| LearnJazzPiano.com archives: practicing....how long should i focus on scales, voicings, impro | |
| dudsy -- 10/05/2004, 18:11:53 -- #7770 | |
| hey everyone! i was wondering if any of u guys can suggest some productive practicing schedules because i'm having a hard time sticking to one schedule each time i practice...theres just so much to cover and i'm overwhelmed with all the new information that i'm learning. i have to admit i am very impatient and i know that i have to work on that but can any of u guys tell me how u practice, what it involves, and how long u focus on a certain topic.....i feel like my practicing is very scattered...i mean i'll focus on one topic for a few hours...but when the next day comes i usually start something new...i dunno....i just need some advice or tips on having productive practices | |
| 7 -- 10/06/2004, 00:15:24 -- #7776 | |
| Personally, I binge. Being a compulsive/obsessive personality I'll go crazy and practice a couple of things for days on end and then something will shift my attention and then I'll binge on the new thing until the next tangent. Somehow or another it all eventually coalesces, but it does take time. Anyway that's what works for me. | |
| Mike -- 10/06/2004, 02:56:59 -- #7788 | |
| I am like 7 in that ussually by the time I make up a practice schedule I have changed it. Yet I still think writing down practice schedules can be a useful exercise even though they often need to be changed by the time the ink is dry. One way I deal with this is by making sure there is plenty of blank space on the practice schedule so I can cross out things and write knew things in and I plan on making new schedules from scratch weekly. If you are just starting with this I suggest you not worrry so much about what you are scheduling but just start trying to work with an organized schedule... ie write down any schedule and try it... then adjust it the next week to make it better... Ie... try writing down for example: scales 15 minutes chord drill 15 minutes sing solfege 15 minutes repetoire review 30 minutes etc etc or whatever and see how it feel for you over a week and change whatever did not feel right for the next week. | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/06/2004, 06:50:08 -- #7794 | |
| solfege? really? why? I have never been able to see the point of it. Perhaps you can shed some light? Maybe this should be a new thread? | |
| Mike -- 10/06/2004, 08:02:29 -- #7799 | |
| I was just writing a sample schedule not suggesting that one practice any of those catagories. But Solfege is a common device used to train ones ear. If anyone intends to go to any Music University and study music start studying solfege now or plan on being embarrased when it comes your turn to sing it in front of an entire ear training class. Why is it good for Ear Training ... that becomes an envolved subject. One that I would have to think out my reply to before answering to do the subject justice. But the moment I think its suffices to say that all the major Music institutions have decided it is the way to train the ear. Berklee, Julliard, etc... But again I did not put in the sample schedule to suggest anyone practice it. Although now that you bring it up... If I were to suggest things to practice that is something I would suggest. | |
| Mike -- 10/06/2004, 08:04:46 -- #7800 | |
| I have one student going to Berklee next year... I am starting to teach him solfege now for example. For him he needs it because if for no other reason... AT Berklee EAr Training classes are Solfege intense. You have to sing Solfege every day in front of 30 people or so. I wish so much that I had a teacher who gave me a heads up on that. | |
| Peteboypete -- 10/06/2004, 08:28:56 -- #7801 | |
| Personally, I have seperate practice session for my solfege and instruments. I feel like this way I can focus on one area. Stopping my saxophone practice to sing, then starting up again seems to stop the flow. | |
| smg -- 10/06/2004, 08:57:10 -- #7803 | |
| Seems like you're describing a very common phenomenon-new person to art form "psyched"to check everything out,find out about everything,adopts a "practice routine"that is more like the probably accompanying "new to jazz" listening they're doing-listening to whatever they're into for the time they're into it,suddenly determined to "sound like"a new influence.....in reality the time it takes to internalize something being studied demands a focus,often exclusive to a lot of more "rudimentary" types of practice that nevertheless are the foundation/building blocks leading to the intended focus(i.e.as an "adult beginner",players of this type often have to search for a teacher that will emphasize an approach taking this seeming dichotomy into account-one way to deal with this is to immediately substitute the relevant chord types/scales/patterns involved in the intended "style appropriation"for the so-called "classical" approach to technique involving the major/minor scales,etc.....as usual,I'll recommend taking a look at the file"Developing" over at 360 degrees re-this...... | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/06/2004, 10:40:27 -- #7811 | |
