Slow Practice Advocacy?

[Rob Firestone]

What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
mean by "slow"?

[Charlie]

Rob, I advocate practicing new pieces slowly. Pieces that I know well I practice up to speed: new pieces I use the slow practice approach.

This is what I mean by slow practice: I just learned the alla polacca from Mertz's op.5. By learned, I mean I memorized it. I first read through the score without my guitar in hand. I read through it a handful of times, visualizing fingers used, position on the neck and imagining what the sound was like. I did this a bunch of times over a couple of days. When I picked up the guitar to play it, I played it very VERY V_E_R_Y slowly, so slowly that the piece would be basically unrecognizable by anyone within hearing distance. I played the first 8 measures so slowly that I played it with out making a mistake. It literally took almost 2 minutes. I then put the guitar away and did other things. When I came back to the guitar after 4 or 5 hours, I played it again, just as slowly. This time, however, I was more confident.

It's been 2.5 weeks and I now can play through the polacca up to speed and have it pretty well memorized. And, it's mistake free.

Charlie

[John Nguyen]

On Mar 30, 11:15 am, Rob Firestone <isdoch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> What do you folks think of slow practice these days?  And what do you
> mean by "slow"?

For my case, there are two types of slow practices:
1. Slow practice on difficult passages/spots that I can observe what
is wrong and how to fix it, then speed it up, correctly, until the
phrase is recognizable but not necessarily at tempo. When fixing a
spot, I would play it VERY slowly to the point that I can observe the
start and release of my LH fingers and/or the cross-string movement of
my RH fingers and pinpoint the exact trouble spot. Only then I can
figure out how to fix/change it.

2. Slow practice on the whole piece without errors at the tempo that
I'm comfortable with and the all phrasings are recognizable. I would
run it at this slow speed a few times to internalize it in terms of
phrasing, dynamics. How slow is slow? It's all relative to me. The
fastest tempo when I can play the whole piece without errors and with
the right phrasing and dynamics is the right slow tempo for me to
internalize the music.

I found that these practices helped me a lot in the last few years,
but YMMV.
Cheers,

John

[Rob Firestone]

Thank you , John for your response. Why do you play at the fastest
speed that you can go without error? Isn't the potential for error
greater than if you played slower than the fastest you are capable of?

[John Nguyen]

> greater than if you played slower than the fastest you are capable of?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

There are two things that I concern with. First is to save time on
practice. If I can go at a reasonable speed without error, then there
is really no benfit for me to slow down more than that. Second, the
slower I go, the harder I have to keep the phrasing flowing, and I
really want the phrasing to ingrain in my memory at the beginning.
Cheers,

John

[Cactus Wren]

Here is a vid by an excellent flamenco player who likes to do much of his work near tempo so there is a groove.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=axEJYoc_OOU

[Murdick]

On Saturday, March 30, 2013 10:15:16 AM UTC-5, Rob Firestone wrote:
> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
>
> mean by "slow"?

Don't play anything any faster than you can play it (almost) perfectly. If you do, you are practicing mistakes. By anything I mean a phrase, a line or a whole piece. What is almost perfect? That's a judgment call.

[Steven Bornfeld]

On 3/30/2013 11:15 AM, Rob Firestone wrote:
> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
> mean by "slow"?
>

It's always slow. Good to see you posting--it's been quite a while!

Steve

[David Raleigh Arnold]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 08:15:16 -0700, Rob Firestone wrote:

> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
> mean by "slow"?

If there is tension, do not relax, slow down. Relaxation
techniques are /never/ the best response to tension.

You should always be able to play faster (or slower) than you are playing
now. If you can't play faster, you are like a car without brakes, no
control. You are not going to get anywhere.

You must /vary/ the tempo. This is a part of practicing
/around/ the target, knowing the areas around the goal.
This is important to recover from mistakes and it also helps
in not making them in the first place. Slow, slower, slowest.

The slower you practice, the more attention you can give to what
you are doing and how you are doing it.

http://www.openguitar.com/guitar-practice-howto.html

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"

[Richard Yates]

On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 14:35:22 -0700 (PDT), Murdick <lute...@aol.com>
wrote:

>On Saturday, March 30, 2013 10:15:16 AM UTC-5, Rob Firestone wrote:
>> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
>>
>> mean by "slow"?
>
>Don't play anything any faster than you can play it (almost) perfectly.

