studies for beginer?
Joe Smith
classical and or flamenco learns?
-Joe
Bruce Butler
Bruce
Joe Smith wrote in message <372EE375...@erols.com>...
Vivienne McLaughlin
1. Good, relaxed and attentive posture and arm / hand postioning
2. How to warm-up fingers and back / arms with stretches
3. Left hand - how to fret the instrument and find strings and the
"pulse" exercise
4. Right hand picking exercises and the scratching exercise
5. How to conduct research to develop an awareness of the history of
music
and the types of music now played on guitar and why things are the
way they are.
6. Who are developmental figures in the repertoire and playing styles
(some hints:
Narvaez, Sanz, Bach, Aguado, Sor, Giuliani, Carcassi, Carrulli, *
Tarrega, Llobet,
* Segovia, the Romero family, Pujol, Yepes, Diaz, Parkening, Bream,
Rak, Shearer)
7. Nail care and some basic muscular anatomy (to understand how position
affects the
reach of the fingers and dexterity)
Exercises:
1. The "basic seven" daily exercises
2. The C major scale, 1st position
3. Basic rhythm patterns and strumming (this may include rasgueado)
4. Most folks wait a few months before teaching chord formations, but
you may
want to learn the C major chord and the G major chord forms to aid
in scale practice.
Most folks I know would wait until the student has several months of
practice before teaching them a piece of music. This is insurance
against developing bad habits immediately. I'm sure I missed some
points, so anyone else feel free to have at it.
Vivienne, a player's player / a teacher's nightmare
Lutemann
<vah...@bellsouth.net> writes:
>ost folks I know would wait until the student has several months of
>practice before teaching them a piece of music. This is insurance
>against developing bad habits immediately. I'm sure I missed some
>points, so anyone else feel free to have at it.
>
>Vivienne, a player's player / a teacher's nightmare
>
Really? My students walk out of the first lesson having played a duet with me,
and then go home to work on a lot more music. Who the hell would spend the
first few months playing no music?
Kent Murdick
-----------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail me for a free catalog...NEW, IMPROVED WEB SITE!!!
Free Guitar Music: http://members.aol.com/lutemann/guitar.html
Aaron Shearer Discussion Board: http://199.20.31.179/shearer
Larry Deack
>Who the hell would spend the
>first few months playing no music?
I thought the same thing. Why not introduce music right away? I don't get
this one.
Erik Johannesson
I'm sure I've heard of them, but I'm not sure which ones you're referring
to?
John Philip Dimick
>Most folks I know would wait until the student has several
>months ofpractice before teaching them a piece of music.
This must be some kind of flamebait? Better stand back, Viv! :-)
--
John Philip Dimick
j...@guitarist.com
www.guitarist.com
Bob Ashley
> Generally speaking, what are the first few things a new player of
> classical and or flamenco learns?
These days, Joe, with real estate at such a premium, space is, or at least
should be, a first consideration.
Decide: Space permitting should you get an 'apartment size' guitar, a
regular upright, or can you spring for a baby grand?
Second: Do you have children? If you want to economize think about sharing
a guitar with that kid revved up to take lessons. Sharing is a snap (not
literally) if you get a 12-string...that's 6 strings each.
Third: Get a picture of you and your teacher together at your first
lesson. Clip this picture to your music stand. It shall remind you of the
vaccuum of knowledge, the absolute zero of skills, the primordial pod from
whence you've come and hopefully hitherto shall never return.
Fourth: Never listen to advice from Rib. It's garbage.
Regards,
Rib
Bob Ashley
> Lutemann wrote
> >Who the hell would spend the
> >first few months playing no music?
>
Larry wrote:
> I thought the same thing. Why not introduce music right away? I don't get
> this one.
I didn't think this, Larry and Looterooski.
What with visualization (no guitar) and this latest prescription (no
music), it's like learning to play 'air' guitar in a vaccuum.
Regards,
Rib
Bob Ashley
1) Abs
2) Biceps
3) Back
4) Shoulders
5) Triceps
6) Calves
7) Thighs
Get thee to a squat rack! So says Arnold, so it must be done.
It was Arnold, wasn't it? Arnold Segovianegger?
Regards,
Rib
Sam
squat or wat?
It's the old noses and opinions things again..everyone has one.
Here is mine..be careful, be very careful..how you begin can set the tone
for the rest of your CG life. My first teacher was so happy to have a
dependable, paying adult he would have let me play Led Zep...and when I
queried the local CG "star" about lessons, he told me he had studied with
Pepe Romero (!) and that his students don't play pieces for TWO YEARS!!
Find something in between and always keep your options open...and enjoy
every minute..
Good luck.
Sam
Joe Smith wrote in message <372EE375...@erols.com>...
>Generally speaking, what are the first few things a new player of
>classical and or flamenco learns?
>
>-Joe
>
Lutemann
<Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.99...@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca>, Bob
Ashley <ax...@chebucto.ns.ca> writes:
> What with visualization (no guitar) and this latest prescription (no
>music), it's like learning to play 'air' guitar in a vaccuum.
>
>Regards,
>
What about "no teacher"?
Vivienne McLaughlin
> >Who the hell would spend the
> >first few months playing no music?
>
Larry then echoed:
> I thought the same thing. Why not introduce music right away? I don't get
> this one.
I don't get it either. How can anyone teach someone who can't fret a !@#$!#$
guitar to play a piece of music? Even if its "Marry had a little lamb" in
single note melody? They cant' even understand how to fret a one position
scale, and you would send them home from lesson one playing Boogie pattern #3
with lead lines? I must oppose.
When I was eight, my violin teacher did just what you suggested. For the first
few months we learned pieces mixed with scale practice and learning how to
resin the bow. In two weeks, I could play a piece, sure spiffy like. It
sounded like some lobotomized sheep herder hitting a baby with a cat. Is this
what you want? To teach your students to play a piece when they can't even
produce a sound tone?
PLEASE learn tone production, fretting and simple exercises first. Wait until
you can play in proper form before trying to learn a piece of music. A solid
foundation! Champion of all emperors, skyscrapers and classical musicians!
Drink milk. (add paid for by the Milk Counsel to Build Strong Guitarists)
Vivienne
Vivienne McLaughlin
>On Tue, 4 May 1999, Larry Deack wrote:
>
>I didn't think this, Larry and Looterooski.
