How did you know when to quit lessons?

[Tommy Grand]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school. How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons? I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

[edspyhill01]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

The teacher wants to shoot the bull more than teach;
the teacher is exhausted all the time and his eyes close
involuntarily;
you realize the teacher has no curriculum for your level ("time to
revisit <insert stuff from 2 years ago here>");
you are interested in repertoire your teacher has never heard of;
you can play repertoire your teacher never heard of;
all past students seemed to have quit around "this time";
some students go on to music school and don't have the chops to make
it;
your gut has been telling you to move on for 6 months but you feel
obliged to continue.

I have more but I can't remember them right now.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by edspyhill01

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

The teacher wants to shoot the bull more than teach;
the teacher is exhausted all the time and his eyes close
involuntarily;
you realize the teacher has no curriculum for your level ("time to
revisit <insert stuff from 2 years ago here>");
you are interested in repertoire your teacher has never heard of;
you can play repertoire your teacher never heard of;
all past students seemed to have quit around "this time";
some students go on to music school and don't have the chops to make
it;
your gut has been telling you to move on for 6 months but you feel
obliged to continue.
I have more but I can't remember them right now.

Ed, I'm not asking how you know it's time to quit taking lessons from
a particular teacher, but rather how you know it's time to quit
lessons period.

[doug]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

Do you ever know everything there is to know about the guitar. I
would guess that even concert guitarists still learn from each other.
they may not actually take lessons but can still learn from others. I
suppose a virtuoso wouldn't find it necessary to actually take lessons
but below that level lessons would be helpful, especially with
interpretation Also I think you can only learn so much from any one
teacher. I know when I studied clarinet my first teacher moved me to
another teacher when I reached the level where he couldn't help me
anymore.
Having said that I quit taking lessons when I reached the level I
wanted for my personal enjoyment. But I played other instruments
prior to the guitar so I had a good background in music and only
wanted to learn how to play the guitar not to excel at it.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by doug
Having said that I quit taking lessons when I reached the level I
wanted for my personal enjoyment.  But I played other instruments
prior to the guitar so I had a good background in music and only
wanted to learn how to play the guitar not to excel at it.

Thanks Doug, don't let anyone say you never post about guitar! I
think I may continue taking lessons for the rest of my life, but I
gather this is quite uncommon. Wondering why.

[Slogoin]

Thanks Doug, don't let anyone say you never post about guitar!  I
think I may continue taking lessons for the rest of my life, but I
gather this is quite uncommon.  Wondering why.

Didn't you say you played cello?

[Tommy Grand]

   Didn't you say you played cello?

I played trombone, which is not unlike the cello. The reason I quit
trombone lessons, was I got a girlfriend (mostly).

[doug]

Thanks Doug, don't let anyone say you never post about guitar!  I
think I may continue taking lessons for the rest of my life, but I
gather this is quite uncommon.  Wondering why.

   Didn't you say you played cello?

I wish

[Slogoin]

Post by doug
Having said that I quit taking lessons when I reached the level I
wanted for my personal enjoyment.  But I played other instruments
prior to the guitar so I had a good background in music and only
wanted to learn how to play the guitar not to excel at it.

So, Doug, do you play guitar? I thought you only pretended to play
guitar, and didn't even do that very well.

[Slogoin]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

How is the question different for someone who went to music school?

[Tommy Grand]

  How is the question different for someone who went to music school?

In music school the lessons naturally end when you graduate, unless
you make special effort to continue them. Quitting private lessons
requires a deliberate change in your routine.

How did you decide you didn't need/want a regular guitar teacher
anymore?

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Tommy Grand

  How is the question different for someone who went to music school?

In music school the lessons naturally end when you graduate, unless
you make special effort to continue them.  Quitting private lessons
requires a deliberate change in your routine.
How did you decide you didn't need/want a regular guitar teacher
anymore?

Larry do you have an answer?

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
Larry do you have an answer?

TG, can you NOT troll?

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Tommy Grand
Larry do you have an answer?

   TG, can you NOT troll?

I was being sincere. How did you know that you had "graduated" from
lessons, so to speak?

[John E. Golden]

Post by Tommy Grand
This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school. How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons? I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

Regards,
John E. Golden

[Dicerous]

Post by John E. Golden

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

http://youtu.be/IQQOjlgviCI
Regards,
John E. Golden

Tommy,

Let alone finding a teacher that can keep up with you, I feel that if
you arrive at a point where you are discussing the *engineering* of
the composition qua composer you have arrived (i.e rather than being a
little gearhead like you are now). Having knowledge of something and
being able to extemporize with your teacher about those things, the
subtleties of interpretation, the quality of the performance viz your
own myopia; and when you feel you can play basically anything your
teacher puts in front of you, then you don't really need him or her
any more.