One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."
Best advice I ever heard.

[Slogoin]

On Mar 30, 5:54 pm, Richard Yates <rich...@yatesguitar.com> wrote:
>
> One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."
> Best advice I ever heard.

That's good.

The idea to me is like juggling where you have to balance between
things competing for your attention. The key to me is to not ever
feeling rushed and be able to focus on some detail while keeping it
going. It might be looking at a fingering or making sure a voice is
well formed.

The thing that most students do is drop the gestures and phrase
meaning, playing without musicality to focus on a physical detail.
Singing to me is the best way to keep the musical ideas clear and I
sing a lot in lessons. I can feel when the student is not singing the
music in their head. For polyphony this it is very difficult because
you can't sing two lines at the same time. What I do in my head is
like round robin multitasking.

I think we do not talk much about this ability to play [ and hear]
two things at once but that is to me the thing that most attracted me
to CG, and it was what got me started on fingerstyle and jazz guitar.
Mark's canon is wonderful as a way to train your CG brain to hear
polyphony. For kids it is singing rounds like Frère Jacques, it's a
real eye opener for kids and they really get a kick out of it once
they get it.

[Steven Bornfeld]

LOL--my brother talks faster than he can think.

[Richard Yates]

Don't worry, Steve. It's probably genetic.

[Andrew Schulman]

On Mar 30, 11:20 pm, Richard Yates <rich...@yatesguitar.com> wrote:
> Don't worry, Steve. It's probably genetic.
>

Or maybe generic.

Andrew

[Slogoin]

On Mar 30, 10:51 pm, Andrew Schulman <and...@abacaproductions.com>
wrote:

> On Mar 30, 11:20 pm, Richard Yates <rich...@yatesguitar.com> wrote:> Don't worry, Steve. It's probably genetic.
>
> Or maybe generic.
>
> Andrew

More like geriatric.

[Murdick]

Richard says. "One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."

Not good advice. Usually, when get a piece ut speed, your not thinking too much about the fingers-that work has already been done. When learning a piece I would say that's good advice.

[Steve Freides]

Rob Firestone wrote:
> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
> mean by "slow"?

A specific slow practice point I make with students: you can practice
moving quickly and relaxedly at a slow tempo, e.g., trying to play
F-G-A-B-C (and reverse) on the first string with a shift to V for the
A-B-C. The goal of making a legato connection - no break in the sound -
between the G and the A can even be practiced at _no_ tempo.

Another practice technique I teach is switching chords by moving your
hands to the shape of the second chord in the air, before you put any
fingers down. Again, something that can be practiced at any tempo, and
a very slow tempo lets you focus on doing this without being concerned
about getting to the final position in time for the next beat.

I also teach both the above on piano and double bass. It's a less
relevant technique on a wind instrument, IMHO, because too much changes
when you have to hold notes for a long time, but it's still possible in
some circumstances, e.g., coordinating breath, tongue, and fingers for a
particular start or a particular pair of notes or short passage.

As a player, I've found that I give my best performances on music that
it really too hard for me to play at tempo by doing almost no practice
at tempo but rather spending my time playing it correctly and slower,
and then just letting whatever happens, happen at performance time. I
realize, of course, it's less than ideal to have to play something in
performance that's too hard for you, but it does happen and it's nice to
have an approach other than "OMG, what am I going to do?"

-S-

[Slogoin]

+1

[Cactus Wren]

How about _rarely_ *practice* anything faster than you can think?

Of course, you couldn't tell a student it in these terms. "Rarely" would be interpreted as around 95% of the time.

[Slogoin]

On Mar 31, 9:02 am, Cactus Wren <elegantspanishgui...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> Of course, you couldn't tell a student it in these terms.
> "Rarely" would be interpreted as around 95% of the time.

Therein lies the difficulty of words. Much more effective, IMO, is
doing it with a student so they can FEEL it as they do it. Some
students will take everything a teacher says "literally", as they
interpret meaning. Words are so loaded with baggage that we rarely
allow them the slack needed for effective communication. For RY that
bit of advice worked, for another it may not.