| Well, it's been a long time, but back in my college days we did sight-singing in front of the class (and boy did we have fun screwing around there. Solfege however was only being used for early childhood ed - at the time - which to me seemed silly, an extra step...kinda like calling a Dominant 7th chord Major-Minor 7th...(I know I'm an old fart) I had a young piano student transfer to me who thought the note "B" was "Ti" - oy...Her mother looked at me like I was nuts when I tried to explain that the note name is "B" and virtually any note could be "Ti" depending on what key blah blah blah...that student never came back:) (thankfully:) | |
| mindful -- 10/06/2004, 12:36:43 -- #7815 | |
| hello guys. I too have just recently found this website. I've been to some really good ones, but a lot of them always refer back to "Jazz" piano as a skill that everyone uses and which in turn will make any musician better. Just by looking around i see all of these resources in front of me, and i can hardly sit still. I've got a question though. I'm learning keyboard, but no nessicarily to be a Jazz musican. But i've been told by many gospel musicians that learning "jazz" piano can really color up your music and playing style. I've only gotten serious for about 3 months, but anyone close to me can tell you that i'm far ahead of what i really "should" know, based on my short time playing. my question is... would it be wise to use all of this theory and information on this site to play the Gospel style of music? or are Gospel and Jazz the exact same theory? Or is it better for me to learn Gospel theory and then incorporate jazz into it? | |
| Scot -- 10/06/2004, 13:12:59 -- #7816 | |
| Music theory is music theory. How you apply your music theory knowledge on the piano will determine the sound you get. Theory and style are different things- gospel is a great style of music, blues, jazz, rock, country, these are all styles. Music theory is the same for all of these styles, so the more you know about theory, the more you can apply it when you are playing, regardless of style. Back to the topic of practicing: I usually start out with some technique. IT's not always the same- sometimes the Rachmaninoff exercise, sometimes scales, sometimes stride exercises, sometimes montuno stuff, and I have a lot of technical exercises that I make up to help me with areas I'm working on. Then I usually work on some tunes for a while. 12 keys, trying out new tricks I've learned, playing in different styles, etc. Then it's whatever I'm trying to work on. At the moment I'm increasing my harmonic diversity- figuring out new ways of playing the same old chords. A lot of that is by analyzing solo piano transcriptions and arrangements to figure out why certain things sound cool. Then take those tricks, practice in 12 keys, utilize them in as many spots in tunes as I can, then move on to the next trick. | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/06/2004, 13:17:55 -- #7818 | |
| To me theory is just the nuts and bolts of mainly harmony & melody pursuant to particular styles and/or time periods. It's important to note that the music came first, then the theory Gospel & Jazz are styles that share some similar harmonic concepts (dominant 7ths that don't necessarily resolve to tonic, etc..) Both have roots in Blues and use the same types of dissonance. One major difference in the past was that Jazz used extended harmonies and sort of wandered away from traditional harmony a little more than Gospel, but as time goes by, more and more Gospel music is using extended harmonies (9ths, 11ths, 13ths). However, the voicings used nowadays seem to be a fusion of pop and jazz... So what am I ramblin on about? I think any book on Jazz or Gospel may help your playing...there kinda the same thing:) | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/06/2004, 13:18:40 -- #7819 | |
| *they're not there...duh!! | |
| mindful -- 10/06/2004, 15:17:32 -- #7820 | |
| wow, i didn't really expect u all to respond so soon. Hey thanks a lot Scot (are u the administrator here?). You too "p" ... that helped. I'm pretty much teaching my self, but there's so much on the 'net' now (like this site) that can help me. My only problem is , i'll end up saying... "ok now that i learned this... what excercises can i do NOW, to sharpen this particular skill." I see that you have an excersise link here. I took a quick peek at it and didn't really understand which one i need to start out with first. But i can figure it on my own. Thanks guys | |