I see you've been busy digging up conjugations of the action verb
"Lutemann." Might I suggest Looteronomy? He could author our WEBible with a
chapter on "Thou shalt learn to play sooner, for later would be a sin."
(sorry, Kent - I can't resist - you might say I have a touch of Lutemania)
> What with visualization (no guitar) and this latest prescription (no
>music), it's like learning to play 'air' guitar in a vaccuum.
Thanks Boob. Much like the ng, thinking and playing guitar in a vacuum
leaves no sound / sound reasoning.
Vivienne
Vivienne McLaughlin
Erik Johannesson wrote in message <372f3...@d2o27.telia.com>...
>>1. The "basic seven" daily exercises
>
>I'm sure I've heard of them, but I'm not sure which ones you're referring
>to?
You can find them in Tennant's book "Pumping Nylon."
Look at http://www.barnesandnoble.com
They involve variations of chromatic walks, the "Spider", and right hand
pima alternations with left hand 1- 2 - 3 - 4 movement. If you need them I
can scan and mail, etc. (shhhhh!)
Vivienne
Erik Johannesson
but tech. exercises their whole first year?
John Philip Dimick wrote in message
<23JX2.69622$A6.34...@news1.teleport.com>...
Erik Johannesson
Bob Ashley wrote in message ...
>On Tue, 4 May 1999, Erik Johannesson wrote:
>
>> >1. The "basic seven" daily exercises
>>
>>
>> I'm sure I've heard of them, but I'm not sure which ones you're referring
>> to?
>
Bob Ashley
> Bob Ashley wrote in message ...
> >On Tue, 4 May 1999, Larry Deack wrote:
> >
> >I didn't think this, Larry and Looterooski.
>
Vivienne wrote:
> I see you've been busy digging up conjugations of the action verb
> "Lutemann." Might I suggest Looteronomy? He could author our WEBible with a
> chapter on "Thou shalt learn to play sooner, for later would be a sin."
> (sorry, Kent - I can't resist - you might say I have a touch of Lutemania)
And by extension, putting Looteroony in the killfile would amount to some
sort of Looterobotomy or '-ectomy'. Actually, more properly this would be
more like war than surgery, thus Lootergenocide, or Loothnic cleansing.
You know, surgery is more like getting your 'lubes' tied?
Bob wrote;
> > What with visualization (no guitar) and this latest prescription (no
> >music), it's like learning to play 'air' guitar in a vaccuum.
>
Vivienne wrote:
> Thanks Boob. Much like the ng, thinking and playing guitar in a vacuum
> leaves no sound / sound reasoning.
No sound/sound reasoning, but a gift of texture, of taste, of round,
round, seasonings. So we re-enter the grand ricorso from philosophico to
poetico.
We are all dumb as statues.
Regards,
Rib
Bob Ashley
<snip>
> When I was eight, my violin teacher did just what you suggested. For the first
> few months we learned pieces mixed with scale practice and learning how to
> resin the bow. In two weeks, I could play a piece, sure spiffy like. It
> sounded like some lobotomized sheep herder hitting a baby with a cat. Is this
> what you want? To teach your students to play a piece when they can't even
> produce a sound tone?
Actually, yes, this piece as you describe it sounds quite intriguing. Do
you have the music for it? How was the 'lobotomized sheep herder' notated?
Little 'crooks' on the 'staff'? Else, do you have it in TAB(by) to
accommodate the 'cat' part?
> PLEASE learn tone production, fretting and simple exercises first. Wait until
> you can play in proper form before trying to learn a piece of music. A solid
> foundation! Champion of all emperors, skyscrapers and classical musicians!
I wonder about 'foundationalism'. I wonder if what we learn is rather more
like the interpenetration of haphazard, but Freudian fogs than the precise
excavations of rationalist holes in which to sink geometric cornerstones.
It's like linear rote learning vs associational memory work. The latter,
although counterintuitive is consistently more productive...in the end.
Dare I suggest that the blooming of pure creativity and energy issued
forth moreso from your description of the 'Cat Concerto' than your
prescription handed down from Nero? Dare I offer that that the former is
stronger for it is based on a female principle of creativity rather than
the male principle of conquest? I'm not suggesting mutual exclusivity
either, but rather, tension between principles.
Maybe the dialectic should eventually resolve somewhere between the
classic stooges..freedom and responsibility. How boring.
Regards,
Rib
Alan Kennedy
should be taught
at the beginning. If only one could begin learning several times! I'm
puzzled about the idea
of spending a year learning 'technical' exercises, apparently necessary
because one hasn't yet learned how to fret a note so as to be able to play
a tune.
Doesn't one have to learn to fret a note sooner or later, even to play a
scale? If one has to learn to fret a note at all in order to play anything,
a scale or a tune, then I'm glad I was started off immediately playing
tunes. I was started on the Noad book, which has some lovely technical
exercises disguised as tunes--or maybe they are lovely tunes disguised as
technical exercises. Now, a little more than a year into it all I'm working
hard on pieces by Carcassi and Carulli (pace Rib), Sor, Brouwer, Villa
Lobos and others.
But I'm also being led into more scale exercises (like the one from Rodrigo
in Pumping Nylon) and
exercises on chord formation and full bar exercises. The result? I loved
being able to
get into the 'real' music of the guitar early on, and loved finding out
that I loved it (it would have
been as valuable in time savings to have discovered I hated it). Now the
technical exercises
are welcome, and i can see how they improve my playing. Clearly, one's
technique has to develop and
improve continually. So i don't subscribe to the view that 'bad' technical
habits get ingrained early on without a lot of technical exercises.
Clearly, the teacher has to pay attention to tone production always.
Admittedly, while I'm not advanced as a student, i do qualify as advanced
in years.
Maybe younger students would benefit from playing technical exercises
exclusively early on, but i doubt it.
possible counter-example: I spent 6 months in India once, learning to play
the drum (pakhwaj, a version of the mrdungm). I was put into the usual
apprentice learning pattern (guru/shishya) and spent several months playing
what seemed to be the same beat on the treble end of the drum, first with
one finger (index) and then with two fingers, index and middle. My teacher
would shout at me in frustration, can't you
hear the difference? I couldn't. Until about 2 months later I could. And
the exercises I was
learning turned out to be the foundation beats for a 'tune'.
--On Wednesday, May 05, 1999, 2:03 PM -0300 Bob Ashley
William Jennings
forced to
provide tunes to satisfy students. Many teachers have to take whatever walks in
the door.