[Cactus Wren]

What do you think about making some lesson time a simulation of how they should actually be practicing? To give them the feeling and general idea of the speed, level of accuracy and intensity, dynamics, accentuation, segment length, etc? This is something no teacher I've had has done, but I'

[Slogoin]

On Mar 31, 10:29 am, Cactus Wren <elegantspanishgui...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>

> What do you think about making some lesson time a simulation
> of how they should actually be practicing?  To give them the
> feeling and general idea of the speed, level of accuracy and
> intensity, dynamics, accentuation, segment length, etc?
>  This is something no teacher I've had has done, but I'

I do, my CG teacher did and many other teachers I've had did it
besides my music teachers. Not sure why your teachers didn't. What I
find is that I can monitor their focus in real time and catch them
drifting as it happens. I love this about music because the student
can feel it too, in the moment. Other subject are harder to monitor
that way. Most students have no idea how focused the work becomes for
those who do have good study habits, in any subject. Work hard and
then go have fun. Fun is also VERY important but it ain't much fun if
the work is not well done.

[Tony Done]

techniques are /never/ the best response to tension.
>
> You should always be able to play faster (or slower) than you are playing
> now. If you can't play faster, you are like a car without brakes, no
> control. You are not going to get anywhere.
>

It seems to me that this is a (the?) key to being a great player, as
opposed to a good one - the ability to create the impression that you
are relaxed and could play the whole thing much faster than you are. I
know almost nothing about classical guitar and its performers, but a
good example is Tony Rice, the bluegrass flatpicker, he always sounds
and looks as if he could be doing a lot more than he is.

--
Tony Done

http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=784456
http://www.flickr.com/photos/done_family/

[Steve Freides]

Cactus Wren wrote:

> What do you think about making some lesson time a simulation of how
> they should actually be practicing? To give them the feeling and
> general idea of the speed, level of accuracy and intensity, dynamics,
> accentuation, segment length, etc? This is something no teacher I've
> had has done, but I'

I have my students practice during their lessons whenever I think
they're missing how to practice something to best effect. I don't see
how a teacher can not do this - it's important. If your goal is your
student's improved playing and you believe that practice will improve
their playing, then how can you not work with them on how to practice?

-S-

[Steve Freides]

Tony Done wrote:
> techniques are /never/ the best response to tension.
>>
>> You should always be able to play faster (or slower) than you are
>> playing now. If you can't play faster, you are like a car without
>> brakes, no control. You are not going to get anywhere.
>>
>
> It seems to me that this is a (the?) key to being a great player, as
> opposed to a good one - the ability to create the impression that you
> are relaxed and could play the whole thing much faster than you are. I
> know almost nothing about classical guitar and its performers, but a
> good example is Tony Rice, the bluegrass flatpicker, he always sounds
> and looks as if he could be doing a lot more than he is.

Absolutely - this is one of the working definitions of a virtuoso:
someone who not only can play difficult passsages but makes those
passages look easy.

Watching someone play at the limits of their technique isn't
particularly entertaining ...

-S-

[Andrew Schulman]

Ouch!

Andrew

[John Nguyen]

It seems to discussion from "how slow one should practice" now is
inching to "how fast". I am with the belief that one should play only
80% of the fastest speed in a performance to make it look at ease.
Anyone goes out to swing it at 100% full speed hoping for the best is
doomed to messing up the performance. Performance anxiety tends to
speed up one's playing, and one will lose control almost immdiately if
jumping in at 100% of the ability. I've seen enough of this phenomenon
in countless student performances over the years in CG as well as
other instruments.
Cheers,

John

[2cts]

Steve Freides wrote:
> Tony Done wrote:
>> techniques are /never/ the best response to tension.
>>>
>>> You should always be able to play faster (or slower) than you are
>>> playing now. If you can't play faster, you are like a car without
>>> brakes, no control. You are not going to get anywhere.
>>>
>>
>> It seems to me that this is a (the?) key to being a great player, as
>> opposed to a good one - the ability to create the impression that you
>> are relaxed and could play the whole thing much faster than you are. I
>> know almost nothing about classical guitar and its performers, but a
>> good example is Tony Rice, the bluegrass flatpicker, he always sounds
>> and looks as if he could be doing a lot more than he is.
>
> Absolutely - this is one of the working definitions of a virtuoso:
> someone who not only can play difficult passsages but makes those
> passages look easy.