The real nasty teachers will keep telling you how you need to adjust
technique in some kind of perfection-fantasy (of theirs); quickly run
away from those people, they can not think positively and move you
forward.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Dicerous
Let alone finding a teacher that can keep up with you, I feel that if
you arrive at a point where you are discussing the *engineering* of
the composition qua composer you have arrived (i.e rather than being a
little gearhead like you are now).  Having knowledge of something and
being able to extemporize with your teacher about those things, the
subtleties of interpretation, the quality of the performance viz your
own myopia; and when you feel you can play basically anything your
teacher puts in front of you, then you don't really need him or her
any more.

Thanks for the feedback, David. I doubt I'll ever get to the point
where I could play anything my teacher puts in front of me. After
all, he plays some of the most demanding virtuoso showpieces in the
repertoire. Yes, it appears lessons for life is my destiny. I fear
this is weak or silly, hmm.

Post by Dicerous
The real nasty teachers will keep telling you how you need to adjust technique in some kind of perfection-fantasy (of theirs);  quickly > run away from those people, they can not think positively and move you forward.

Fortunately my teacher is ultra non-dogmatic, and will teach me
whatever I want to learn unless it is total bullshit (he turns me down
about 5%-10% of the time). My current arpeggio project is my own
idea, and I'm sure my teacher thinks it's a bit pointless and
masochistic. Luckily for me, however, he knows exactly what must be
done to achieve these mechanical goals. Some of it is very strange,
almost paradoxical, such as playing with a lot of tension on
purpose...but I'm not at liberty to go into many details.

[edspyhill01]

Post by Dicerous
Let alone finding a teacher that can keep up with you, I feel that if
you arrive at a point where you are discussing the *engineering* of
the composition qua composer you have arrived (i.e rather than being a
little gearhead like you are now).  Having knowledge of something and
being able to extemporize with your teacher about those things, the
subtleties of interpretation, the quality of the performance viz your
own myopia; and when you feel you can play basically anything your
teacher puts in front of you, then you don't really need him or her
any more.

Thanks for the feedback, David.  I doubt I'll ever get to the point
where I could play anything my teacher puts in front of me.  After
all, he plays some of the most demanding virtuoso showpieces in the
repertoire.  Yes, it appears lessons for life is my destiny.  I fear
this is weak or silly, hmm.

Post by Dicerous
The real nasty teachers will keep telling you how you need to adjust technique in some kind of perfection-fantasy (of theirs);  quickly > run away from those people, they can not think positively and move you forward.

Fortunately my teacher is ultra non-dogmatic, and will teach me
whatever I want to learn unless it is total bullshit (he turns me down
about 5%-10% of the time).  My current arpeggio project is my own
idea, and I'm sure my teacher thinks it's a bit pointless and
masochistic.  Luckily for me, however, he knows exactly what must be
done to achieve these mechanical goals.  Some of it is very strange,
almost paradoxical, such as playing with a lot of tension on
purpose...but I'm not at liberty to go into many details.

What strategies has your teacher given you to facilitate fast and
accurate finger shifts when changing chords?

[Tommy Grand]

Post by edspyhill01
What strategies has your teacher given you to facilitate fast and
accurate finger shifts when changing chords?

This is a very suttle, and complex problem, and usually must be solved
case by case! However I have not really practised this much, as my
Pujol #3, Pisador Villanesca, and Sor #1 videos will demonstrate. It's
on my list.

How about you?

[edspyhill01]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by edspyhill01
What strategies has your teacher given you to facilitate fast and
accurate finger shifts when changing chords?

This is a very suttle, and complex problem, and usually must be solved
case by case!  However I have not really practised this much, as my
Pujol #3, Pisador Villanesca, and Sor #1 videos will demonstrate. It's
on my list.
How about you?

I use a variation of the Shearer Aim Directed Movement and shift back
and forth using different finger combinations until all or most
sequences are "easy".

[Tommy Grand]

Post by edspyhill01

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by edspyhill01
What strategies has your teacher given you to facilitate fast and
accurate finger shifts when changing chords?

This is a very suttle, and complex problem, and usually must be solved
case by case!  However I have not really practised this much, as my
Pujol #3, Pisador Villanesca, and Sor #1 videos will demonstrate. It's
on my list.
How about you?

I use a variation of the Shearer Aim Directed Movement and shift back
and forth using different finger combinations until all or most
sequences are "easy".

Oh, I haven't found any simple formulas that work well for me. I have
to think about each shift, considering which notes must be sustained,
which can be clipped without sactificing the continuity, etc. But,
I'm bad at this. Like I said, its on the list!

[Lutemann]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

Here's a freebie. You need to get another teacher, Tommy. And that
advice is worth a thousand plus dollars.

