PDL says you dont need to study !

PDL says you dont need to study ! (Full Version)

Foro Flamenco: http://www.foroflamenco.com/
- Discussions: http://www.foroflamenco.com/default.asp?catApp=0
- - General: http://www.foroflamenco.com/in_forum.asp?forumid=13
- - - PDL says you dont need to study !: http://www.foroflamenco.com/fb.asp?m=244748

Message

kudo -> PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 18:08:37)
http://es.noticias.yahoo.com/paco-luc%C3%ADa-asegura-guitarristas-necesitan-estudiar-193437737.html what do you think? [:D]

tele -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 18:20:48)
"pueden quedar con la imaginación limitada por la teoría" Leaving with imagination limited to theory or something like that... " Sin embargo, recomiendo que los músicos nuevos aprendan música y teoría" new musicians should learn music and theory. . I think here his words have been bended a bit that he would be saying that musicians shouldn't study. It's usual when somebody not understanding music writes an article about music, he even doesn't understand what paco is basically saying. I think he is saying that theory is not necessary as musicality(or knowing how to play) can be obtained through oral tradition(like he says he did) and experience with other people. If you wouldn't study anything what could you play? where goes the line between just playing and studying? Remember that paco played 8-10 hours as a kid per day and he says he's glad he did so. If that wasn't studying I don't know what is. Just another article with misunderstanding from the writer of the article I think[8D] EDIT: "Paco de Lucía aseguró que "los guitarristas no necesitan estudiar", porque los que lo hacen mucho "pueden quedar con la imaginación limitada por la teoría"," Because those who study alot can be left with imagination limited to theory. Saying that those who study alot might become limited is different from saying studying is not necessary.

mark74 -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 18:31:50)
Agree with Tele There seems to be some folk legend among guitarists that flamencos don't study music. They study music intensively, they just don't use the standard notes and theory of the western classical tradition. They have their own terminology and their own theory. My Spanish is poor, unfortunately, but from what I glimpsed I'm guessing he means they don't need to learn to read notes on a staff and study theory based on that system, but you know Spanish fluently I think (Kudo) so if I'm wrong I stand corrected.

Arash -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 18:44:45)
He is totally right. Too much Theory and academic approach can limit your creativity and fantasy in flamenco and also your learning speed. After all its music, its not mathematics. Specially such a genre as flamenco which is full of passion, energy and emotions needs a more 'relaxed' and temperamental approach. This is not to say that those non chalance "do it your way and be happy and don't listen to anyone and the naysayers" hippie type of recommandations i sometimes read in the foro is the way to go. Thats bullsh.t. There are many rules which you have to follow and learn. But those kind of wikipedia and university lectures i sometimes was reading in threads like that compas theory thread are equally boring and useless. Its also proven that you learn fastest and best with all your sences together at the same time (eyes, ears, hands, body, etc.) as opposed to seperate the steps and read a book before you even know how to pick out your guitar out of its case. Thats why if you simply play together with others or your teacher or at least a lot of videos/audio, you can learn it all. Of course its easy for Paco to say what he said, because he is Paco [:D]

tele -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 18:51:41)
I think every flamenco guitarist would like to learn through oral tradition like paco did but very few have the chance. I suppose we have to study something to say the least. Flamenco is largely based on dominant phrygian scale with some occasional notes outside the scale and not to know and understand theory in terms of scales and how the notes of scale can make a chord would make playing for me a whole lot more difficult. I agree there's no necessity to study too much as paco said but not to study music theory at all would make it a whole lot more difficult to play anything outside pre-learned pieces or falsetas. Basically you would have to have heck of a musical ear to know what your next notes are going to sound like without knowing theory at all. To learn all basic scales and modes on the whole fretboard takes only about a month and after that one can become much more fluent in improvisation and writing/understanding music. I personally like to use the basic scales as a base and occasionally include chromatic off-scale notes depending on the situation when improvising with a rumba backing track for example.

El Kiko -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 18:51:44)
noit quite .. he says that he, recommends that new musicians learn new music and theory , and have a teacher . even though he came from an oral tradition that was driven by passion and madness, but also brings sophistication. What his main point is , that you can do a lot with imagination that is not be limited by theory ,.... I do get what he means ...when I was at college i used to practice all kind if scales and stuff .. maybe too much .. and then when playing even in a band .. my solo sounded like i was still practicing scales and stuff .. really boring .. you play what you practice ... So although you have to learn a lot of theory , you also have to forget it , when it comes time to play music ...if its in your head it just comes out anyway . along with any bits of theory or scales even without thinking ..sounds more like music ... I think this is the kind of thing he is getting at ..

kudo -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 19:28:07)
quote: I think here his words have been bended a bit that he would be saying that musicians shouldn't study. the journalist on that site did that with the title of the article "Paco de Lucía asegura que "los guitarristas no necesitan estudiar" ",which is what caught my attention and thats the title of the topic, to catch your attention just like how it did to me [;)] . i read the entire article... i do agree i wanna see other point of views and what you guys think as theres no one writing anything in the comment section on the articles site

kudo -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 19:32:38)
quote: where goes the line between just playing and studying? where goes the line between practicing/ playing / studying? the 3 could be same at once !