It even is easy for him.

> Watching someone play at the limits of their technique isn't
> particularly entertaining ...

It is really easy for him in order to look easy and there is no way
to fake that ;)

[thomas]

On Sunday, March 31, 2013 4:59:10 PM UTC-4, 2cts wrote:
>
> > Absolutely - this is one of the working definitions of a virtuoso:
> > someone who not only can play difficult passsages but makes those
> > passages look easy.
>
> It even is easy for him.

You're correct -- Steve Friedes has his head up his ass as usual. A good player doesn't need to "make it look easy", because it really is easy for him.

[2cts]

A player might sometimes risk a bit for instance on bad hair day but
a good player even neither is nor will be in need to risk something ;)

[Slogoin]

On Mar 31, 2:44 pm, thomas <drthomasfbr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You're correct -- Steve Friedes has his head up his ass as usual.

Here we go again, and you can't even spell his name correctly,
pathetic.

[Tony Done]

It can be easy for a good player and he can still manage to make it look
and sound like hard work from where the audience is sitting, but that
depends on how you want to define good. However, I think there more to
it than that. For certain instruments and genres, eg classical, folk and
blues guitar, the performer looks best when he appears to be putting no
effort into what he is doing. In contrast, a rock guitarist has to make
it look like hard work, <g> and this also seems to apply to some
classical violinists and pianists.

[Slogoin]

On Mar 31, 2:53 pm, 2cts <2...@from.gov> wrote:
>
> but a good player even neither is nor will be in need to risk something ;)

Live solo CG music is always a risk at the highest levels. I have
yet to hear a perfect performance and have heard many top players blow
whole sections. Williams once toasted a large section and Russell did
it a lot when he first started performing a lot. It is NOT easy at the
highest levels for anybody, even though it may look easy. SY has
talked at length about how insanely difficult it is to play CG live.
If there are any out there who think it is easy I'd like to hear a
video of them playing Mark's Sonata No 3. without messing up something.

[2cts]

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 08:22:51 +1000, Tony Done wrote:
> On 1/04/2013 7:44 AM, thomas wrote:
>> On Sunday, March 31, 2013 4:59:10 PM UTC-4, 2cts wrote:
>>>
>>>> Absolutely - this is one of the working definitions of a virtuoso:
>>>> someone who not only can play difficult passsages but makes those
>>>> passages look easy.
>>>
>>> It even is easy for him.
>>
>> You're correct -- Steve Friedes has his head up his ass as usual. A good player doesn't need to "make it look easy", because it really is easy for him.
>>
>
> It can be easy for a good player and he can still manage to make it look
> and sound like hard work from where the audience is sitting, but that
> depends on how you want to define good. However, I think there more to
> it than that. For certain instruments and genres, eg classical, folk and
> blues guitar, the performer looks best when he appears to be putting no
> effort into what he is doing. In contrast, a rock guitarist has to make
> it look like hard work, <g> and this also seems to apply to some
> classical violinists and pianists.

Lol yep, seems to been depending within narrow limits on their investors �;)

[2cts]

IC...

[Steve Freides]

2cts wrote:
> Steve Freides wrote:
>> Tony Done wrote:
>>> techniques are /never/ the best response to tension.
>>>>
>>>> You should always be able to play faster (or slower) than you are
>>>> playing now. If you can't play faster, you are like a car without
>>>> brakes, no control. You are not going to get anywhere.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It seems to me that this is a (the?) key to being a great player, as
>>> opposed to a good one - the ability to create the impression that
>>> you are relaxed and could play the whole thing much faster than you
>>> are. I know almost nothing about classical guitar and its
>>> performers, but a good example is Tony Rice, the bluegrass
>>> flatpicker, he always sounds and looks as if he could be doing a
>>> lot more than he is.
>>
>> Absolutely - this is one of the working definitions of a virtuoso:
>> someone who not only can play difficult passsages but makes those
>> passages look easy.
>
> It even is easy for him.

Yes, I agree, that's the point, but I was speaking from the point of
view of a non-player listener. An audience member doesn't know "is easy"
from "looks easy", only what they see. The concert hall experience is
"sounds difficult but looks easy."