Now, if you were a first year " High Wire Walker " would you run across your
wire?
The Romero's would not allow you to use nails the first year On the other hand,
for an adult who does not aspire to other things this is fine.
Drill instructors shouted at me in boot camp, that may have just ended up
saving my life in Nam. I don't teach but I would never except as a student
anyone who I might have to shout at.
One of the first choices a student must make is " teacher ". He is electing
something of which he has limited knowledge to begin with, how could he/she know
the difference between teachers. Some elect those that are the cheapest others
with high visibility. I say you are only as good as the choices you make.
wdj
Vivienne McLaughlin
wonderful if one (pronounced with silent "w") weed out what is un-essential and with
wip and sharp wit wield a wellrounded reservoir of weducation. Wokay, that may be a
wittle will-o-the-wisp. We can still wonder!
Wivienne
John Philip Dimick
>...I queried the local CG "star" about lessons, he told me he
>had studied with Pepe Romero (!) and that his students don't
>play pieces for TWO YEARS!!
And you believed him?! :-)
Vivienne McLaughlin
> I'm puzzled about the idea of spending a year learning 'technical' exercises,
> apparently necessary because one hasn't yet learned how to fret a note so as
> to be able to play
> a tune.
> Doesn't one have to learn to fret a note sooner or later, even to play a
> scale? If one has to learn to fret a note at all in order to play anything,
> a scale or a tune, then I'm glad I was started off immediately playing
> tunes.
It is not learning to fret a note that is important. If it takes you three weeks
to learn to produce a modest tone, then after three weeks you may be ready to
learn music. What is important is realizing the difference between a casual
guitar player and one who takes it quite seriously. I am among the latter, even
though it is only an avocation to me. Playing music is _entirely not the same_
as performing exercises, although you should perform exercises as if they were a
work of art unto themselves. The quality of musicianship is not the same as the
quality of playing guitar pieces. They are two different animals, although they
may at times cross paths.
>I was started on the Noad book, which has some lovely technical
>exercises disguised as tunes--or maybe they are lovely tunes disguised as
> technical exercises. Now, a little more than a year into it all I'm working
> hard on pieces by Carcassi and Carulli (pace Rib), Sor, Brouwer, Villa
> Lobos and others.
> But I'm also being led into more scale exercises (like the one from Rodrigo
> in Pumping Nylon) and
> exercises on chord formation and full bar exercises. The result? I loved
> being able to
> get into the 'real' music of the guitar early on, and loved finding out
> that I loved it (it would have
> been as valuable in time savings to have discovered I hated it). Now the
> technical exercises
> are welcome, and i can see how they improve my playing. Clearly, one's
> technique has to develop and
> improve continually.
Please don't take this the wrong way, but after a year, I find it hard to
believe you have even begun to understand how important a good technique is in
evoking the finer details of physical and mental playing. I have never met
anyone who, with less than 2 years of playing was anything more than a note
spewing robot. It took me three full years to develop a beautiful tone, and ten
more to sharpen my technique. I wish I had a teacher like Anthony Glise or Pepe
Romero, who would have forced me to stay away from pieces until I had learned
the science of the fretboard and all its magic, before jumping headfirst into
the chaos of infinite musical potentialities.
> So i don't subscribe to the view that 'bad' technical
> habits get ingrained early on without a lot of technical exercises.
How can you say this with a year under your belt? Sorry to be so opinionated,
but it takes years to uncover faults which you think are correct in those first
few years of musical infancy.
> Clearly, the teacher has to pay attention to tone production always.
And the student. The teacher does nothing but help you to identify how to play
correctly.
> Maybe younger students would benefit from playing technical exercises
> exclusively early on, but i doubt it.
The exercises are to teach players how to be artists - performance artists whose
medium is a fretboard and strings. It becomes "technical" when you remove the
soul from it and isolate it as a chore which "must be done" without realizing
the benefit. We do want a good "technique", but as a means to an end - technical
exercises are the means, yet can not be seperated from the creative benefit.
Segovia's Diatonic Scales recommends 2 hours of rest stroke scale practice
daily. Granted, Segovia practiced 6 hours during the day, even into his 90's -
but listen to how he played.
> I spent 6 months in India once, learning to play
> the drum (pakhwaj, a version of the mrdungm). I was put into the usual
> apprentice learning pattern (guru/shishya) and spent several months playing
> what seemed to be the same beat on the treble end of the drum, first with
> one finger (index) and then with two fingers, index and middle. My teacher
> would shout at me in frustration, can't you
> hear the difference? I couldn't. Until about 2 months later I could. And
> the exercises I was
> learning turned out to be the foundation beats for a 'tune'.
You have summed it up quite succinctly.
Vivienne
John Philip Dimick
>Didn't someone here post about a teacher not letting students
>play anything but tech. exercises their whole first year?
I've read that some old sitar schools required students to
meditate on the sound of a single note for a few years (these are
OLD schools!), but I cannot imagine that any modern method -- at
least, any *successful* modern method -- would require such a
foolish thing. That sounds like somethng from the Dark Ages!
Vivienne McLaughlin
> Actually, yes, this piece as you describe it sounds quite intriguing. Do
> you have the music for it? How was the 'lobotomized sheep herder' notated?
> Little 'crooks' on the 'staff'? Else, do you have it in TAB(by) to
> accommodate the 'cat' part?
It requires the innocence and share wide-eyed-ness of youth. Us older folks would
need to procure illicit substances of formidable strength and toxicology. This would
help with our "musical interpretation" in order to hit the high "A" of the cat
screetching or the scale runs of the "baby crying counterpoint in the key of D#".
The shepherd provides a constant bass atonality in the key of G# to the effect of
"bubah - bub - bubl - bubah", etc. The result sounds somewhat akin to, well, a
lobotomized shepherd hitting a baby with a cat, in ABA form. Use this as a
reference. For the "B" part, you may grab the baby and use it to hit the cat,
although I suggest taping down the cat.
> > PLEASE learn tone production, fretting and simple exercises first. Wait until
> > you can play in proper form before trying to learn a piece of music. A solid
> > foundation! Champion of all emperors, skyscrapers and classical musicians!
>
> I wonder about 'foundationalism'. I wonder if what we learn is rather more
> like the interpenetration of haphazard, but Freudian fogs than the precise
> excavations of rationalist holes in which to sink geometric cornerstones.