| Scot -- 10/06/2004, 16:33:31 -- #7828 | |
| I'm kind of the administrator- this is my website :) | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/06/2004, 18:25:36 -- #7830 | |
| He keeps us all in line too:) | |
| alfredo -- 10/07/2004, 10:58:12 -- #7846 | |
| I did solfege by the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... Do they do it that way at Berklee? Or do they use the old Do, Re, Mi... sylable system? | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/07/2004, 12:42:09 -- #7847 | |
| We did numbers too... Solfege is the "Do Re Mi" routine...and you can also factor in the Kodaly hand signals (like in E.T.) Interesting enough but I don't see it as a prerequisite to any type playing/singing...why not just use the numbers? | |
| Mike -- 10/07/2004, 13:18:04 -- #7848 | |
| They use the movable Do system at Berklee. | |
| Peteboypete -- 10/07/2004, 19:59:44 -- #7855 | |
| How do you indicate a non-diatonic tone with the number system? In solfege, you just change the end of the syllable to an "ay" sound, i.e. a lowered 3rd goes from "mi" to "may." Also, step 7 would be odd with numbers because "seven" has two syllables. It would be much easier to sing "do ti la ti do" than "one seven six seven one." | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/08/2004, 08:12:23 -- #7867 | |
| well this is where it gets kinda silly and I guess it's what you're used to. For example a Bb in the key of C would be flat 7 an A# would be sharp 6, three and two syllables respectively, but more descriptive IMHO... (I always think of the Three Stooges when I hear mi may my mo moo etc:) Sofege just seems to me an extra language to learn...but like many other newer teaching concepts, if it helps you understand things, then go for it:) | |
| Mike -- 10/08/2004, 08:33:19 -- #7869 | |
| many musicians think notation is just an extra language to learn too. And just skip it. That makes them no worse a musician than anyone else. It makes it so I personally choose not to gig with them because It is too tedius for me to gig with someone that can't read but who cares if they gig with me. No one needs to learn Solfege, there are plenty of other ways to train the ear. Its just seems to be the time tested best approach and that is why it is used by all the best Music Universities in the world. No one needs to use the Wheel either, There are Donkeys, sleds and many other ways to get things from one place to another. Its just the Wheel seems to established itself over time by just about everybody who likes to move things from one place to another on a regular basis as the way to go. | |
| alfredo -- 10/08/2004, 11:14:40 -- #7877 | |
| "No one needs to use the Wheel either, There are Donkeys, sleds and many other ways to get things from one place to another. Its just the Wheel seems to established itself over time by just about everybody who likes to move things from one place to another on a regular basis as the way to go. " That is a ridiculous analogy and it sounds very condescending, why do your posts always seem arrogant like you know everything and other people know nothing? There is an advantage to doing ear training by the numbers because it has a more direct link to theory analysis that jazz musicians use when thinking about chord tones. Solfege just sounds nicer for vocalizing, but it is not as directly linked to the language used by jazz player to describe chord tones. Jazz musicians think a C7 #9, not C7 "ri", or whatever it would be. | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/08/2004, 11:15:27 -- #7878 | |
| is the wheel that round thing? I know what a Donkey is:) | |
| faustus74 -- 10/08/2004, 15:23:37 -- #7880 | |
| Or do you mean a mule? :) | |
| Mike -- 10/08/2004, 16:10:20 -- #7881 | |
| oh I forgot about mules. | |
| Mike -- 10/08/2004, 16:19:40 -- #7883 | |
| Oh and thanks Alfredo but in my opinion saying that I know everything and everyone else knows nothing is definetly an overstatement. | |
| Peteboypete -- 10/09/2004, 01:24:56 -- #7891 | |
| Back to the subject... It only takes about five minutes to learn that "do" equals 1, "re" equals 2, etc... As for the terms when compared to jazz, no, you wouldn't think C7"ri" but no one (at least not here at UMKC) would describe it that way. The only good use of solfege is for singing. When we are talking in theory class we use the scale degree number or name (tonic, dominant, leading tone, etc). The degree names are a third language we must learn, but once again it is just another way of explaining the same thing. Plus, it is pretty easy to convert from solfege or degree names to numbers. In the end, the important thing is the music that comes out. Whether someone says "one," "tonic," or "do" doesn't really matter because I know that that is the first step of the scale. I am sure that solfege has made sight-singing much easier for me, and probably many others. | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/09/2004, 07:36:34 -- #7894 | |