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 19:54:41)
So many of the players who I admire never had teachers.....and never studied........... And these same people grew up in families of professional players or gifted amateurs............ who played with them and gave them tips and stuff throughout their childhood....... I guess we need journalists to make sense of this for us............................................................................. I don't speak Spanish.......but then neither did my father or my brothers. I guess the best way to learn would be to avoid Spanish teachers or study. Because I have Spanish friends who can speak Spanish....and they didn't have teachers........although their whole family spoke Spanish to them their whole lives......... Huumphhhhhhhhh. D.

Mark2 -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 20:19:30)
I can't really disagree more with your post. First, there are good flamenco guitarists in most cities who can show you how to play by teaching in the oral tradition. Second, many of the great players don't know phrygian from a refrigerator. The idea that a flamenco guitarist needs to be able to run scales is wrong. Not that being able to do it is a bad thing, but flamenco playing is not soloing over changes or vamps. Making up falsetas isn't a matter of knowing what notes are in what scale, or what scale you can improvise with over what chord. It's a matter of knowing the palo, and what sounds right. People historically have learned that by listening and copying before trying to compose their own falsetas. The rest is knowing how to play for dance and cante. If what you thought was true, jazz players would be tearing up flamenco, but they aren't. A rumba backing track? That has little to do with flamenco. Go back a few decades and there were no backing tracks.... quote: ORIGINAL: tele I think every flamenco guitarist would like to learn through oral tradition like paco did but very few have the chance. I suppose we have to study something to say the least. Flamenco is largely based on dominant phrygian scale with some occasional notes outside the scale and not to know and understand theory in terms of scales and how the notes of scale can make a chord would make playing for me a whole lot more difficult. I agree there's no necessity to study too much as paco said but not to study music theory at all would make it a whole lot more difficult to play anything outside pre-learned pieces or falsetas. Basically you would have to have heck of a musical ear to know what your next notes are going to sound like without knowing theory at all. To learn all basic scales and modes on the whole fretboard takes only about a month and after that one can become much more fluent in improvisation and writing/understanding music. I personally like to use the basic scales as a base and occasionally include chromatic off-scale notes depending on the situation when improvising with a rumba backing track for example.

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 20:27:11)
quote: ORIGINAL: El Kiko What his main point is , that you can do a lot with imagination that is not be limited by theory ,.... I do get what he means ...when I was at college i used to practice all kind if scales and stuff .. maybe too much .. and then when playing even in a band .. my solo sounded like i was still practicing scales and stuff .. really boring .. you play what you practice ... Hi Kiko. I know what you mean . I went to music school and my father didn't. He played the diatonic accordian in the Irish/Scottish tradition, entirely by ear. All he did was play tunes by ear (and not very often), and never studied ([:D]). When I was a student every so often (christmas and other drunken festivals) we would 'jam' and he would laugh at me for being terrible. And rightly so !!!! I still study. But more and more that study is playing tunes .....by ear. D.

El Kiko -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 20:46:18)
whoa ... wait on........He doesnt say that ''musicians shouldn't study'' los guitarristas no necesitan estudiar means they dont need to,,.. not the same thing you can learn something by studying ......or not you can learn by just listening , copying or just using your imagination ...or a bit of all of the above .. But nowhere in the artical does he , or the journalist, claim that musicians 'shouldnt' study . in fact he 'recommends that you learn music and theory and have a teacher ' how many people do you know that just ' play by ear'' on any instrument ...see I think the first thing is to read it , then comment on what was said , not what you think was said .......reading back ..now ....sorry if that came out a bit heavy it wasnt meant to ..

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 20:52:40)
quote: ORIGINAL: El Kiko how many people do you know that just ' play by ear'' on any instrument Quite a few and quite a few of the best too. It is as DEEEEEEEP a mode of study as there is. But it lies on top of all of the rest of your study, like everything else. D. (PS I am aware of the conventional spelling of deep.)