[Tommy Grand]

Here's a freebie. You need to get another teacher, Tommy.  And that
advice is worth a thousand plus dollars.

Hmm, I don't think so. I seem to be progressing toward my goals under
his tutelage. To recap the goals:

1) pimi @ 132 for 48 measures. (Giulini 81).
2) pima @ 120 for 20 measures (Giuliani 87)
3) pami @ 112 for 24 measures (Giuliani 88)
4) pimami @ 88 for 64 measures (Giuliani 31)

With no galloping, of course.

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
With no galloping, of course.

Here's TG's arrhythmical posts done HIS WAY!

http://www.larrydeack.com/TG.mp3

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Slogoin

Post by Tommy Grand
With no galloping, of course.

Here's TG's arrhythmical posts done HIS WAY!
http://www.larrydeack.com/TG.mp3

Hee hee!

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Slogoin
Here's TG's arrhythmical posts done HIS WAY!
http://www.larrydeack.com/TG.mp3

Hee hee!

I'm glad you liked that :-)

You should hear Apple's built in speech for some of my poems... OMG! I
think that's a true Turing Test.

http://www.larrydeack.com/TG%202.mp3

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Slogoin

Post by Tommy Grand
With no galloping, of course.

Here's TG's arrhythmical posts done HIS WAY!
http://www.larrydeack.com/TG.mp3

Since you are making mp3's, why not play pimi for 48 measures @ 132,
with a nice groove, to show me how it's done? Any chords you want...

[Lutemann]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Lutemann
Here's a freebie. You need to get another teacher, Tommy. And that
advice is worth a thousand plus dollars.

Hmm, I don't think so. I seem to be progressing toward my goals under
With no galloping, of course.

Tommy says, "Hmm, I don't think so. I seem to be progressing toward
my goals under
his tutelage."

That's a little bit like saying that you have chosen the best new car
to buy because it starts up when you turn the key. Did it ever occur
to you that your goals are wrong? Do you you have any imagination?

[Tommy Grand]

Did it ever occur to you that your goals are wrong?  Do you you have any
imagination?

Would it really be fair to fire my teacher for providing exactly what
I ask for? I might fire him if he didn't have anything useful to say
about fast arpeggios.

[Dicerous]

Post by Tommy Grand

Did it ever occur to you that your goals are wrong?  Do you you have any
imagination?

Would it really be fair to fire my teacher for providing exactly what
I ask for?  I might fire him if he didn't have anything useful to say
about fast arpeggios.

ha!

[Lutemann]

Post by Tommy Grand

Did it ever occur to you that your goals are wrong? Do you you have any
imagination?

Would it really be fair to fire my teacher for providing exactly what
I ask for? I might fire him if he didn't have anything useful to say
about fast arpeggios.

Tommy says, "Would it really be fair to fire my teacher for providing
exactly what
I ask for? I might fire him if he didn't have anything useful to say
about fast arpeggios."

Almost nothing in life is fair. You could try serveral other teachers
and go back if you were unhappy. I actually send my students to other
teachers. You claim to be interested in performing at the professional
level, but like any beginner you don't know the right questions to
ask.

[Tommy Grand]

Almost nothing in life is fair.  You could try serveral other teachers
and go back if you were unhappy.  I actually send my students to other
teachers. You claim to be interested in performing at the professional
level, but like any beginner you don't know the right questions to
ask.

I'm happy now, yet you claim I'm misguided. So this can't be a
reliable way to test a new teacher.

Kent, when I first posted a pimi video you predicted it will never go
fast because my teacher didn't know what he was doing. A week later I
posted an update, and you said it looked good and was "starting to
move pretty fast". I think you owe my teacher an apology!

BTW my goal isn't to play at a professional level, but merely at a BM
level (so I can get into a DMA program). Based on responses here, I
understand that anyone with a BM credential could easily play at the
speeds I described. So the short term goals are necessary conditions
to achieve my overall strategy (not sufficient conditions, of course).

[Lutemann]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Lutemann
Almost nothing in life is fair. You could try serveral other teachers
and go back if you were unhappy. I actually send my students to other
teachers. You claim to be interested in performing at the professional
level, but like any beginner you don't know the right questions to
ask.

I'm happy now, yet you claim I'm misguided. So this can't be a
reliable way to test a new teacher.
Kent, when I first posted a pimi video you predicted it will never go
fast because my teacher didn't know what he was doing. A week later I
posted an update, and you said it looked good and was "starting to
move pretty fast". I think you owe my teacher an apology!
BTW my goal isn't to play at a professional level, but merely at a BM
level (so I can get into a DMA program). Based on responses here, I
understand that anyone with a BM credential could easily play at the
speeds I described. So the short term goals are necessary conditions
to achieve my overall strategy (not sufficient conditions, of course).