Actually, it is more akin to existential realism. What is presented before us
solidifies our destiny, and our failure to grasp what is essential to our ideal is
no more cruel than the implosion of a fat sun or the smelling of a fat drunkards'
armpit.
> It's like linear rote learning vs associational memory work. The latter,
> although counterintuitive is consistently more productive...in the end.
Yes. And if those associative links are formed with a dirty, convoluted fountain
rather than a rich, clean pool, it will yeild a smelly lotus. That includes the
obvious connotations between the blossoming of the lotus chakra and the cleanliness
of the vessel which carries it.
> Dare I suggest that the blooming of pure creativity and energy issued
> forth moreso from your description of the 'Cat Concerto' than your
> prescription handed down from Nero? Dare I offer that that the former is
> stronger for it is based on a female principle of creativity rather than
> the male principle of conquest? I'm not suggesting mutual exclusivity
> either, but rather, tension between principles.
Actually, the female principle is at work regardless. The male attempt at conquest
is a means toward union with the womb (if you don't know the one I'm refering, I'm
not at liberty to tell - its not the one you think). It is the "will" whereby
unification with the latent female principle is achieved. This male "point"
microcosm of which the female is the voluminous macrocosm, is directed towards
union. Osiris (or more appropriately, Hadit) and Isis.
However, the tension you refer is what we have now. The fall from grace, the
expulsion from Eden. The Disunion. The Sword, the Serpent, etc.
> Maybe the dialectic should eventually resolve somewhere between the
> classic stooges..freedom and responsibility. How boring.
Yes, Ribald Ribbity Roboob. And we could cultivate hemp to use as clothing rather
than to smoke. Freedom _and_ responsibility.
Vivienne
William Jennings
And not as eloquent as some. ( A. Giacometti )
wdj
Bob Ashley wrote:
> On Wed, 5 May 1999, Vivienne McLaughlin wrote:
>
John Philip Dimick
>How can anyone teach someone who can't fret a !@#$!#$ guitar to
>play a piece of music? Even if its "Marry had a little lamb" in
>single note melody? They cant' even understand how to fret a one
>position scale, and you would send them home from lesson one
>playing Boogie pattern #3 with lead lines?
Not at all. This is where Shearer comes in.
In the Shearer method, the beginning student can learn a nice
little solo the first day -- on the open strings! The open 2nd,
3rd, and 4th strings make a nice little G major triad. Using just
these notes, the first-time student can read and play a nice
little piece that sounds a lot like "Reveille" by the end of the
first lesson. In that same lesson, they have also learned how to
properly hold the guitar, how to make a decent tone with the
thumb, and how to properly position the right hand. Also during
the 1st lesson, they will have played five duets with the
teacher. This is *real* music, played and read by a first-day
student. They always greatly enjoy it.
In the next lesson, rather than teaching them an entire first
position scale -- or even three notes on a single string -- they
instead learn how to properly fret a single note: the A on the
3rd string, 2nd fret. This, imho, is the best introduction to
proper fretting technique. It's simple to understand, simple
enough that the student can also pay attention to the proper
configuration of unused fingers, hand, wrist, elbow, shoulders,
back, neck, and head. ("Sit up straight ... keep your lungs open
.. breathe, don't hunch your shoulders ... keep your head
balanced, don't lean to the left, stay relaxed.... take a good
look at how your fingertip comes right up against the fret,
and make sure wrist is not bent ... that's right, you've got it!
Now, try it without looking at your hand. Keep your shoulders
level and relaxed... There you go, that's it! Good!")
Adding the A to the previous three learned notes opens up new
possibilities for simple melodies. By the end of the second
lesson, the student has played four additional duets with the
teacher, played "prima vista" a nice new solo tune made from the
four notes, learned the basics of properly fretting a note with
the 2nd finger (including how to properly support this action
with the rest of the body), and it's all done with REAL MUSIC.
In the third lesson, the student adds C and D on the 2nd string.
Now the musical possibilities really begin to widen. Five new
duets and three new solos are now available to the student -- and
that's just the pieces from the method book. At this point, I
begin to bring in duets from outside sources. I also have some
"Sounds Like" melodies that I introduce at this point. (My
"Sounds Like" melodies are little melodies that are written to
sound like famous traditional melodies. I don't tell the student
what I am up to. Instead, I just bring out some supplemental
sight-reading pieces and ask the student to run through them.
Usually, after the first few measures, they get a surprised look
on their faces and say, "Hmmm, this sounds like something I've
heard before. Hey, this sounds like Amazing Grace! And this
sounds like Twinkle Twinkle! Heyyyyy!" And then they get big
smiles on their faces and they are eager to play more "Name That
Tune!" ;-)
Anyway, there is no excuse for preventing a student from having a
good musical experince right from the beginning. There is no
reason they cannot learn fundamental technique while having a
real musical experience.
Vivienne McLaughlin
> > I see you've been busy digging up conjugations of the action verb
> > "Lutemann." Might I suggest Looteronomy? He could author our WEBible with a
> > chapter on "Thou shalt learn to play sooner, for later would be a sin."
> > (sorry, Kent - I can't resist - you might say I have a touch of Lutemania)
>
> And by extension, putting Looteroony in the killfile would amount to some
> sort of Looterobotomy or '-ectomy'. Actually, more properly this would be
> more like war than surgery, thus Lootergenocide, or Loothnic cleansing.
> You know, surgery is more like getting your 'lubes' tied?
Luterogenous lutenacy! A cursory lootology suggests you are perhaps engaging in
lootiscrimination. As such, I wish to decry this as lootinfamy, and play no part
in this lutrid display, you lute, lute man!
> Boob wrote;
> > > What with visualization (no guitar) and this latest prescription (no
> > >music), it's like learning to play 'air' guitar in a vaccuum.
> >
> Vivienne wrote:
> > Thanks Boob. Much like the ng, thinking and playing guitar in a vacuum
> > leaves no sound / sound reasoning.
>
> No sound/sound reasoning, but a gift of texture, of taste, of round,
> round, seasonings. So we re-enter the grand ricorso from philosophico to
> poetico.
You must be on the plus side of your bipolar lutenality disorder. Better get some
thorazine, or lutezac quick!
> We are all dumb as statues.
I resemble that remark, and raise you two raspberry doughnuts. A statue couldn't
think, and thus think he's dumb, no? And who is best at pointing fingers, save
the one whose finger tells him to point away from its holder? That is just
luteless reasoning.
Vivienne
Larry Deack
they learn to read rhythms from "real music". Could you expand on this a
bit?