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 20:58:21)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mark2 Making up falsetas isn't a matter of knowing what notes are in what scale, or what scale you can improvise with over what chord. It's a matter of knowing the palo, and what sounds right. Hi Mark, you seem to find a contradiction here. I do not. If you know the palo and what sounds right then you know the what notes are in the scale of the moment. And you also must know what will fit with each chord. I believe that the player who plays within a tradition has the better theory. Just like the native speaker has the better grammar and control of his idiom, whether he knows it or not. It doesn't matter if he can spell or write his words, not one jot. But spelling and writing might help US........As long as we correct/refine the theory in the light of what we hear AND NOT VICE VERSA. D.

tele -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 21:44:57)
You can disagree as much as you want. I still think like I do. but when you speak about knowing a palo and how to play it I think it is basically knowing the theory of the palo. All music lies on theory more or less, it's just not necessarily the theory that is teached to all(the western ABC naming for example or naming scales). Palo is based on a scale and if you know how to play the palo you know how to play the scale. Even if the scale has additional notes not found in any traditional scale. still the basics of the palo and the theory is the same. just the methods of naming it or teaching it vary. Basically all music is based on scales, you can mix them up so much that you end up with the chromatic scale if you wish. If someone plays by ear it doesn't mean he doesn't know theory, he just has his own theory of music and way of looking at the fretboard, which most often in the end is pretty much often based on the same old scales. quote: ORIGINAL: Mark2 I can't really disagree more with your post. First, there are good flamenco guitarists in most cities who can show you how to play by teaching in the oral tradition. Second, many of the great players don't know phrygian from a refrigerator. The idea that a flamenco guitarist needs to be able to run scales is wrong. Not that being able to do it is a bad thing, but flamenco playing is not soloing over changes or vamps. Making up falsetas isn't a matter of knowing what notes are in what scale, or what scale you can improvise with over what chord. It's a matter of knowing the palo, and what sounds right. People historically have learned that by listening and copying before trying to compose their own falsetas. The rest is knowing how to play for dance and cante. If what you thought was true, jazz players would be tearing up flamenco, but they aren't. A rumba backing track? That has little to do with flamenco. Go back a few decades and there were no backing tracks.... quote: ORIGINAL: tele I think every flamenco guitarist would like to learn through oral tradition like paco did but very few have the chance. I suppose we have to study something to say the least. Flamenco is largely based on dominant phrygian scale with some occasional notes outside the scale and not to know and understand theory in terms of scales and how the notes of scale can make a chord would make playing for me a whole lot more difficult. I agree there's no necessity to study too much as paco said but not to study music theory at all would make it a whole lot more difficult to play anything outside pre-learned pieces or falsetas. Basically you would have to have heck of a musical ear to know what your next notes are going to sound like without knowing theory at all. To learn all basic scales and modes on the whole fretboard takes only about a month and after that one can become much more fluent in improvisation and writing/understanding music. I personally like to use the basic scales as a base and occasionally include chromatic off-scale notes depending on the situation when improvising with a rumba backing track for example.

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 1 2013 23:16:20)
quote: ORIGINAL: tele Basically all music is based on scales, you can mix them up so much that you end up with the chromatic scale if you wish. Hi Tele. I agree with the broad spirit of your posts on this thread and with most of the others also. But I personally do not believe that music is based on scales. First comes the thing itself.... either the song or the Palo or the Raga or a blues or whatever. When I began to study Jazz I found it very confusing that a lot of the music seemed to have weird exotic scales and impenetrable chromaticism. But it only seems that way when you are thinking in terms of scales. If you look at connecting chord tones with passing tones, some of which may sound chromatic, then it all gets pretty damn simple. Well at least it does on the guitar. On the page it looks like crazy random stuff. Here is an example. In the key of Bb D7 is often used to get to Gm. Now is that Fsharp in the key of Bb ? As far as I am concerned it is. So what about E natural, is that in the key of Bb ? Well E natural sure sounds great over Gminor, when a Gminor chord is in the key of Bb. So, yes of course it is. So what is the scale for the key of Bb major? Well you could say it is the chromatic scale but that would be saying nothing at all. It sure aint the Bb major scale either though because so much of the harmonic moves which reinforce the key have chords with notes that are not in the Bb major scale. For me a key or a Palo or a Raga is not best explained by its 'parent' scale because they all have the same parent scale. Music is not based on scales. It just isn't. Scales are based on music, and they change all of the time during the course of a piece since music is seldom static. It is a real good idea to work outwards from the harmony of the moment with the knowledge of what the function of the harmony of the moment is in a given key. For example in the Bb example you play a D7 to get to G. So what scale do you play? Well that is just the wrong question. You should play what you hear. Now that is likely to be Gharmonic minor (or in this case Dphrygian major third) since that will relate strongly to the Gm resolution which will follow. But why play that. Why not just play melodic material from the D7 arpeggio. Or an Eb diminish arpeggio. Or an Eb melodic minor scale. Or A half diminished arpeggio, the whole tone scale on D or ................ Or sing what you want to hear and find it on your instrument. Then remember what the fingering and the sounds are and they worked over that particular chord in that particular key. And if you are like me transpose those ideas to another few keys by ear on the spot to hammer the point home. You need to know where you are, work out from the harmony to what you are hearing in your head. If you try and shoehorn all of this into the Bb major scale then you are missing a lot of the richness that being in a key can mean. Or a palo or raga or blues or any other music. This is kinda like the rants I have when science is being discussed. The rules don't tell nature what to do. We observe nature and devise rules to help us predict how things will work. I have read loads of theory books which miss the point of this. But only in music, for hard science people who write the books seem to know better. And the whole point of science is to trash the old rules and find better ones. Anyway I do go on,,,, sorry. D.