Tommy says, "Kent, when I first posted a pimi video you predicted it
will never go
fast because my teacher didn't know what he was doing. A week later I
posted an update, and you said it looked good and was "starting to
move pretty fast". I think you owe my teacher an apology! "

Tommy, you have an answer for everything. What can I say, you have all
the answers. I deal with students like you everyday.

[Slogoin]

Did it ever occur to you that your goals are wrong?

TG won't listen to anybody who doesn't have the "proper"
credentials.

 Do you you have any imagination?

He seems to repeat the same patterns over and over, just like his
CG study plan.

[Richard Yates]

Post by Lutemann

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Lutemann
Here's a freebie. You need to get another teacher, Tommy. And that
advice is worth a thousand plus dollars.

Hmm, I don't think so. I seem to be progressing toward my goals
With no galloping, of course.

Tommy says, "Hmm, I don't think so. I seem to be progressing toward
my goals under
his tutelage."
That's a little bit like saying that you have chosen the best new car
to buy because it starts up when you turn the key. Did it ever occur
to you that your goals are wrong? Do you you have any imagination?

Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's so great
about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many suggestions about
musicality. Those suggestions that he has incorporated are themselves
mechanical implemented. He is interested in mechanics and numbers (and
trolling). Now, it may be that this is not what he is really like - most of
us probably appear at least somewhat different here, I'm sure - but I just
find nothing in his posts to suggest that he is otherwise. And, there's
nothing wrong with that if he is enjoying his pursuits, it's just that we
should not expect something different.

[Slogoin]

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's so great
about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many suggestions about
musicality. Those suggestions that he has incorporated are themselves
mechanical implemented. He is interested in mechanics and numbers (and
trolling).

"The value of an education in a liberal arts college is not the
learning of many facts but the training of the mind to think."
—Albert Einstein

Post by Richard Yates
Now, it may be that this is not what he is really like - most of
us probably appear at least somewhat different here, I'm sure - but I just
find nothing in his posts to suggest that he is otherwise. And, there's
nothing wrong with that if he is enjoying his pursuits, it's just that we
should not expect something different.

There are a number of people like TG who get a kick from trolling.
We've had our share in RMCG. It is an interesting psychology and not
without parallel in the real-time world.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's so great
about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many suggestions about
musicality.

Consider also that I've yet to receive one coherent answer to these
questions. Also Richard, can you identify one concrete suggestion
about musicality that I've resisted? I would like to play with
greater expression, but merely insulting me for not doing so is
unhelpful.

[Richard Yates]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's
so great about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many
suggestions about musicality.

Consider also that I've yet to receive one coherent answer to these
questions.

Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

Post by Tommy Grand
Also Richard, can you identify one concrete suggestion
about musicality that I've resisted?

Larry's.

Post by Tommy Grand
I would like to play with
greater expression, but merely insulting me for not doing so is
unhelpful.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Richard Yates
Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

Both were ridden with false statements. To take one from Stanleys:

"The output of every composer we might look at is of variable quality.
Not so with Bach."

Do you actually agree with this? For example, do you think the
Chaconne is equal to the Minuet in G?

Post by Richard Yates
Larry's.

Which one, exactly?

[Richard Yates]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

"The output of every composer we might look at is of variable quality.
Not so with Bach."
Do you actually agree with this? For example, do you think the
Chaconne is equal to the Minuet in G?

Post by Richard Yates
Larry's.

Which one, exactly?

I've told you where to find your own rocks. It's up to you to decide which
to pick up.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Richard Yates

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

"The output of every composer we might look at is of variable quality.
Not so with Bach."
Do you actually agree with this?  For example, do you think the
Chaconne is equal to the Minuet in G?
 > Larry's.
Which one, exactly?

I've told you where to find your own rocks. It's up to you to decide which
to pick up.

You could just answer the question. If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality. Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.

[arys]

Post by Richard Yates

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

"The output of every composer we might look at is of variable quality.
Not so with Bach."
Do you actually agree with this?  For example, do you think the
Chaconne is equal to the Minuet in G?
 > Larry's.
Which one, exactly?

I've told you where to find your own rocks. It's up to you to decide which
to pick up.

You could just answer the question.  If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality.  Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.

Maybe you should make it a poll. I agree those pieces represent the
same quality. Of course, quality necessarily won't equal significance.

-MK

[Tommy Grand]

Post by arys
Maybe you should make it a poll. I agree those pieces represent the
same quality.

I think your out of your mind! Many, many superior minuets have been
written. How many greater chaconnes?

[arys]

Post by arys
Maybe you should make it a poll. I agree those pieces represent the
same quality.