William Jennings
William Jennings wrote:
> And not as eloquent as some. ( A. Giacometti )
" The Boy Who Was Too Slow "
"A young lad was sent to school. He began his lessons with the
other children, and the first lesson the teacher set him was the
straight line, the figure "one". But wheareas the others went on
progressing, this child continued writing the same figure. After
two or three days the teacher came up to him and said, "Have you
finished your lesson?" He said, "No, I'm still writing 'one' " He
went on doing the same thing, and when at the end of the week the
teacher asked him again he said, "I have not yet finished it."
The teacher thought he was an idiot and should be sent away, as
he could not or did not want to learn. At home, the child
continued with the same exercise and the parents also became
tired and disgusted. He simply said "I have not yet learned it, I
am learning it. When I have finished I shall take the other
lessons." The parents said, "The other children are going
further, school has given you up, and you do not show any
progress; we are tired of you." And the lad thought with sad
heart that as he had displeased his parents, too, he had better
leave home. So he went into the wilderness and lived on fruits
and nuts. After a long time he returned to his old school. And
when he saw the teacher he said to him, "I think I have learned
it. See if I have. Shall I write on this wall?" And when he made
his sign, the wall split in two."
-Hazrat Inayan Khan
Sam
Pepe Romero..and since he( the teacher) told me this himself, yes, I
believed him.. I also passed on the pleasure of his instruction.
Sam
John Philip Dimick wrote in message ...
>"Sam" <scul...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>
>>...I queried the local CG "star" about lessons, he told me he
>>had studied with Pepe Romero (!) and that his students don't
>>play pieces for TWO YEARS!!
>
>And you believed him?! :-)
>
Trahd Oogggerg
>Really? My students walk out of the first lesson having played a duet with
me,
>and then go home to work on a lot more music
Couldn't resist, how in the Hell can a young person with no experience
play a duet of any magnitude at all (translated: music) within 30-60 minutes
of touching a guitar. No
way. Kent, you need a good teacher, preferably a pedagogy teacher.
Trahd Oogggerg
>Really? My students walk out of the first lesson having played a duet with
me,
>and then go home to work on a lot more music.
Couldn't resist, how in the Hell can a young person with no experience
play a duet of any magnitude within 30-60 minutes of touching a guitar. No
way. Kent, you need a good teacher. Preferably a pedagogy teacher.
Peter Inglis
Peter Inglis
gui...@migman.com.au
http://www.migman.com.au/aes
Sam wrote in message <7gop9v$9...@dfw-ixnews9.ix.netcom.com>...
<snip>, he told me he had studied with
>Pepe Romero (!) and that his students don't play pieces for TWO YEARS!!
<snip>
Vivienne McLaughlin
> In the Shearer method, the beginning student can learn a nice
> little solo the first day -- on the open strings! The open 2nd,
> 3rd, and 4th strings make a nice little G major triad. Using just
<snip>
> teacher. This is *real* music, played and read by a first-day
> student. They always greatly enjoy it.
Yes, I guess music is relative. Even a one note drone smacked on a stick
by an invalid can be considered music. I think most listeners have a bit
more discriminating distinction between "music" and "logically sequenced
sound".
> <snip lesson plan ad nauseam>
> with the rest of the body), and it's all done with REAL MUSIC.
Thwack, thwack, thwicket. Thwack, thwack, thicket. Thwickety, wickety -
thwack.
All you need do is add a "tink, tonk, tink, tonk" layered on my triplets
and we've got a duo. All this, and on the first lesson with time to
spare for scale practice!
> Anyway, there is no excuse for preventing a student from having a
> good musical experince right from the beginning. There is no
> reason they cannot learn fundamental technique while having a
> real musical experience.
Again, its all relative. I just assume that the student wants to learn
to be a musician and not wallow in the logos of "guitar player" or hide
under the aegis of "hey folks, name this tune" at a party.
Vivienne
Bob Ashley
> As a beginner I read with interest the various points of view about how one
> should be taught
> at the beginning. If only one could begin learning several times! I'm
> puzzled about the idea
> of spending a year learning 'technical' exercises, apparently necessary
> because one hasn't yet learned how to fret a note so as to be able to play
> a tune.
Alan, I think there's some wisdom tucked in your notion to 'begin learning
several times'. I don't know how to explain it, though. Maybe like we
should try to hold on to 'beginner' mind somehow even as we progress?
Alan Kennedy wrote:
> Doesn't one have to learn to fret a note sooner or later, even to play a
> scale? If one has to learn to fret a note at all in order to play anything,
> a scale or a tune, then I'm glad I was started off immediately playing
> tunes. I was started on the Noad book, which has some lovely technical
> exercises disguised as tunes--or maybe they are lovely tunes disguised as
> technical exercises. Now, a little more than a year into it all I'm working
> hard on pieces by Carcassi and Carulli (pace Rib), Sor, Brouwer, Villa
> Lobos and others.
Well Alan you had me nodding right up to the part about those twin
boxCARS, 'Assi' & 'Ulli', the Abbott & Costello of the guitar world! :)
The 'pace', by the way, is appreciated, moreso in that nobody offers it up
in their writing anymore.
I think I'd be a little embarrassed to propose to my beginning student
that she prepare herself for a year of hard work and no music. If nothing
else, the whole aesthetic is a desert in this approach, a kind of Marines
of Music. Sergeant Carter & Gomer Pyle. Imagine a dreary analogy in your
lit classes. Yuck. Examining Prosody, but no Enjoying Ezra Pound? Ick.
But chuck beef to cavier, that's the trip from teh Carboys to Villa Lobos,
one I'd rank with Picasso, a titan of modernism. You're slummin' one
minute, going swank the next. Nice.
Are you self-learning? I can't remember.
Alan Kennedy wrote:
> But I'm also being led into more scale exercises (like the one from
> Rodrigo in Pumping Nylon) and exercises on chord formation and full bar
> exercises. The result? I loved being able to get into the 'real' music
> of the guitar early on, and loved finding out that I loved it (it would
> have been as valuable in time savings to have discovered I hated it).
> Now the technical exercises are welcome, and i can see how they improve
> my playing. Clearly, one's technique has to develop and improve
> continually.
Sounds like self-learning. Okay I guess if you've already got a permit and
had the inspector (teacher) come round to inspect. Make sure you're not
breaching any codes. Would you say you're improvement by technical
exercises is in any way measurable somehow? Or does it just kind of feel
good to be 'working out' pumpin' that nylon.
