[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Usa Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

rec.music.classical.guitar

Technique Can't Be Taught?

augustineregal@yahoo.com

6/13/2016 12:54:00 PM

In a current thread, this assertion caught my eye:

"A great teacher does not teach the mechanics of playing
the guitar. You can get that stuff in books and on Youtube."

So according to this assertion, technique either can't or shouldn't be taught during a lesson.

Why?

In fact, the above quote seems absurd. It suggests that technique should learned, but only via books and video. For reasons left unsaid, having a teacher present in the room somehow invalidates good technical instruction.

Again, why?

Tom Poore
South Euclid, OH
USA
66 Answers

Douglas Seth

6/13/2016 1:12:00 PM

0

Tom,
David is a nice guy, but this is coming from someone who has taught approximately one person by his own admission and has exact zero successful sstudents. The statement is absolutely absurd and has no basis in reality. It is the same as a 2nd grader who still learning to read attempting to explain grammar. No David, I don't think you are stupid, I just think you talking about something you have little to credibility to back up your words and ideas. Learnwell comes off as an arrogant ass on here, but he does have credibility. Sorry typical Usernet.

Doug

augustineregal@yahoo.com

6/13/2016 1:45:00 PM

0

As it happens, I also disagree with the quote I cited. (Doubtless that's a surprise to no one.) But I believe it's a topic worthy of discussion. The belief illustrated in the quote I cited is more prevalent than one might think. For example, I recently spoke to a guitarist about a major conservatory guitar program in Europe. He told me that in this program, no one discusses technique. They talk only about music. When it comes to technique, students are on their own.

This is pretty much the attitude David espoused.

Further, if this attitude is wrong, then it should be refuted with something other than: "I'm right—you're wrong." People should have reasons for what they believe. They shouldn't be afraid to describe their reasons. Finally, let's not assume that all are rigidly doctrinaire and will never change their minds, even in the face of contrary good evidence.

This is a chat group. So let's chat.

Tom Poore
South Euclid, OH
USA

Dick Cheney

6/13/2016 2:00:00 PM

0

On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 8:11:52 AM UTC-5, dougla...@gmail.com wrote:
> Tom,
> David is a nice guy, but this is coming from someone who has taught approximately one person by his own admission and has exact zero successful sstudents. The statement is absolutely absurd and has no basis in reality. It is the same as a 2nd grader who still learning to read attempting to explain grammar. No David, I don't think you are stupid, I just think you talking about something you have little to credibility to back up your words and ideas. Learnwell comes off as an arrogant ass on here, but he does have credibility. Sorry typical Usernet.
>
> Doug

Yes, every group needs it's Edward Albee

Matt Faunce

6/13/2016 2:51:00 PM

0

augustineregal@yahoo.com <augustineregal@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In a current thread, this assertion caught my eye:
>
> "A great teacher does not teach the mechanics of playing
> the guitar. You can get that stuff in books and on Youtube."
>
> So according to this assertion, technique either can't or shouldn't be
> taught during a lesson.
>
> Why?
>
> In fact, the above quote seems absurd. It suggests that technique should
> learned, but only via books and video. For reasons left unsaid, having a
> teacher present in the room somehow invalidates good technical instruction.
>
> Again, why?
>
> Tom Poore
> South Euclid, OH
> USA
>

David's point is this:

If someone is playing the guitar he's using a technique; that technique
yields the sound it made; another technique yields a different sound; and
the idea that his sound is not good but the sound from a different
technique is good is not an absolute truth: it's purely a matter of taste.

It's a philosophical problem.

--
Matt

Matt Faunce

6/13/2016 3:25:00 PM

0

Matt Faunce <mattfaunce@gmail.com> wrote:
> augustineregal@yahoo.com <augustineregal@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> In a current thread, this assertion caught my eye:
>>
>> "A great teacher does not teach the mechanics of playing
>> the guitar. You can get that stuff in books and on Youtube."
>>
>> So according to this assertion, technique either can't or shouldn't be
>> taught during a lesson.
>>
>> Why?
>>
>> In fact, the above quote seems absurd. It suggests that technique should
>> learned, but only via books and video. For reasons left unsaid, having a
>> teacher present in the room somehow invalidates good technical instruction.
>>
>> Again, why?
>>
>> Tom Poore
>> South Euclid, OH
>> USA
>>
>
> David's point is this:
>
> If someone is playing the guitar he's using a technique; that technique
> yields the sound it made; another technique yields a different sound; and
> the idea that his sound is not good but the sound from a different
> technique is good is not an absolute truth: it's purely a matter of taste.
>
> It's a philosophical problem.
>

He's furthermore saying: a beginning guitarist has a choice: follow a
teacher's technique, which accords with a specific taste that's probably
not the beginner's, or let his technique form according to his own taste.
He's saying technique will find its way; and YouTube, showing a wider
variety of techniques than any single teacher ever shows, will help the
talented student develop the technique that matches his taste.

So the question to be answered is this: is taste indoctrinated via the
teaching of technique?