I think your out of your mind!  Many, many superior minuets have been
written.  How many greater chaconnes?

Ever heard it played by a professional?

-MK

[Tommy Grand]

Post by arys

Post by arys
Maybe you should make it a poll. I agree those pieces represent the
same quality.

I think your out of your mind!  Many, many superior minuets have been
written.  How many greater chaconnes?

Ever heard it played by a professional?

Sure, but what does that have to do with it? I'm talking about the
music itself. Here's a much better one:

[arys]

Post by arys

Post by arys
Maybe you should make it a poll. I agree those pieces represent the
same quality.

I think your out of your mind!  Many, many superior minuets have been
written.  How many greater chaconnes?

Ever heard it played by a professional?

Sure, but what does that have to do with it?  I'm talking about the
music itself.  Here's a much better http://youtu.be/J4lz8ylKS6c

Thanks for the link, I haven't heard it played by orchestra before.
But it's not from the same era, and it's a lot longer and has much
emotional development, so I don't think fair comparison is possible.

I think you are referring to this piece in your original Bach post, am
I right?:

Is it even authentic Bach?

-MK

[Stanley Yates]

"Tommy Grand" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:adb85ac9-ea28-471a-998c-***@v25g2000yqk.googlegroups.com...

Sure, but what does that have to do with it? I'm talking about the
music itself. Here's a much better one:
http://youtu.be/J4lz8ylKS6c
---------

Tommy, how can you compare an orchestral minuet written by a 20th-century
composer with a galant minuet written for an instruction book>? Their aims
are entirely different.

[Stanley Yates]

Post by arys
Maybe you should make it a poll. I agree those pieces represent the
same quality.

I think your out of your mind! Many, many superior minuets have been
written. How many greater chaconnes?

-------

Then identify a superior galant minuet, written for instructional use (as
this one was), and identify in what terms it is stronger than Bach's. Or,
simply indentify an imperfection or weakness in the g-major minuet.

sy

[Stanley Yates]

"Tommy Grand" <***@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:a1ad3752-311c-4ced-a68c-***@e25g2000yqh.googlegroups.com...

You could just answer the question. If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality. Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.

-------------
You can only judge a piece in terms of what it is, how it relates to its
specific genre. Both the chaconne and the minuet in g are excellent examples
of their respective genres. But you cannot compare them to one another
directly.

If my remarks contain a falsehood, perhaps someone could identify a weak of
flawed piece that can be found in the surviving corpus of Bach's works. I'm
yet to come across one. I'd say that Toccata and Fugue in d-mi, relatively
speaking and in terms of its genre, is one of his weaker pieces. And how
weak is that!?

sy

[Tommy Grand]

You could just answer the question.  If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality.  Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.
-------------
You can only judge a piece in terms of what it is, how it relates to its
specific genre. Both the chaconne and the minuet in g are excellent examples
of their respective genres. But you cannot compare them to one another
directly.
If my remarks contain a falsehood, perhaps someone could identify a weak of
flawed piece that can be found in the surviving corpus of Bach's works. I'm
yet to come across one. I'd say that Toccata and Fugue in d-mi, relatively
speaking and in terms of its genre, is one of his weaker pieces. And how
weak is that!?

Friend Stanley, you know I hold you in the highest esteem! You were
kind to send me that book on arpeggios, and I hope you'll give me
directions to the guitar summer camp, so I can get some in person
advise.

However, I think you are wrong that Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived, and that he never wrote a weak piece.

Here's another of his duds imo:

Here's why it's a dud:

[Tommy Grand]

You could just answer the question.  If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality.  Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.
-------------
You can only judge a piece in terms of what it is, how it relates to its
specific genre. Both the chaconne and the minuet in g are excellent examples
of their respective genres. But you cannot compare them to one another
directly.
If my remarks contain a falsehood, perhaps someone could identify a weak of
flawed piece that can be found in the surviving corpus of Bach's works. I'm
yet to come across one. I'd say that Toccata and Fugue in d-mi, relatively
speaking and in terms of its genre, is one of his weaker pieces. And how
weak is that!?

Friend Stanley, you know I hold you in the highest esteem!  You were
kind to send me that book on arpeggios, and I hope you'll give me
directions to the guitar summer camp, so I can get some in person
advise.
However, I think you are wrong that Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived, and that he never wrote a weak piece.
http://youtu.be/qGO0wbRdI4Y
http://youtu.be/bHOdbCuBd5g

Another yawner:

[Stanley Yates]

This is a good indication of when an instrument has gone to far. What's that
story about Bach holding a pole in his mouth and using it to play an
otherwise unavailable note. But I wonder if, in the genre of organ pedal
exercises, there's any better music than this...

sy

You could just answer the question. If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality. Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.
-------------
You can only judge a piece in terms of what it is, how it relates to its
specific genre. Both the chaconne and the minuet in g are excellent examples
of their respective genres. But you cannot compare them to one another
directly.
If my remarks contain a falsehood, perhaps someone could identify a weak of
flawed piece that can be found in the surviving corpus of Bach's works. I'm
yet to come across one. I'd say that Toccata and Fugue in d-mi, relatively
speaking and in terms of its genre, is one of his weaker pieces. And how
weak is that!?

