is laughable, and
only fits the agenda of those who set themselves up as_great teachers_. Heh.. "
The only thing that is laughable is your ignorance.
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 5, 2012, 2:30:53 PM10/5/12
to
On Friday, October 5, 2012 12:18:24 AM UTC-7, Carey wrote:
> along with some '80s chaff.
Chronological snobbery.
> along with some '80s chaff.
Douglas Seth
Oct 5, 2012, 2:57:50 PM10/5/12
to
wollybird
Oct 5, 2012, 3:05:05 PM10/5/12
to
> This may be one of the most ignorant threads on RMCG ever.
That would make a good thread
dsi1
Oct 5, 2012, 3:16:04 PM10/5/12
to
JPD
Oct 5, 2012, 3:21:08 PM10/5/12
to
On Friday, October 5, 2012 12:18:24 AM UTC-7, Carey wrote:
dsi1
Oct 5, 2012, 3:48:19 PM10/5/12
to
On 10/4/2012 9:18 PM, Carey wrote:
>
> The notion that a teacher can ruin a great student is laughable, and
> only fits the
> agenda of those who set themselves up as_great teachers_. Heh..
>
Some folks in this small newsgroup think that learning to play the
>
> The notion that a teacher can ruin a great student is laughable, and
> only fits the
> agenda of those who set themselves up as_great teachers_. Heh..
>
guitar is full of dangers and you need the best guide through the jungle
otherwise you're doomed. These folks have been in the jungle way too long.
The reality is that you don't need to read music to play the guitar and
most people don't pay professional teachers to learn. Most people who
play can appreciate and love the guitar at whatever level they play at
and the only thing that matters is their enjoyment and desire to express
themselves and what they're trying to say.
OTOH, learning to read music and play the guitar is indeed full of
danger. You stand a great chance of becoming a jaded blowhard that can
no longer enjoy listening to other guitarists without putting your ego
on the line. The truth is that no normal person would give a fuck if
someone rolled their chords or not.
JPD
Oct 5, 2012, 5:55:41 PM10/5/12
to
dsi1
Oct 5, 2012, 6:04:17 PM10/5/12
to
won't do a thing for messages relayed throughout the Usenet servers but
who the heck uses NNTP anyway? :-)
This might only be a feature of the New Google Groups interface.
Matt Faunce
Oct 5, 2012, 6:07:01 PM10/5/12
to
I agree. The first teacher may have been lacking in some areas important
for later development, but in many cases he fanned your ember into a
little flame. That's the most important part. Approaching mastery is
like approaching the speed of light. The closer you get the more force
you need to move even closer. An incredible amount of work is necessary
to become a concert player. I imagine that the disproportionate time
spent focusing on the later work has made people forget those critical
days when you were just an ember.
--
Matt
Alphonsus Jr.
Oct 5, 2012, 6:38:16 PM10/5/12
to
On Friday, October 5, 2012 12:48:27 PM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
> The reality is that you don't need to read music to play the guitar and
>
> most people don't pay professional teachers to learn. Most people who
>
> play can appreciate and love the guitar at whatever level they play at
>
> and the only thing that matters is their enjoyment and desire to express
>
> themselves and what they're trying to say.
Not coincidentally, most people are doomed to perpetual mediocrity.
> The reality is that you don't need to read music to play the guitar and
>
> most people don't pay professional teachers to learn. Most people who
>
> play can appreciate and love the guitar at whatever level they play at
>
> and the only thing that matters is their enjoyment and desire to express
>
> themselves and what they're trying to say.
dsi1
Oct 5, 2012, 7:59:46 PM10/5/12
to
famous. They start because something about it appeals to them. They
continue to play as long as they find it rewarding. Your entire notion
of why people play the guitar is totally out of sync with reality and
corrupted - possibly by this group. That's the breaks.
Message has been deleted
Murdick
Oct 6, 2012, 10:23:15 AM10/6/12
to
0 new messages