Erik van Goch -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 3:20:56)
Funny enough the same Paco ones stated that he believed it was about time flamenco guitar players became a bid more knowledgeable in musical theory :-). But i can see the danger involved.... clearly Bach was very limited in his musical ideas dude to an overdose of theoretical knowledge :-).

ToddK -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 6:38:01)
quote: Too much Theory and academic approach can limit your creativity and fantasy in flamenco and also your learning speed. Probably the most idiotic statement i've ever read on this or any forum. I wonder how many musicians out there are this clueless.

ToddK -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 6:40:06)
quote: Bach was very limited in his musical ideas dude to an overdose of theoretical knowledge :-). Hahahahaha!! Awesome Eric! Couldnt have said it better.

tele -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 10:58:19)
GB , I agree with you but I also see it in a way as in jazz one can change the scale every time after a new chord is being played, also add own chromatic notes to the scales for own flavour. Even if the passage during one chord would include only a small arpeggio from a new scale, it still is part of it. Still I see it as the base being the scales even if they might be "customized" with passing notes not fitting any traditional scales(I like to do it alot when playing blues for example). Or in cases of modulation every 5 or 10 seconds, still going with parts of different scales with occasional chromatic notes. That's how I see it and without it improvisation would be alot more difficult for me because I wouldn't know what I'm doing and I would have to go by feeling only.

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 11:28:01)
Increasingly I just try and 'play round chords'. If you watch the Tedd video that is what he is doing for sure. Now you are right that sometimes the chord sequence is derived from the 'Parent Scale' in a real obvious way like Autumn Leaves but sometimes it really aint so obvious. Here are the first few bars of Nuage by Django. Bm6 D7b9/A Gmaj7 So what is that ? Well you could get into a lot of stuff trying to explain it theoretically (ie it is a substitute ii V I from the the parallell minor with a multi sub on the A half diminished of that (Eb7) substitued with its own two(Bbm) That is good to know but..... What works really well is over the Bm6 play round a Bm6 arp and over D7 play round D7b9. As you play round the chords you will find the scales that sound good in this context and constantly relate them to the chords. What this means is that you construct your own roadmap on the guitar itself. Instantly relatable. I usually start with the triad, then add sixth (or seventh) and the ninth. Then I just connect these either scalewise or chromatically in ways that don't upset my technique or current style of fingering. It is great fun, highly recommended. And you can fall back and play G blues lines whenever you want. Anyway it is nice topic to throw ideas around with. And I note with relief that these things produce more productive discussions here than they used to. D.

tele -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 12:01:04)
quote: ORIGINAL: guitarbuddha As you play round the chords you will find the scales that sound good in this context and constantly relate them to the chords. So do you just go by feeling on what notes to drop around the basic chord shapes? Maybe like in around 3-fret area around the chord shape?

El Kiko -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 12:06:50)
Johann Sebastian Bach..... one of the greatest composers of the baroque period .. highly acclaimed throughout Europe .well used to improvisation .. ''skill in contrapuntal invention and motivic control''........Found within Bach's music is a magnificent blend of technical skill ....... are some of the fantastic reviews and comments about his work ....thats why he is still so famous ..... and on here we get ....''Bach was very limited in his musical ideas dude ''...and ....''Awesome Eric! Couldnt have said it better''..... [8\|][8\|][8\|] still. ....I suppose since people class themselves high enough to have go a Bach you also will be around in 500 years time ...... I'm not the biggest fan of Bach but I have to admit to his genius and pushing of many of the boundaries that existed in his day and for the instruments available ....then again I've been wrong before .....