-S-

[Murdick]

Do we need to spell his name correctly?

[Richard Yates]

On Sun, 31 Mar 2013 06:51:57 -0700 (PDT), Murdick <lute...@aol.com>

wrote:

>On Saturday, March 30, 2013 7:54:12 PM UTC-5, Richard Yates wrote:
>> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 14:35:22 -0700 (PDT), Murdick <lute...@aol.com>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Saturday, March 30, 2013 10:15:16 AM UTC-5, Rob Firestone wrote:
>>
>> >> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
>>
>> >>
>>
>> >> mean by "slow"?
>>
>> >
>>
>> >Don't play anything any faster than you can play it (almost) perfectly.
>>
>>
>>
>> One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."
>>
>> Best advice I ever heard.
>
>Richard says. "One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."
>
>Not good advice. Usually, when get a piece ut speed, your not thinking too much about the fingers-that work has already been done. When learning a piece I would say that's good advice.

He said "Never play faster than you CAN think" not "Always think about
what your fingers are doing."

Here are two relevant corrolaries for you:
"Never read faster than you can think," and
"Never type faster than you can read."

Richard

[Alphonsus Jr.]

The great Julian Bream didn't make it look very easy.

[Fadosolrélamisi]

On Saturday, March 30, 2013 5:54:12 PM UTC-7, Richard Yates wrote:
> On Sat, 30 Mar 2013 14:35:22 -0700 (PDT), Murdick <lute...@aol.com>
>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Saturday, March 30, 2013 10:15:16 AM UTC-5, Rob Firestone wrote:
>
> >> What do you folks think of slow practice these days? And what do you
>
> >>
>
> >> mean by "slow"?
>
> >
>
> >Don't play anything any faster than you can play it (almost) perfectly.
>
>
>
> One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."
>
> Best advice I ever heard.

Eh! I heard it today in Vladimir Gorbach master class! There you go, this saying is going around ... Here are my notes about what he said about playing slowly ...

(Paraphrasing) - The only way to improve is to play at a tempo where one is very, very comfortable.
Slow down to the point where you can practice without mistakes - Find you comfy tempo for no mistakes.
All the musical information (that one intend to perform at tempo)should remain when slowing down.

Alain

[Cactus Wren]

Keeping on the Russian theme, Grisha Goryachev wrote that when you do this slow practice, you should think of it as if you had superpowers and you were actually playing it fast, but it just felt slow to you. He also said that you should take advantage of this to put every bit of expressivity you can into it.

[toomtab...@gmail.com]

On Sunday, 31 March 2013 20:44:58 UTC+1, Tony Done wrote:

>
> It seems to me that this is a (the?) key to being a great player, as
> opposed to a good one - the ability to create the impression that you
> are relaxed and could play the whole thing much faster than you are. I
> know almost nothing about classical guitar and its performers, but a
> good example is Tony Rice, the bluegrass flatpicker, he always sounds
> and looks as if he could be doing a lot more than he is.
>

Only once saw the pianist Shura Cherkassky play live, and it was Beethoven's
Emporer. Even in the fast bits, he made it look as though he had time
to go for a coffee and get back in time for the next note. It was masterly.
If you look at the videos of the three tenors, you'll see Carreras and
Domingo straining, and going purple at the gills, on stuff which Pavarotti
could do on half throttle (or should that be half throatle). The same relaxed
command applies to Paul Tortelier and Slim Whitman.

Of guitarists, one who exemplifies the same apparently relaxed command
is David Russell. I recall an article he wrote which particularly emphasised
the importance he gave to slow practice.

Toom

[Cactus Wren]

Pavarotti is obviously more famous, and I personally much prefer his voice to Domingo; but is he actually considered to be technically superior? I was not under that impression at all.

[David Raleigh Arnold]

You never saw Julian Bream in concert. He got a review in the
"New Yorker", and the entire text was: "Lute music with faces."
He failed utterly to make it look easy. I believe that was a wakeup call
for him.

Ida Presti had the coolest most peaceful expression on her face
when she played that I have ever seen. Segovia was good
that way, but she was incredible.

