Practising without a guitar

Costs are rising and times are tough.
Please consider a donation to keep this
place going.

Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.

This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.

We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.

You are logged in as Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >>Discussions >>General >>

Page: [1]

Message

<< Newer Topic Older Topic >>

Ron.M

Posts: 7051
Joined: Jul. 7 2003
From: Scotland

Practising without a guitar

Hi Amigos,
I don't really have a great amount of time to practise. A Sunday afternoon is my main free time.
Today, things didn't go too well...I wasn't really in the mood, so after a couple of hours I just packed it in and did something else.
However I made a good improvement, because while I was doing something else, I had a couple of phrases humming around my head which just suddenly "clicked".
Now, to me that is a far greater improvement than anything I can do farting around with my fingers on the guitar.
Unless something makes complete sense to you phrasing-wise, compás-wise and feeling-wise...then you can tickle them strings till the cow's come home and not get anywhere.

Rafael, the brilliant Flamenco guitarist who now lives in Oxford turned me on to that.

He said (on Bulerías) " You've got to sing your falsetas, feel them...when you are walking down the road you hum them, with your feet walking in two's and your fingers snapping in 3's. Feel it with your body..."

It's so true, (for me anyway) that my progress is at least 50% thinking about the stuff and the other 50% actually practising with the guitar.

Once you know what you want to play, and how you want to play it, then it's just a matter of trying to get the fingers to follow, which may require a bit of work, but not as much as just playing blind, thoughtless exercises, and you learn a lot more from it.

Just as an experiment, how many fast picado enthusiasts out there can actually sing or mouth or hear in their head the exact picado they are trying to do?
Or do they need the guitar to give fingering and audible clues as to how it actually goes?

(I know Mike likes this kind of stuff...

)

cheers

Ron

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 27 2005 20:54:52

Miguel de Maria

Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

Ron,
that's true, you have to be 100% sure about the phrase musically and rhythmically or else you ain't got nada. Usually if you are having an unexplained difficulty it will come down to rhythm. Another aspect of this is uncertainty about which fingers go where. Anything on the guitar, if you are having a problem, you should check to see if you actually know which fingers go where, the sequence, how much pressure you really need, etc.

The body can do much more than we give it credit for, but we have to program it with correct information.

I do a lot of mental practicing, and that includes intervals, arpeggios, and the locations of notes on the guitar.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 27 2005 21:18:31

Guest

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

You've got to know how to lilt a tune before you can fiddle it.

_____________________________

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 27 2005 21:42:14

ToddK

Posts: 2961
Joined: Dec. 6 2004

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

Great points..

I sing to myself alot. If i'm alone, i sing out loud.

the phrases take on new meaning after you
have sung them alot. When you sing, your personality comes through
instantly and naturally. I think this is a way of "Internalizing" a phrase.

And it doesnt really have to be connected to the guitar. I think the point
is to have the phrase, wether you sing it, or tap it out on a table, or
whatever.

I think many people get locked into visualizing everything as a shape or
pattern, or fingering. This is bad in a way.
It locks you in. Its better to leave melodies in the air, and not always
try to connect it to a key, position, etc etc... When the vision is complete
in your mind, and you can sing it, then sit down and transcribe it.

I often write falsetas in a midi editor. This lets me follow my ear,
and not my fingers. We often fall into the same habitual positions
when picking up the guitar. Instead of letting your brain and ears
spin melodies, we follow pre'determined scales and such.
Its good to break out of the confines of the guitar once in a while.

I wrote the last falsetta in my Alegrias in a midi editor. Took me about
20 minutes to write it. Took two weeks before i could play it right.:)
You'll notice that falsetta is fairly different as far as prhasing and positioning.
There's a couple of grips that were totally new, that i hadnt encountered before.

Ramble Ramble Ramble.....
TK

_____________________________

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 27 2005 21:50:20

Ricardo

Posts: 14832
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

I transcribed a falseta once while driving in the car. I kept rewinding it and singing it until I got all the rhythms right. The high notes I hit "falsetto". Took awhile, but I had time sitting in traffic. A few days later I still remembered it and sat down and tried to find the fingerings on the guitar. Amazing how much easier that was than going through a score! Not everyone can sing in key and rhythm though. That is a whole other difficult technique. But you guys are right about how the fingers can have a mind of their own, and that doesn't always help you learn or play better.

Ricardo

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 28 2005 8:24:26

sorin popovici

Posts: 427
Joined: Jan. 7 2005
From: Iasi, Romania

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

Well this is really a good advice....I have a little something that is weird to post here
on this topic.
I had a Bach piece (BWV1006 gavotte en rondeau) which i played over and
over again until my hands know it at any hour in the day or night.I realised only after
doing an mp3 that i really am doing something beautiful that I dont hear when I play.
I do a good bass line which has sense ...it's not about that i'm a good player(cause i'm not) but every time i rehearsed it i tend to play it louder and with even less effort(cause
I thought that one of the secrets that the old players emphasize is this ...be more relaxed ...and i try to use this tip).