I ask 'cause there are several players here who seem to advocate
improving technique by really working on the techniques specific to
individual pieces. Like the only way to train the lions is to, well, train
the lions; working with your tabby as technical practice won't cut it.
So this is what I do, (practice techniques in pieces) but with some ironic
resignation I confess that it doesn't work all that great. It's not
enough. Still, I find nothing but doubt in trying to translate the way
technical exercises manifest themselves in real, live pieces. Other
players seem to find nice, neat translations between exercises and pieces.
I think of poetry. You cannot write poetry by saying I'll practice doing
'metaphors' or how about an exercise in 'enjambment' or 'open stanzas'.
Now poetry is no less rigorous an art form than CG playing. As I see it,
once you're up to draft 24 or 74, you may be getting some vague notion
about what techniques are happening. But you practice by writing, then
writing more, not by practicing to write. So, I suppose I'm confused. Who
isn't? Naturally, you know this better than I. I preach to the converted.
Regards,
Rib
Lutemann
<cade...@eathlink.net> writes:
> Couldn't resist, how in the Hell can a young person with no experience
>play a duet of any magnitude at all (translated: music) within 30-60 minutes
>of touching a guitar. No
>way. Kent, you need a good teacher, preferably a pedagogy teacher.
Somebody please give this guy a copy of Aaron Shearer's "Learning the Classic
Guitar, Part 1". Once you see the book, you will know what I'm talking about.
I have my own material that doesn't divide the beat. I start them out, as
Shearer does, with P stroke. Then I have a programed bunch of exercises that
they only play once that brings them through the open 3rd, 2nd and 4th strings
in various rhythms. The first duet they play is "Folk Song". In my guitar
classes, we end with this piece in the first session. The 8 to 10 students in
my class play the melody and I play the second part. It sound like a big lute.
Send me a self addressed stamped envelope, and I'll send you a free copy of
"Folk Song". When I get my material typed out in Finale, I'll offer it all
free to anyone in the news group.
BTW, it's you that needs the teacher. I can tell by your comments that you've
never met one.
Kent Murdick
-----------------------------------------------------------------
E-mail me for a free catalog...NEW, IMPROVED WEB SITE!!!
Free Guitar Music: http://members.aol.com/lutemann/guitar.html
Aaron Shearer Discussion Board: http://199.20.31.179/shearer
Bob Ashley
> Alan Kennedy wrote:
>
> > I'm puzzled about the idea of spending a year learning 'technical' exercises,
> > apparently necessary because one hasn't yet learned how to fret a note so as
> > to be able to play
> > a tune.
> > Doesn't one have to learn to fret a note sooner or later, even to play a
> > scale? If one has to learn to fret a note at all in order to play anything,
> > a scale or a tune, then I'm glad I was started off immediately playing
> > tunes.
Vivienne wrote:
> It is not learning to fret a note that is important. If it takes you
> three weeks to learn to produce a modest tone, then after three weeks
> you may be ready to learn music. What is important is realizing the
> difference between a casual guitar player and one who takes it quite
> seriously. I am among the latter, even though it is only an avocation to
> me. Playing music is _entirely not the same_ as performing exercises,
> although you should perform exercises as if they were a work of art unto
> themselves. The quality of musicianship is not the same as the quality
> of playing guitar pieces. They are two different animals, although they
> may at times cross paths.
Funky. A dichotomy is drawn between casual (group A) and serious
guitarists (group B). Vivienne says she's a serious guitarist (group B),
but then it is 'only an avocation' (group A). So, a 'casually' serious
guitarist'. Okay. Wheeeeeeee! I'm one of those too, then. A serious
slouch.
I'm not quite sure what the causal relationship is between between being
serious and doing things right. I've met some pretty solemn lawyers who's
virtuosity with the law would pale alongside Bozo the Clown's. But they're
serious. Closer to our universe, I agree with Lutemann's verdict on
Segovia's scales, a quite serious enterprise, doubtless, but correct? Ask
my cockatoo as he flushes.
More to the point: does Vivienne's response answer to Alan's query?
Vivienne? Alan? Seems like a lot of gaps in understanding are forming
fast.
Alan wrote:
> >I was started on the Noad book, which has some lovely technical
> >exercises disguised as tunes--or maybe they are lovely tunes disguised as
Vivienne wrote:
> Please don't take this the wrong way, but after a year, I find it hard
> to believe you have even begun to understand how important a good
> technique is in evoking the finer details of physical and mental
> playing. I have never met anyone who, with less than 2 years of playing
> was anything more than a note spewing robot. It took me three full years
> to develop a beautiful tone, and ten more to sharpen my technique. I
> wish I had a teacher like Anthony Glise or Pepe Romero, who would have
> forced me to stay away from pieces until I had learned the science of
> the fretboard and all its magic, before jumping headfirst into the chaos
> of infinite musical potentialities.
It's sounds to me as if Alan really *has* begun to understand what he
needs to in order to get on with his learning project, and quite well too.
Vivienne sees the 'half-empty' glass; to me it looks 'half-full'. Were I
his teacher I might be quite pleased to hear him talk such talk; I might
even offer something about precocity. Perspective is everything. Fairly,
though, I think there is some heft in Vivienne's speculations, but this is
what they remain in the end.
I don't get Vivienne's regret that someone like Romero didn't have the
chance to banish her from art with the higher purpose in mind of having
her learn art. Seemingly, having acquired a 'beautiful' tone and technique
to match, why not celebrate the actual route taken, rather than the missed
hypothetical path. The former success has happened, the latter proposed is
conjecture, perhaps even romantic and whimsical?
Alan wrote:
> > So i don't subscribe to the view that 'bad' technical
> > habits get ingrained early on without a lot of technical exercises.
Vivienne wrote:
> How can you say this with a year under your belt? Sorry to be so
> opinionated, but it takes years to uncover faults which you think are
> correct in those first few years of musical infancy.
This rebuff is the sort thing Galileo got. Gangs of others with worthy
points to make get it too. Authority rests in the
established, traditional priesthood, for no particular reasons other than
authority rests in the established traditional priesthood.
As the Wizard of Oz barked out to Dorothy's query (something along the
lines of Alan's)
"Silence whippersnapper!
I am the Great and Powerful Wizard of Oz!"
Must we send Alan off to bring us back the broomstick of the Wicked Witch
of the West before we'll grant him audience?