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"

[ktaylor]

On Mar 30, 4:35 pm, Murdick <lutem...@aol.com> wrote:
> On Saturday, March 30, 2013 10:15:16 AM UTC-5, Rob Firestone wrote:
> > What do you folks think of slow practice these days?  And what do you
>
> > mean by "slow"?
>

> Don't play anything any faster than you can play it (almost) perfectly. If you do, you are practicing mistakes. By anything I mean a phrase, a line or a whole piece.  What is almost perfect?  That's a judgment call.

I think there is an over emphasis on this worry about never making
mistakes for fear you will be practicing them. That's a Shearer thing
- and he, or you, are missing the real point. Certainly if you make
the same mistake over and over, you will be practicing it and it will
become reinforced (insulated), but as long as there is attention, the
process of mistake-correct, mistake-correct is part of the natural
learning system of most organisms - certainly children. If one plays a
passage, say, and misses a shift, I think that provides very important
information, provided one attends to it. I don't discard slow
practice, but demand it when I notice the student not paying the right
kind of attention to what is being played. In other words slow play
doesn't necessarily create error-free playing (because it can overtax
the attention and thus it is not done with attention), but it often
does stimulate attention, which is critical to error-free
performance.

Kevin Taylor

[David Raleigh Arnold]

I never saw Pavarotti look relaxed. He radiated intense
concentration, but he also looked like he enjoyed doing
what he was doing, and he conveyed that to his audience.
I always thought that to be the key to his success; after
all, his voice couldn't touch Caruso's.

[David Raleigh Arnold]

Great stuff. I'd like to use it. Do you have the exact quotation,
or can you cite it?

[Cactus Wren]

I think he might have taken that post down, I can't find it. Drop him an email. He is an excellent dude.

[Fadosolrélamisi]

What we see and what's going on inside the player are two different things (which manifest itself as one ...) Vladimir Gorbach mentioned it yesterday,
about people commenting on his playing, "you look so calm" while he himself disclose how nervous he was while playing ...(he indeed has a very composed face when playing) When I heard this it reminded me of the image of the swan ... dignified on the surface but below, in the water ... his paddling palmed feet working like ... crazy!

[Fadosolrélamisi]

Very good! Ninja guitar power! Playing from the hearth is indeed the way to go, slow as much as fast.

[toomtab...@gmail.com]

Domingo may be technically better, and more versatile as a musician. Pavarotti
always looked in better and more relaxed control of his voice, and as though
he could do everything without straining to the limits. For me, that gave him
a superior voice quality and dynamic range.
Also bear in mind Domingo was naturally nearer the baritone range (he
started in baritone roles), hence the darker tone, and he would be nearer his
limits in tenor roles.

Toom

[toomtab...@gmail.com]

On Monday, 1 April 2013 15:58:32 UTC+1, daveA wrote:

>
> I never saw Pavarotti look relaxed. He radiated intense
> concentration, but he also looked like he enjoyed doing
> what he was doing, and he conveyed that to his audience.
> I always thought that to be the key to his success; after
> all, his voice couldn't touch Caruso's.
>

That's a difficult, if not impossible, comparison. Caruso had a different,
darker voice quality and there's the noise and loss of frequency and dynamic
range on Caruso's recordings. Also, performance and technical standards change
and are much higher now than they were at the turn of the 20th century.
There's also a much larger field of top-notch performers now. I largely
find recordings from the acoustic and early electric period largely
unlistenable, but, even allowing for that, I doubt Caruso would have rated as
high as many more recent tenors.

Toom

[carlosguitar2000]

On Sunday, March 31, 2013 3:27:14 PM UTC-5, Andrew Schulman wrote:
> On Mar 31, 2:12 am, Slogoin <la...@deack.net> wrote:
>
> > On Mar 30, 10:51 pm, Andrew Schulman <and...@abacaproductions.com>
>
> > wrote:
>
> >
>
> > > On Mar 30, 11:20 pm, Richard Yates <rich...@yatesguitar.com> wrote:> Don't worry, Steve. It's probably genetic.
>
> >
>
> > > Or maybe generic.
>
> >
>
> > > Andrew
>
> >
>
> >    More like geriatric.
>
> >
>
> Ouch!
>
>
>
> Andrew

OUCHIE!!!
:)

See the latest Soundboard for a very illuminating anecdote by Kevin Manderville about working w Bruce Holtzman at FSU...