The funny thing is this : now that I got some basics in "economics" of movement and effort i can really play it ...but I discovered that I cant really hear it .

The funny thing is this ....in a way i'm proud ...cause i did it (this is the first tune
segovia i ever listened)....but I cant enjoy it....so it's like I killed a dream instead of
turning a dream into reality.
I dont know ...it's like i'm killing the music when i learn it ...cause once u get the aritmetics of fingers right ....i tend to say ....oh,that is not really hard....and because of
that ...I really dont apreciate it like i did before.

I am really upset ...that u can really learn to do complicated things ...but have no clue
what u are really doing .It's like what's the point of memorising some moves....if u dont
know their meaning .I thought that after watching some of my virtuoso buddies playing computer games...after half and hour i said to myself ..."isnt that what i've been really doing for six years ?".And I had the nerve to say that I was playing bach

.

Now that I discovered this ...I'm so ashame ...I invested some time ,some guys know
me like "the guy who's playing guitar " ...I cant break it to them
that I really dont have such a good idea about this topic called music...damn I'm pissed.
That's a new dilema ...how the hell could I ever excuse me for investing so much time
and get so little results(I'm thinking i should have used half of the time learn some music
and know other stuff too pretty well)

Anyway , i could go on and on ....but I said what i wanted ...now ,i'll be quiet for a while
and let it pass...tomorrow , I'll surely think that I was wrong.

What did I post it (if tomorrow i'll think that i was wrong) ..? well , it's funny in a weird way....

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 28 2005 22:57:52

Ricardo

Posts: 14832
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

Sorin, don't feel so bad man! Bach wrote polyphonic music, and it is almost impossible to comprehend the two or more voice melodies as separate entities while listening once, much less playing them together on one instrument. You can focus on one voice or another, or sit back and enjoy the harmony created by both parts while letting your fingers worry about it. That is the beauty of Bach and polyphony.

Think about piano players. They can learn Bach linearly, one hand at a time, or vertically, both hands together. That is hard stuff. Guitarists have to do it all vertically, that is just the way it is. If you want to "understand" your Bach piece better, go back and learn just one voice, like the bass line. Record it. Then learn another voice and play it over top of the bass line. You will be surprised how simple the music really is broken down like that.

Ricardo

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 29 2005 3:46:13

duende

Posts: 3053
Joined: Dec. 15 2003
From: Sweden

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to sorin popovici)

I would say that hearing the music within those notes is something that we all nead to improve
In all kinds of music. As a jazz guitarist i can say that i sound one way to my ears while playing and one way when i listen to a recording of myself playing. It seems to be a musical
problem in general. To be able to hear how we actually sound "inside" the music is harder that we think.

I hope you guys know what im trying to say

Henrik

_____________________________

This is hard stuff!
Don't give up...
And don't make it a race.
Enjoy the ray of sunshine that comes with every new step in knowledge.

RON

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 29 2005 8:06:52

Miguel de Maria

Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to duende)

This is one reason why I consider CG to be harder than flamenco...the sheer harmonic density. In flamenco or other types of folk music, you generally have one chord per sequence or "line". But in classical, you can have a chord per beat! In other words, there is a lot more "information" packed into a single measure of classical. That is why it is so hard to memorize and learn and understand. I think when it comes down to it, you can learn classical as easily as flamenco, but it requires a high level familiarity with harmony--learning how a sequence of chords is the same as a single idea. But--it's harder. On the other hand, flamenco requires that strength and that resolve to really express the rhythm with conviction.

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 29 2005 21:37:20

Escribano

Posts: 6416
Joined: Jul. 6 2003
From: England, living in Italy

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Miguel de Maria)

quote:

This is one reason why I consider CG to be harder than flamenco...the sheer harmonic density

Let's not judge music by it's technical complexity - it's the way it makes you feel and flamenco wins because it makes me feel something and there are less technocrats around, at least for now.

For me, the guitar is not a puzzle or a degree course, it is hardly started and can never be finished.

My two cents.

_____________________________

Foro Flamenco founder and Admin

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 29 2005 21:44:21

Miguel de Maria

Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Escribano)

Well, music is music. Classical is not better than blues is not better than flamenco is not better than Mongolian violin music. If you want to play something great, then you have to master it. Otherwise, you are probably spending too much of your mind and heart on technique and not enough on expressing music. So if something is much more complex, it takes that much more mastery to really make it sing. That's why I think it's harder. Not better....

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 29 2005 23:19:45

Ricardo

Posts: 14832
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

quote:

This is one reason why I consider CG to be harder than flamenco...the sheer harmonic density.

That does not make it harder or even more complex really. It depends on the composer you are talking about. And also, it seems you are talking more about composing than interpretation. Which is "harder", contrapuntal music or linear music? Depends. Rapid harmonic movement does not make something "hard" to play necessarily.

But....in general, you can take your average modern flamenco virtuosso and challenge him to learn a classical piece. Chances are he could get it down pretty well. Then take your average modern classical virtuosso and ask him to learn a flamenco piece. Chances are, it won't be as convincing. This is a generalization of course.