--
Matt

David Raleigh Arnold

6/13/2016 5:52:00 PM

0

On Mon, 13 Jun 2016 05:54:08 -0700 (PDT)
"augustineregal@yahoo.com" <augustineregal@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In a current thread, this assertion caught my eye:
>
> "A great teacher does not teach the mechanics of playing
> the guitar. You can get that stuff in books and on Youtube."

Segovia didn't teach much technique in master classes
for several reasons which have nothing to do with
what journeyman teachers should do or wish to do in
lessons.

1. He did not like teaching beginners, and technique
is something that should be learned as a beginner.

2. He did not want to discourage new ideas. He wanted
to avoid confining the student.

3. He was not totally confident in his own technique.
He died with some issues still unresolved.

> So according to this assertion, technique either
can't or shouldn't be taught during a lesson.

It doesn't follow. Regards, Rale

Steve Freides

6/13/2016 6:02:00 PM

0

augustineregal@yahoo.com wrote:
> In a current thread, this assertion caught my eye:
>
> "A great teacher does not teach the mechanics of playing
> the guitar. You can get that stuff in books and on Youtube."
>
> So according to this assertion, technique either can't or shouldn't
> be taught during a lesson.
>
> Why?
>
> In fact, the above quote seems absurd. It suggests that technique
> should learned, but only via books and video. For reasons left
> unsaid, having a teacher present in the room somehow invalidates good
> technical instruction.
>
> Again, why?
>
> Tom Poore
> South Euclid, OH
> USA

Tom, never argue with a fool; people might not know the difference.

Of course technique should be taught by a teacher - duh.

-S-


dsi1

6/13/2016 6:10:00 PM

0

On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 2:54:11 AM UTC-10, augusti...@yahoo.com wrote:
> In a current thread, this assertion caught my eye:
>
> "A great teacher does not teach the mechanics of playing
> the guitar. You can get that stuff in books and on Youtube."
>
> So according to this assertion, technique either can't or shouldn't be taught during a lesson.
>
> Why?
>
> In fact, the above quote seems absurd. It suggests that technique should learned, but only via books and video. For reasons left unsaid, having a teacher present in the room somehow invalidates good technical instruction.
>
> Again, why?
>
> Tom Poore
> South Euclid, OH
> USA

Everybody interacts with the guitar strings in their own way. Ultimately, teaching the guitar is one of giving suggestions. These suggestions are either accepted or rejected by the student. Mostly it has to do with the geometry of their body and how they're neurologically wired. They may even change their playing temporarily to please the teacher. The teacher will fool themselves into thinking that the student is being molded into their own image but that's an illusion of perception.

For more info on the folly of trying to mold guitarists into the proper/correct form, I suggest the most authoritative book on the subject:

https://www.amazon.com/Segovia-Technique-Vladimir-Bobri/dp/...

dsi1

6/13/2016 6:20:00 PM

0

On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 3:11:52 AM UTC-10, dougla...@gmail.com wrote:
> Tom,
> David is a nice guy, but this is coming from someone who has taught approximately one person by his own admission and has exact zero successful sstudents. The statement is absolutely absurd and has no basis in reality. It is the same as a 2nd grader who still learning to read attempting to explain grammar. No David, I don't think you are stupid, I just think you talking about something you have little to credibility to back up your words and ideas. Learnwell comes off as an arrogant ass on here, but he does have credibility. Sorry typical Usernet.
>
> Doug

I respectfully disagree - the real function of a beginning guitar teacher is not to teach guitar but to foster a love of music first and the guitar second. I never liked the way my student played. His hand position was awful and gave me the creeps. That guy sort of resented me not going to see him on gigs but it was unavoidable - I'm not that kind of guy. The happy ending to this story that I met him about a year ago and he played for me some fingerstyle jazz arrangements of his. I was most impressed. The student should alway be better than the teacher if the world is to be in balance!

Teaching is the easiest thing in the world. I teach everyday. The only thing you need is a willing student and you have it made in the shade.

Learnwell

6/13/2016 6:53:00 PM

0

On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 11:20:16 AM UTC-7, dsi1 wrote:
> On Monday, June 13, 2016 at 3:11:52 AM UTC-10, dougla...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Tom,
> > David is a nice guy, but this is coming from someone who has taught approximately one person by his own admission and has exact zero successful sstudents. The statement is absolutely absurd and has no basis in reality. It is the same as a 2nd grader who still learning to read attempting to explain grammar. No David, I don't think you are stupid, I just think you talking about something you have little to credibility to back up your words and ideas. Learnwell comes off as an arrogant ass on here, but he does have credibility. Sorry typical Usernet.
> >
> > Doug
>
> I respectfully disagree - the real function of a beginning guitar teacher is not to teach guitar but to foster a love of music first and the guitar second. I never liked the way my student played. His hand position was awful and gave me the creeps. That guy sort of resented me not going to see him on gigs but it was unavoidable - I'm not that kind of guy. The happy ending to this story that I met him about a year ago and he played for me some fingerstyle jazz arrangements of his. I was most impressed. The student should alway be better than the teacher if the world is to be in balance!
>
> Teaching is the easiest thing in the world. I teach everyday. The only thing you need is a willing student and you have it made in the shade.

Typical Usenet.