Experience, seniority has summarily overruled critical enquiry. I think
Alan's is a critical distance he should be making, and I think it's a line
of thinking worth pursuing, not choking off for the sole reason that
'authority rests...'
Socrates, o great teacher, where are you when we need you...here!?
Perhaps some faults 'take years to uncover', but reasonably, most do not.
Most faults take minutes, or even seconds to uncover. Any fault that takes
years to uncover must be of the fine-tuned, experts-only variety, lest one
is the village idiot who's been wrestling with a bar chord technique for
the past thirteen years. This argument also seems to presume that only the
seasoned expert would even have the 'eye' to spot such a fault. We are
talking different levels of fault-finding.
Vivienne wrote:
> The exercises are to teach players how to be artists - performance
> artists whose medium is a fretboard and strings. It becomes "technical"
> when you remove the soul from it and isolate it as a chore which "must
> be done" without realizing the benefit. We do want a good "technique",
> but as a means to an end - technical exercises are the means, yet can
> not be seperated from the creative benefit.
Hey, nice! You're pulling music and exercise closer together here,
creeping, a little...a weensie bit closer to Lutemann's position. A
little? Perhaps he too might admit that 'Folk Song' was probably not
conceived first as music, but ah, what the hell, we'll call it a song
anyhoo! After all, are not Da Vinci's anatomical sketches, art? Don't ask
me. Roses by other names? Thorns too?
Vivienne wrote:
> Segovia's Diatonic Scales recommends 2 hours of rest stroke scale
> practice daily. Granted, Segovia practiced 6 hours during the day, even
> into his 90's - but listen to how he played.
Russets, from what I hear, are good baking potatoes. I wonder into which
cultivar Segovia will reincarnate. If only I were in his furrow now! What
his eyes would say.
Alan wrote:
<snip>
> > the drum (pakhwaj, a version of the mrdungm). I was put into the usual
Funny, Mr. Dung. The perfect guy to nurture nature and Mr. Potato Head's
resurrection.
Mr. Potato Head. I love you.
Regards,
Rib
Lutemann
<Pine.GSO.3.95.iB1.0.99...@halifax.chebucto.ns.ca>, Bob
Ashley <ax...@chebucto.ns.ca> writes:
>Actually, yes, this piece as you describe it sounds quite intriguing. Do
>you have the music for it? How was the 'lobotomized sheep herder' notated?
>Little 'crooks' on the 'staff'? Else, do you have it in TAB(by) to
>accommodate the 'cat' part?
>
Please send a SASE, and I'll send you the piece. Of course you must realize
that there are about twenty exercises that they play and clap before hand.
Lutemann
(John Philip Dimick) writes:
>Usually, after the first few measures, they get a surprised look
>on their faces and say, "Hmmm, this sounds like something I've
>heard before. Hey, this sounds like Amazing Grace! And this
>sounds like Twinkle Twinkle! Heyyyyy!" And then they get big
>smiles on their faces and they are eager to play more "Name That
>Tune!" ;-)
>
>Anyway, there is no excuse for preventing a student from having a
>good musical experince right from the beginning. There is no
>reason they cannot learn fundamental technique while having a
>real musical experience.
>
>--
>John Philip Dimick
>j...@guitarist.com
>www.guitarist.com
>
>
Beautifully said, John. It's things like this that make me think that maybe
you and I miscommunicate more than disagree.
Bob Ashley
> (John Philip Dimick) writes:
> >Usually, after the first few measures, they get a surprised look
> >on their faces and say, "Hmmm, this sounds like something I've
> >heard before. Hey, this sounds like Amazing Grace! And this
> >sounds like Twinkle Twinkle! Heyyyyy!" And then they get big
> >smiles on their faces and they are eager to play more "Name That
> >Tune!" ;-)
> >
> >Anyway, there is no excuse for preventing a student from having a
> >good musical experince right from the beginning. There is no
> >reason they cannot learn fundamental technique while having a
> >real musical experience.
Lutemann wrote:
> Beautifully said, John. It's things like this that make me think that maybe
> you and I miscommunicate more than disagree.
Yes, nicely said, John. Lutemann too. I don't know about the JPD/Lutemann
miscommunications, but one of the ambiguities troubling this present
thread is the meaning of 'music'.
Somehow an illusory dichotomy has been set up between music and technical
exercises, the former being legitimated as a welcomed guest at the dinner
table of art, the latter demoted to status of scullery maid.
I'm not suggesting they are the same thing either. But maybe they are
dogs. They might interbreed, given the chance. Make new crossbreds,
sometimes with more vigor than either purebred And evidence of some
technically motivated pieces already suggests this interbreeding has
taken place.
Myself, I'd say some of the stuff in 'Pumping Nylon' is 'mongrel' music.
Now what are we going to do with those yipping purebred chihuahuas,
Carcassi and Carulli? Make of them a new breed, an 'Assulli'? Joking, I
take it back; these guys are quite the mongrels. There, now don't say I
never compliment them, Fido and Rex.
Regards,
Rib
Erik Johannesson
who go up in the morning, ans sit and 'jam' with just using one single note.
For some hours. Then they include a second note and go on for some more
hours. Then one more and so on....
Sounds like fun... Haven't tried of obvious reasons ;)
John Philip Dimick wrote in message ...
>"Erik Johannesson" <er...@telia.com> wrote:
>
>>Didn't someone here post about a teacher not letting students
>>play anything but tech. exercises their whole first year?
>
>I've read that some old sitar schools required students to
>meditate on the sound of a single note for a few years (these are
>OLD schools!), but I cannot imagine that any modern method -- at
>least, any *successful* modern method -- would require such a
>foolish thing. That sounds like somethng from the Dark Ages!
>
Lutemann
writes:
>I had a teacher who told a story about that. He said there are sitar players
>who go up in the morning, ans sit and 'jam' with just using one single note.
>For some hours. Then they include a second note and go on for some more
>hours. Then one more and so on....
>
>Sounds like fun... Haven't tried of obvious reasons ;)
>
Anyone listen to Chuck Berry's lead on "Johnny Be Good" lately?
Erik Johannesson
routine on pages 48-54?
Vivienne McLaughlin wrote in message ...
>
>Erik Johannesson wrote in message <372f3...@d2o27.telia.com>...
>>>1. The "basic seven" daily exercises
>>
>>I'm sure I've heard of them, but I'm not sure which ones you're referring
>>to?