Friend Stanley, you know I hold you in the highest esteem! You were
kind to send me that book on arpeggios, and I hope you'll give me
directions to the guitar summer camp, so I can get some in person
advise.
However, I think you are wrong that Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived, and that he never wrote a weak piece.
http://youtu.be/qGO0wbRdI4Y
http://youtu.be/bHOdbCuBd5g

Another yawner: http://youtu.be/PulGElOMBzQ

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Stanley Yates
This is a good indication of when an instrument has gone to far. What's that
story about Bach holding a pole in his mouth and using it to play an
otherwise unavailable note. But I wonder if, in the genre of organ pedal
exercises, there's any better music than this...

Ha ha, did you know Pujol transcribed this for guitar? See here:
http://www.allegro.co.uk/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=14_276&products_id=110315

[stanleyy]

Another http://youtu.be/PulGElOMBzQ

By the way, a priceless set of comments accompany that YouTube
performance at normal tempo,

starting with "what kind of piano is that" and shortly thereafter
moving on to various savory items I can't possibly reproduce here!

sy

[Stanley Yates]

Here's another iconic musician, and something I find myself listening to at
least once a week:

Be sure to listen all the way through...

sy

Another http://youtu.be/PulGElOMBzQ

By the way, a priceless set of comments accompany that YouTube
performance at normal tempo,

http://youtu.be/aAhjeMYqRmQ

starting with "what kind of piano is that" and shortly thereafter
moving on to various savory items I can't possibly reproduce here!

sy

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Stanley Yates
Here's another iconic musician, and something I find myself listening to at
http://youtu.be/14GYov0EdyQ
Be sure to listen all the way through...

I'm not sure I get it...BUT I don't know jack about Zepplin, nor rock
and roll.

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
I'm not sure I get it...BUT I don't know jack

...nor rhythm.

[Stanley Yates]

Friend Tommy,

Now you're appealing to authority, and Gould certainly is an authority. But
that doesn't mean that he is correct. His statement, "you've heard one
diminished 7th, you've heard them all" tells you he's playing one of his
games. He always played games and was very good at that. But this doesn't
diminish the value of the Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue, a piece championed by
countless first-rate musicians, such as Brendel. ans authority equal to
Gould.

sy

You could just answer the question. If Stanley's essay is true, then
Minuet in G=Chaconne in quality. Otherwise, his essay contains
falsehoods, and you consider it "excellent" merely because it affirms
your beliefs.
-------------
You can only judge a piece in terms of what it is, how it relates to its
specific genre. Both the chaconne and the minuet in g are excellent examples
of their respective genres. But you cannot compare them to one another
directly.
If my remarks contain a falsehood, perhaps someone could identify a weak of
flawed piece that can be found in the surviving corpus of Bach's works. I'm
yet to come across one. I'd say that Toccata and Fugue in d-mi, relatively
speaking and in terms of its genre, is one of his weaker pieces. And how
weak is that!?

Friend Stanley, you know I hold you in the highest esteem! You were
kind to send me that book on arpeggios, and I hope you'll give me
directions to the guitar summer camp, so I can get some in person
advise.

However, I think you are wrong that Bach is the greatest composer who
ever lived, and that he never wrote a weak piece.

Here's another of his duds imo:

http://youtu.be/qGO0wbRdI4Y

Here's why it's a dud:

http://youtu.be/bHOdbCuBd5g

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Stanley Yates
Friend Tommy,
Now you're appealing to authority, and Gould certainly is an authority. But
that doesn't mean that he is correct. His statement, "you've heard one
diminished 7th, you've heard them all" tells you he's playing one of his
games. He always played games and was very good at that. But this doesn't
diminish the value of the Chromatic Fantasy and Fugue, a piece championed by
countless first-rate musicians, such as Brendel. ans authority equal to
Gould.

I am appealing to authority, but no more than the countless people
here who have defended Bach's greatness by saying he is "widely
considered" to be this or that. It doesn't matter what he's
considered, nor by whom. Just the facts ma'am! And the fact is that
we pay a lot of attention to Bach, because we are brought up to do so,
because he's been in vogue the last 100 years or so. If some demon
sneaked into the textbooks, and replaced Bach's name with Vivaldi, I
think we'd all be parroting a different line.