| I'm glad to hear it helps you:) I wasn't trying to blast it. I was seriously inquiring as to the benefit of it...Like I said, I guess it depends on what you're used to. I'm kinda dumb and found it confusing. I'm turning into one of those old farts that complains about new advances:) (hey you kids! get off my grass!) | |
| fingers -- 10/09/2004, 12:54:23 -- #7897 | |
| As a 3year student of jazz piano, I find the huge plate full of info passed on to me by my teacher and the folks here tends to boggle the mind. Information overload So when its comes to practice, im lucky to have an hour to an hour and a half, so theres just so much one can do Theres (at my stage) memorizing and reading five kinds of scales, modes. appegios, left hand stride, chords, rounds of 5ths, voicings, shell voicings, reading practice, ear practice, finger techniques, peddling, THEN i go to my repetoir of 20 songs so far. Plus i like to put on a CD or tune into my local jazz radio station and play along. To do all of that, at my sluggish speed, would take up half the day So for me I sit down and think about my session first with a plan so I dont get stuck doing the same old rut. I realize that this is a long journey and patience and perserverence I iessential | |
| Dr. Whack -- 10/09/2004, 15:49:09 -- #7899 | |
| yep...that's whay it takes a lifetime to learn to play:) | |
| Mike -- 10/09/2004, 16:00:16 -- #7900 | |
| That is the Joy of it. There is a lifelong plate of beautiful endless challenges ahead that never end. When feeling frustrated that you are not getting it all done take comfort in the fact that no one no matter how great ever gets it all done that is one of the main reasons we all do it, it is one of the main reasons we are all attracted to it... because ot the infinite challenge of it. | |
| Barry -- 10/09/2004, 17:09:00 -- #7901 | |
| Randy Halberstadt has an interesting approach to limited practice time. He recommends what he calls 'Target Bombing'. Basically, if you have a limited practice time then you will not be able to work on everything you want. His idea is that you should use whatever time you have to focus on just one thing and make it you goal to have that thing internalised so you will never need to learn it again. Assume that on your next session you will move onto something else and so you must get it down now. So, for example, if you only have an hour to practice then you might choose to work on a particular chord progression or improvise with a particular scale or practice a single voicing through a few keys. You will know what it is realistic to expect you be able to learn in an hour. However, it is important that you only choose to do something which you know can really get down in an hour and that way, at the end of the session your playing has improved because you have learnt something that you will never have to work on again. The idea of this approach is it makes you set and achieve goals and stops you touching on everything but remembering nothing the next day. If you find yourself with limited time, either regularly or on just the odd day, then this could be a useful approach. Leave the piano a demonstrably better player because you have really learnt and internalised something. It doesn't matter how small or simple it is because it will be one less thing on your list of stuff to learn. Enjoy Barry. | |
| smg -- 10/12/2004, 19:12:29 -- #7975 | |
| I thought about what I posted above and I wanted to go into a little more detail about what I was talking about the other day..... re-being into working on so many different things that this becomes a factor and dealing with terms like "scattered" and "overwhelmed" as they impact practice time resulting in anything concrete in terms of one's developement as a player.....so many times,beginning/ intermediate players will devote themselves to a rigorously determined,forcefully institued,emotionally-invested practice routine they are sure will produce the intended results in terms of their style/playing capacity....often they've been influenced by a teacher who,while being an excellent for all the technical/"classical repertoire" aspects of playing,have no idea of the subtle factors involved in developing as a jazz improviser.... | |
| smg -- 10/12/2004, 19:28:11 -- #7977 | |