Ricardo

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 31 2005 9:14:24

Miguel de Maria

Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

Okay Richard, you learn the Chaconne, and I'll see if I can get Stanley Yates to learn a Siguriyas. Then we'll run them side by side. Sound fair? :)

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Mar. 31 2005 15:06:55

Ricardo

Posts: 14832
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

I am flattered you consider me for the flamenco "virtuosso". I am up for the challenge. Chaconne in Dm, I checked out the recording of Segovia. It is like 16 minutes! I don't know Stanley Yates, but he must be good. I think to be fair he would have to learn like 3 complete siguiryas transcriptions and combine them into one piece. Clock starts now!

Ricardo

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 1 2005 20:09:51

Ron.M

Posts: 7051
Joined: Jul. 7 2003
From: Scotland

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ricardo)

Sound good Mike,
Have you emailed Stanley?
I like Sabicas's Siguiriyas solo from "The Queen Of The Gypsies" album.
So you could suggest that one.
Not too technical for a good guitar classical player.
And it's only just over a couple of minutes long...

cheers

Ron

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 1 2005 22:21:29

Miguel de Maria

Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

No, Richard, I was joking... unfortunately Stanley and I aren't on personal terms. I do think you are a great player, good enough to use as a "test subject" for sure.

Your response is interesting to me because I assume you do know enough about classical guitar to make an informed judgement, but what you think is different than me. Something like the Chaconne is incredibly complex; there are no "hooks", there is no tradition of cante to fall back upon to understand what he is doing. Of course it is a set of variations based upon a Spanish dance.

Ron, you should check out Stanley as he is a very good player. He lives in Great Britain somewhere, probably you could hop in the car and see him, eh? :)

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 1 2005 22:25:43

Ricardo

Posts: 14832
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ron.M)

Shoot! I just learned about 2:20 minutes of it (actually the Segovia version is 13:50). I have a score, but I am memorizing it. Bach does a lot of repeating so far, w/ little variations at the end of each section. Not too hard. Then there are straight 16ths where he as a melodic sequence moving around a chord progression. I am trying to do it in compas (slow 3/4), unlike Segovia. Actually he starts playing in compas where the 16th notes start. But there are some weird awkward things. Since it is not a guitar piece, there are some hard jumps and things for the left hand, some pretzel twists. And there are some strange harmonic movements like resolving on beat 2, but I am only 2minutes into it. Got to go to work, but I will keep working on it tomorrow.

I understand why this piece is looked at as a huge challenge. It is long. If you just sit and sight read it, it is a bear. But if you notice the little double bar lines (I see them in the Japanese score I have), the rhythmic phrasing is simple and clear. I just learned each part up to the double bar and repeated until I could keep the compas. Each one is a "falseta". Memorizing is easy if you think rhythmically.

I still want to hear a classical guy play siguiriyas! Or even a rumba!

Ricardo

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 1 2005 23:06:20

Miguel de Maria

Posts: 3532
Joined: Oct. 20 2003
From: Phoenix, AZ

RE: Practising without a guitar (in reply to Ricardo)

Ricardo,
you're doing good, man. When I get enough skeelz, I'm going to learn that piece. Gigs will go by fast when I'm playing pieces that long! :) Isn't it a beautiful piece? You could cop a lot of that for some falsetas por solea por bulerias :)

I have a friend who is an accomplished CGer and I think a good flamenco player too--his name is Craig Alden Dell. He concertizes, plays the Aranjuez with orchestra, and has a couple albums out. Here was his response to my question, which is harder:

"Hey Miguel,
It has been my personal experience that all things considered, the Chaconne
would be.
Of course, things are relative too, like, to play Flamenco at Vicente
Amigo's level compared to a [particular classical guitarist] or etc., then I would say that
Flamenco is the more difficult. One thing that is quite challenging in the
Flamenco genre is the mastery of the rhythms to the point where physicality
is transcended and Duende steers the player to a place of sheer
improvisational genius outside of technical limitations. This would be to
attain the height of what can be reached within the human experience and
therefore considerations of levels of difficulty fall by the wayside.
However, the reason the I feel that all things considered, Classical guitar
is the "harder" of the two is because in a concert setting I've noticed that
it is much harder to maintain the level of silence needed to distinguish the
attack of right hand for the Classical guitar in contrast to that silence,
as compared to the attack rendered by the apt Flamenco guitarist which
glorifies the acceptance and even encouragement of all manner of percussive
noise indigenous to the form. In other words, total technical clarity is a
must with one and not even so much as a consideration with the other.
Although one should be clean in either style, an almost "noiseless
perfection" of execution must be present before the Classical player can
even be considered in the running, whereas this isn't even part of the
criterion of Flamenco guitar.
I really adore the "heart" aspect of Flamenco which happens simultaneously
with a good player. To attain this with Classical guitar is a much greater
challenge in my opinion. So much must first be in place before the heart is
revealed if at all.
You obviously have a pretty congruent network of folks to spend your day
with. This is great!! I'd like to be there!
Until later,
- Craig"

REPORT THIS POST AS INAPPROPRIATE | Date Apr. 2 2005 16:24:45