BTW have you heard this story about Beethoven. He had a book by
Forkel in his library which contained the following setence: "There is
no better measure of a music-lover's discrimination than his ability
to appreciate the works of Bach". Beethoven's biographer writes: "At
either side of this excerpt there stands in Beethoven's writing a
thick, black question mark made with the heaviest of music pens. The
two question marks stand in judgement on this claim made by the
learned historian and most distinguisted of Bach lovers. No Hogarth
could have made a question mark look more severe or depicted dissent
more expressively."

[Stanley Yates]

Post by Tommy Grand
"The output of every composer we might look at is of variable quality.
Not so with Bach."
Do you actually agree with this? For example, do you think the
Chaconne is equal to the Minuet in G?

Bach's Minuet in G is one of the most trivial thinsg we have by him, yet
it's still an incredibly popular piece - was even the basis of a hit pop
song. As an example of its type, Bach's Minuet in G is one of the most
admired, if not the most admiored, galant minuets ever written.

sy

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Richard Yates
Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

BTW Richard, I like Bach and Barrios. I just don't see why they are
considered 100x better than Palestrina and Pujol. In fact, I'm quite
sure most people admire the former composers mostly because their
mommies said so. Stanley and Tony gave semi-cogent responses, but
most people couldn't even approach the question. This proves my point.

[Slogoin]

 This proves my point.

The constant repeating, ad nauseam, over and over, redundant point
of TG... everybody is a poser... why? Because TG is a poser and
believes everybody else but those "properly" credentialed are posers
just like him.

[Tommy Grand]

 This proves my point.

   The constant repeating, ad nauseam, over and over, redundant point
of TG... everybody is a poser... why? Because TG is a poser and
believes everybody else but those "properly" credentialed are posers
just like him.

Like when you say nobody understands maths?

[Lutemann]

Post by Richard Yates

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's
so great about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many
suggestions about musicality.

Consider also that I've yet to receive one coherent answer to these
questions.

Tony's was excellent about Barrios.
Stanley's was excellent about Bach.

Post by Tommy Grand
Also Richard, can you identify one concrete suggestion
about musicality that I've resisted?

Larry's.

Post by Tommy Grand
I would like to play with
greater expression, but merely insulting me for not doing so is
unhelpful.

Barrios wrote a lot of great restaurant music, but then why can't
great restaurant music be art? Much of Barrios' music is at least
minor art, IMO.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Lutemann
Barrios wrote a lot of great restaurant music, but then why can't
great restaurant music be art? Much of Barrios' music is at least
minor art, IMO.

I have no opinion on whether Barrios and Bach deserve their
reputation. I'm agnostic. But it's a commonplace to say these are
two of the most important composers in history. Since this is so
widely repeated, I assume people have good reasons and can back it
up...unless they're just following the herd. So I ask the simple
question: why is Bach>Vivaldi? One guy writes a billion fugues, one
guy writes a billion concertos.

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
I assume people have good reasons and can back it
up...unless they're just following the herd.

The constant repeating, ad nauseam, over and over, redundant point
of TG... everybody is a poser... why? Because TG is a poser and
believes everybody else but those "properly" credentialed are posers
just like him.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Tommy Grand
I assume people have good reasons and can back it
up...unless they're just following the herd.

  The constant repeating, ad nauseam, over and over, redundant point
of TG... everybody is a poser... why? Because TG is a poser and
believes everybody else but those "properly" credentialed are posers
just like him.

Like when you say everyone's obsessed with credentials, because you're
ashamed you have no HS diploma?

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
Like when you say everyone's obsessed with credentials,

I've experienced a good deal of this personally, for idiosyncratic
reasons. I actually have no serious professional qualifications in any
field that was identifiable 40 years ago -- which is why I am teaching
at MIT, a scientific university, where no one cared much about
credentials. I'm largely self-taught (including linguistics), and my
work happens to have ranged fairly widely. Some years ago I did some
work on mathematical theory of automata. At the time, I gave invited
lectures in mathematics and engineering departments at major
universities. No one believed that I was an accomplished professional
mathematician, but no one cared either; people were interested in
determining whether what I said was true or false, interesting or not,
susceptible to improvement and further work or not. On the other hand,
when I've worked in such areas as history of ideas or international
affairs, the reaction has commonly been quite different, ranging from
near-hysteria of an often comical variety to fury that I should even
dare to step upon this sacred turf without the proper letters after my
name. I don't think it's very hard to explain the difference, which is
quite striking.