Best!

C

[thomas]

On Monday, April 1, 2013 12:39:18 PM UTC-4, toomtab...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> Domingo may be technically better, and more versatile as a musician. Pavarotti
>
> always looked in better and more relaxed control of his voice, and as though
>
> he could do everything without straining to the limits. For me, that gave him
>
> a superior voice quality and dynamic range.
>
> Also bear in mind Domingo was naturally nearer the baritone range (he
>
> started in baritone roles), hence the darker tone, and he would be nearer his
>
> limits in tenor roles.

Domingo and Pavarotti were good, but I always preferred the other guy.

[Murdick]

Kevin says, "I think there is an over emphasis on this worry about never making

mistakes for fear you will be practicing them."

Like anything else, it's a judgment call -a lot depends on the level and age of the student. This is not a Shearer thing, it's a practice thing. I think Shearer went to far with it, but the idea is sound. Clearly, one should be working toward perfection.

[Cactus Wren]

I first heard the no-mistake concept from the piano dept. at UH via a high school student.

[Steve Freides]

A student needs an appropriate challenge, one that's neither too hard
nor too easy.

My "perfect" appropriate challenge is one a student can sight-read
pretty well (read: very few mistakes) at about half-speed, and then they
practice and improve the speed.

It doesn't always work out that way, of course, which is why you can't
always work towards perfection - you have to work towards improvement
and accept that some of what would constitute "perfection" is beyond a
student's near-term grasp, and that's OK. You either accept that or you
find a different piece for them to work on.

-S-

[ktaylor]

I mention Shearer because that was a topic of a lecture he gave at the Charleston GFA a number of years ago. He even used the phrase, "never make mistakes." It seemed to be a cornerstone of his ideas in learning in his last years. I understand this was an ideal he was trying to hammer home. I believe he thought the concept was novel.

Kevin

[Cactus Wren]

"I believe he thought the concept was novel."

Your post came across as cordial until that line.

[Murdick]

Steve, you should be able to play whatever it is you are working on perfectly at some tempo, otherwise it may be too far above your level.

[Steve Freides]

Yes, I agree, and I always can, but I sometimes get asked to accompany
on piano, standard literature, e.g., someone's clarinet concerto for a
high school. Usually friends, siblings of students, etc. - I don't
advertise myself as being able to do this. That's the situation I was
referring to - I can certainly play it, but some of the things go at
screamingly fast tempi and I don't have screamingly fast piano chops.
For guitar, it's not an issue for me.

-S-

[Steve Freides]

Cactus Wren wrote:
> "I believe he thought the concept was novel."
>
> Your post came across as cordial until that line.

Kevin is almost unfailingly cordial - we'll let him slip once in a
while, I think. :)

-S-

[dsi1]

On 4/5/2013 11:12 AM, Murdick wrote:
> Steve, you should be able to play whatever it is you are working on perfectly at some tempo, otherwise it may be too far above your level.
>

Playing at ones level sounds kind of boring, although it's probably good
advice for people who get paid to play. Personally, I'm not interested
in playing anything that I'm able to play too well. :-)

[David Raleigh Arnold]

On Mon, 01 Apr 2013 09:59:13 -0700, toomtabard1760 wrote:

> On Monday, 1 April 2013 15:58:32 UTC+1, daveA wrote:
>
>
>> I never saw Pavarotti look relaxed. He radiated intense concentration,
>> but he also looked like he enjoyed doing what he was doing, and he
>> conveyed that to his audience. I always thought that to be the key to
>> his success; after all, his voice couldn't touch Caruso's.
>>
> That's a difficult, if not impossible, comparison.

I saw a tv show in which Pavarotti played an old 78rpm Caruso recording
and sang a bit himself too. It was a very easy and unavoidable
comparison, in spite of all your assumed problems.

[stanleyy]

> One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."

Think about what?

[John Nguyen]

On Apr 26, 9:42 pm, stanleyy <yat...@apsu.edu> wrote:
> > One of those Holzmans says "Never play faster than you can think."
>
> Think about what?

Good to see your posts again, Mr. Yates!!!!