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 12:30:34)
Kiki , kiki, KIKO.......... You need a new irony detector. Either that or keep correcting people whose point you have missed. D.

athrane77 -> [Deleted] (Nov. 2 2013 12:35:41)
Post has been moved to the Recycle Bin at Nov. 2 2013 12:37:22

Ruphus -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 13:34:20)
Hi Todd, I am surprised that you have not felt something like that yet. Not that theorectically educated people would lose improvisational / compository skills on default, but indeed many times the one skill appearrs to burden on the other. Sometime in the late seventies I became acquainted with some guitar students from a conservatory. ( At that time I was way more improvising than today, with now vastly exercising to repair my right hand.) And the funny thing was that we admired each other. Me adored them for their wonderful sheet reading and technical skills, while they ( aside from respect for my fake `virtuouso´ playing ) were fascinated by how the stuff I did was all spontaneously generated. Actually I had such repeatedly before and after with fully trained musicians. Folks who I envied for their skills while some of them in return would record my trivial creations in order to write that down in notes later on. Or for popular example, look at John Williams. He ought to present the top with accuracy, understanding of theory and repertoire, but with composing he would probably yield like a Scandinavian ambassador in Russia my cousin used to know. My cousind described him as a highly advancedc flamenco player who when presenting an own composition would merely patch standard sequences. To my experience regularly trained musicians seem more often hampered in creation than not. The fraction capable of both, theory / repertoire in conjunction with originality of own composition appear to be in the minority. ( At a lower rate at least than the `illiterate´ fraction.) And I have the feeling as if there was a special challenge in mastering both, sophistication and inspiration. - I must say that my own fundus on discography ain´t exactly productive for generatig music either ( at least not when you aim for somewhat original tune). When intentionally trying to make up new music, usually after the first three notes it will go in the back of my head like: `Ah yes, that´s piece X´. And: `That´s piece Y´. Just like with the vast of new public releases. Almost all of them are mere modifications of some original music. The question only being how subtley or blatantly at that. With only rarely something been created so lively that you feel not bothered through plagiatism. And more scarce even the case of a piece being so fresh that dependence on preceeding compositions feels neglectable anyway. - Guess if PdL was schooled in the way like John Williams, with all the sheet reading and interpretational weighing ( of how the author might have wanted his music to sound), he might have been less productive with own pieces. Ruphus

Miguel de Maria -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 13:48:33)
If you just play what you hear, how could anything go wrong? The theory should just be a set of tools to facilitate finding where you need to go and perhaps opening your mind to trying it elsewhere. I'm always fascinated when people are obsessed with "but he doesn't read a note of music" or "he never even went to school to learn music." Music is sound and idioms and traditions and the rest are pre-made tools with little intrinsic value.

guitarbuddha -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 13:51:01)
If you practicing reading music you will get better at reading music. If you practice playing by ear you will get better at that. If you are surprised that you are only good at the thing you have practiced then ...... If you only lift weights you will not be a great runner. If you only run you might not be great at lifting weights. Running well won't have stopped you lifting weights. It is simply that you failed to practice weights. Stopping running won't help, unless it leaves more time for lifting weights. Ideally you would do a little of both, or if you have time and feel you have a talent then a lot of both. It really is that simple. D.

Ruphus -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 14:07:02)
quote: ORIGINAL: guitarbuddha If you only run you might not be great at lifting weights. Just lately I read a side note on how Aristoteles ( I think it was) critisized the appearance of the olympic runners of his day. He noted that they had narrow shoulders and thin arms over thick muscular legs. He instead advocated balanced training and body shape. Ruphus

Morante -> RE: PDL says you dont need to study ! (Nov. 2 2013 16:20:51)
Hola I have never learned to read, nor ever had a teacher, yet I can accompany cante, in spite of everything. HOWEVER. one of the things which impresses me is that reading music allows musicians from various disciplines to communicate and play together. Many of the young flamencos here have studied in the conservatorio and since all the jazz players read and understand compás de bulerías, they can all work together in various projects. It is a great regret to me that I did not learn theory when I was young and I think that everyone should do it while they can. Al de Meola said that he thinks it is important to learn all theory possible, then, on stage, put it out of your mind and play what you feel: the theory is a tool to help your expression.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 5 > >>

Forum Software powered by ASP Playground Advanced Edition 2.0.5
Copyright © 2000 - 2003 ASPPlayground.NET