| so the inevitable result is something like this- highly motivated,into-the-music pianist gets up and immediately begins their daily routine of thoroughly working on all the standard scales,chords,arpeggios,and etudes they've been doing for so long they could do them in their sleep(setting up a kind of auto-pilot approach to playing which in itself negates any of the kind of inner involvement improvisers rely on)for the usual hour or more...then it's time for a break..they listen to the CD of a contemporary player that they most are influenced by,encouraging themselves to "practice all day" to become able to play like that...then it's time for their assigned jazz practice-a jazz etude that their teacher,who would have abslutely no idea how to play any of the modern harmony/theory based stuff the ID'd influence just listened to used,has convinced them is the "stepping stone" to being able to "play jazz"...and will be checking to make sure the student uses the correct technique next week....the next hour,again after listening to the CD on the break,consists of practicing some "2-5 patterns" in all keys,that a "jazz lab band instructor" gave them,which use all the stylistic harmonic/melodic conventions of pre-60's bebop....more listening to the influence playing originals which are based on nonstandard progresssions,polychords,etc...and now it's time for working on tunes..so the neophyte gets out the Real Book and "plays through" some of the songs that have been ID'd as..... | |
| smg -- 10/12/2004, 19:58:52 -- #7978 | |
| the "easier ones" for a player like themselves..the usual overplayed ones that the players' approach to consists of- reading through the lead sheet,using the standard Type A and B jazz voicings they've memorized to play the same chords listed on the sheet while thinking about how the influence sounded playing this tune(where they reharmonized it completely in sections and where they didn't,nevertheless used chord types and a harmonic/melodic approach which was "peripherally related"to the way the player is practicing it,to a degree that would make it incomphrensible without a serious study of the factors involved..but(the student reasons)the melodies the same so... Anyone who's looked at the file I did called "Developing" will recognize the point I'm trying to make at this point....with the above I mean no disrespect to hard-working piano teachers,"lab band instructors" who double as gym teachers and,while proficient on an instrument,aren't at all equipped to know what to give a player to work on that will be relevant but by virtue of their position,are in a position to influence players in a way that ultimately becomes detrimental..my suggestion is that,to the extent it's feasible,the components of the influences' style should form the basis of a practice routine,not be relegated to any "putting it off because of" factors..training a player to hear like the influence does might be the beginning step,where playing transcribed sections of a solo under the supervision of a teacher who knows whats' involved will kick start the process..... | |
| smg -- 10/12/2004, 20:13:44 -- #7979 | |
| identifying,isolating and focusing in on any unusual/unfamiliar aspects and instead of destroying the musicality of things by "practicing it in all 12 keys with a metronome set at just a little faster than usual",listening to what it is in a few keys (or even one-you'd be surprised how the ear hearing something creats the technique to play it in a new key it's never been practiced in)using some of the approaches I described in that file..... Of course depending on one's level of technical development,this must be balanced with time spent on some of what I identified above as stuff that could be played in sleep,until it can be..... To sum it up- No avoidance of studying/practicing the actual elements of an intended style and No rationalization/justification for not doing so based on any logic except that of the qualifying last paragraph above... An example of this would be the difference between hearing "Giant Steps",wanting to be able to deal with stuff on this level,but not practicing the song itself because of its' tempo vs.beginning to work on the "Coltrane cycle" as a study at a tempo thats'workable.....the former leads to the infamous "Giant Steps complex"some threads here have dealt with,simultaneously "hearing the tune" and probably subconsciously creating patterns for it which never get translated intio actual notes..the latter gets you on your way to playing this in any tune you like.... d | |
| smg -- 10/12/2004, 20:14:42 -- #7980 | |
| BTW-re-uncharacteristic of smgs' posts spelling errors above- | |
| smg -- 10/12/2004, 20:17:20 -- #7981 | |
| I have to apologize..I'm using a computer at a public library with 15 min time limits and my spelling checking hasn't beeen what it usually is as I try to finish this and get it posted... | |
| Copyright © 2005 by Scot Ranney. All rights reserved. | |
| Click Here for more information about performances and clinics. Click Here to sign up for Scot's music announcements. | |