>
>
>You can find them in Tennant's book "Pumping Nylon."
>Look at http://www.barnesandnoble.com
>
>They involve variations of chromatic walks, the "Spider", and right hand
>pima alternations with left hand 1- 2 - 3 - 4 movement. If you need them I
>can scan and mail, etc. (shhhhh!)
>
>Vivienne
>
>
Vivienne McLaughlin
> Yes I have a copy of that book, you must be referring to his daily warm-up
> routine on pages 48-54?
>
Yes and no. Well, yes. And, well, no. The daily warm-up is grouped into seven
and I sometimes substitute it with other "basic seven" exercises. I know of
several other books that have so-called basic seven's and they are all pretty
much the same. If you bothered to practice them all, you may end up with a basic
49 or a basic 98.
Seven warm-up exercises are perfect for beginners - they are easy to remember
and there are just enough to keep you engaged.
If you have Tennant's book, you'll do just fine, though. Just spend an hour (or
two) a day working on exercises and forget about the denominations.
Vivienne
Alan Kennedy
--On Thursday, May 06, 1999, 12:28 AM -0300 Bob Ashley
<ax...@chebucto.ns.ca> wrote:
> Sounds like self-learning. Okay I guess if you've already got a permit and
> had the inspector (teacher) come round to inspect. Make sure you're not
> breaching any codes. Would you say you're improvement by technical
> exercises is in any way measurable somehow? Or does it just kind of feel
> good to be 'working out' pumpin' that nylon.
Bob, computer glitches have kept me out of touch for a few days. No I'm not
learning
on my own. I've got a teacher that I like and respect a lot. He teaches
from the point
of view of a performer, constantly trying to get me to recognize the music
that my
production of notes doesn't quite arrive at. He concentrates my attention
on tone
production. He has also let me have my head a lot, when I wanted to explore
pieces of
'real' music. He keeps a careful eye, though. E.g. i wanted to plunge into
Villa Lobos, but found
I couldn't even figure out the music. He pointed out a couple of things in
the 3rd Prelude
that were in my range and I started working on that. The Pumping Nylon
exercise, in general,
he is not very keen on. But the one particular scale exercise he liked
because it requires
some musical articulation.
Your confusion over the chicken/egg issue in learning does you credit. I
expect some kind
of oscillation between two modes is the norm.
Alan
Bob Ashley
On Fri, 7 May 1999, Alan Kennedy wrote:
> Bob, computer glitches have kept me out of touch for a few days. No I'm
> not learning on my own. I've got a teacher that I like and respect a
> lot. He teaches from the point of view of a performer, constantly trying
> to get me to recognize the music that my production of notes doesn't
> quite arrive at. He concentrates my attention on tone production. He has
> also let me have my head a lot, when I wanted to explore pieces of
> 'real' music. He keeps a careful eye, though. E.g. i wanted to plunge
> into Villa Lobos, but found I couldn't even figure out the music. He
> pointed out a couple of things in the 3rd Prelude that were in my range
> and I started working on that. The Pumping Nylon exercise, in general,
> he is not very keen on. But the one particular scale exercise he liked
> because it requires some musical articulation.
The main thing in your case, as I see it, is the healthy and productive
interrelationship of student and teacher. I especially like the idea of
letting you go ahead to explore selected excerpts under your teacher's
supervision. I think this aspect of your learning speaks to your
aesthetic aspirations. My situation was the same, but as a kid. I'd offer
that it was for this being allowed to shadow-box with the big pieces that
I kept up my playing as a teen. Or sometimes I felt like a kid sitting in
Captian Jean-Luc Picard's chair, driving the Enterprise to who knows
where.
In fact, I feel quite strange and alone in this newsgroup since I don't
think I've read a single post from any of our participants recounting
their childhood adventures with the classical guitar. And this is exactly
what they were for me...adventures. Yes, the exercises had to be done,
like farm chores, everyday. But the learning was never distanced from art
for very long. My teacher let me 'fiddle' with bits of the Chaconne when I
was 11 or 12! Or whatever else he might 'entice' me with. It really was
like driving a starship, fudging the Chaconne! Or at least I imagined it
so. So if there are others who learned as as a kid, PIPE UP! (I'll
initiate a new thread; bets that it'll die in a day?)
Now, I can fudge that Chaconne just as badly as I did then, but I don't
care. It's the artistic hunger, *NOT TECHNIQUE*, that keeps me going
still. It's the FUN. Never lost that. The fact that there aren't too many
players here who learned as kids I think sometimes helps to explain why we
regularly find here very rigid militancy about which methodology will work
best. Boring adults. Had more learned as kids we might be hearing more
about our pratfuls, practical jokes, and near utter unconscious learning.
To me, some of the comments here are like watching Grandma trying to go
down the slide at the playground. Cripes, you have to explain bloody well
every-godamm-thing to her..and then she still looks like a complete
klutzoid bumpling donw the tube! Sure, give grandma lots of credit...but
for her courage and determination, certainly not her slide technique!
At 9 or 13, I didn't give a flying fuck what technique or 'lesson plan'
or 'method' I was been instructed in. Kids don't worry about that stuff.
Desire is all. Teachers says, 'Do this', so you shut up and do it. None of
this, "Ah, but so-and-so says I should do 'that', not 'this'. And guess
what, kids kick our sorry adult butts in learning practically anything,
especially linguistic or artistic skills. Why is that? One reason might be
that kids aren't dragged down by that ponderous chain--critical thinking.
Innocence is just as powerful, but maybe not at the same stuff.
Just think of how you'd try to learn skateboarding as a adult. Forget it,
right? To me, that's not much different that learning the CG as an adult.
In both cases, the student has arrived 10, 20, or 50 years late for class.
But better late than never, right? Of course.
Alan wrote:
> Your confusion over the chicken/egg issue in learning does you credit. I
> expect some kind of oscillation between two modes is the norm.
Honestly, I cannot think of one thing about which for me, confusion
doesn't preside. I live 'chaos theory'.
Regards,
Rib
Peter Inglis
Peter Inglis
gui...@migman.com.au
http://www.migman.com.au/aes
Bob Ashley wrote in message ...
<snip> I don't
>think I've read a single post from any of our participants recounting
>their childhood adventures with the classical guitar. <snip
Lutemann
writes:
>I didn't have any.... took up CG at about 30!
I didn't either. I guess I was about 20 when I took up the classic guitar.