Noam Chomsky interviewed by Günther Grewendorf
Protosociology, Vol. 6, 1994, pp. 293-303

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Tommy Grand
Like when you say everyone's obsessed with credentials,

    I've experienced a good deal of this personally, for idiosyncratic
reasons. I actually have no serious professional qualifications in any
field that was identifiable 40 years ago -- which is why I am teaching
at MIT, a scientific university, where no one cared much about
credentials. I'm largely self-taught (including linguistics), and my
work happens to have ranged fairly widely. Some years ago I did some
work on mathematical theory of automata. At the time, I gave invited
lectures in mathematics and engineering departments at major
universities. No one believed that I was an accomplished professional
mathematician, but no one cared either; people were interested in
determining whether what I said was true or false, interesting or not,
susceptible to improvement and further work or not. On the other hand,
when I've worked in such areas as history of ideas or international
affairs, the reaction has commonly been quite different, ranging from
near-hysteria of an often comical variety to fury that I should even
dare to step upon this sacred turf without the proper letters after my
name. I don't think it's very hard to explain the difference, which is
quite striking.
Noam Chomsky interviewed by Günther Grewendorf
Protosociology, Vol. 6, 1994, pp. 293-303

Like when you say everyone's obsessed with credentials, because
you're
ashamed you have no HS diploma?

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
Like when you say everyone's obsessed with credentials,
because you're ashamed you have no HS diploma?

The constant repeating, ad nauseam, over and over, redundant point
of TG... everybody is a poser... why? Because TG is a poser and
believes everybody else but those "properly" credentialed are posers
just like him.

[Douglas Seth]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Lutemann
Barrios wrote a lot of great restaurant music, but then why can't
great restaurant music be art? Much of Barrios' music is  at least
minor art, IMO.

I have no opinion on whether Barrios and Bach deserve their
reputation.  I'm agnostic.  But it's a commonplace to say these are
two of the most important composers in history.

I have NEVER heard anyone say Barrios is on the the most important
composers in history. He is a footnote at best. It is hard to dispute
the high quality of Barrios' guitar works. Bach is, however, by all
eyewitness accounts of his playing and musicianship, perhaps not only
the greatest composer, but the greatest musician of all time.

Since this is so

Post by Tommy Grand
widely repeated, I assume people have good reasons and can back it
up...unless they're just following the herd.  So I ask the simple
question: why is Bach>Vivaldi?  One guy writes a billion fugues, one
guy writes a billion concertos.

It is the skill in which he not only wrote, but improvised these
fugues amongst other works. Someday, if you continue to study music,
I would be shocked if you don't agree. I guess you aren't there yet.
SY laid out a very convincing case for Bach's place in music. If that
isn't enough, nothing will be until you see it yourself which clearly
you haven't yet.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Douglas Seth
It is the skill in which he not only wrote, but improvised these
fugues amongst other works.  Someday, if you continue to study music,
I would be shocked if you don't agree.  I guess you aren't there yet.
SY laid out a very convincing case for Bach's place in music.  If that
isn't enough, nothing will be until you see it yourself which clearly
you haven't yet.

Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

Doug, quit while you are ahead. He's bent on making the point that
people are sheep and posers. It's not about music.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Tommy Grand
Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

   Doug, quit while you are ahead. He's bent on making the point that
people are sheep and posers. It's not about music.

It's just that I listen to tons of classical music and Bach doesn't
particularly stand out. I'd much rather listen to a Shostakovich
symphony than yet another Bach fugue. And for polyphony, give me des
Prez over Bach any day. See here:

[Douglas Seth]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Tommy Grand
Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

   Doug, quit while you are ahead. He's bent on making the point that
people are sheep and posers. It's not about music.

It's just that I listen to tons of classical music and Bach doesn't
particularly stand out.  I'd much rather listen to a Shostakovich
symphony than yet another Bach fugue.  And for polyphony, give me des
Prez over Bach any day.  See http://youtu.be/yHEOayo0QV0

I think I feel asleep. Now feel the power! This is a man's polyphony.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Douglas Seth

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Tommy Grand
Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

   Doug, quit while you are ahead. He's bent on making the point that
people are sheep and posers. It's not about music.

It's just that I listen to tons of classical music and Bach doesn't
particularly stand out.  I'd much rather listen to a Shostakovich
symphony than yet another Bach fugue.  And for polyphony, give me des
Prez over Bach any day.  See http://youtu.be/yHEOayo0QV0

I think I feel asleep. Now feel the power! This is a man's polyphony.
http://youtu.be/_FXoyr_FyFw

Sorry I seek the sublime, not the carnal. Anyway Bach didn't write
that, its old news.

[Douglas Seth]

Post by Douglas Seth

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Tommy Grand
Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

   Doug, quit while you are ahead. He's bent on making the point that
people are sheep and posers. It's not about music.

It's just that I listen to tons of classical music and Bach doesn't
particularly stand out.  I'd much rather listen to a Shostakovich
symphony than yet another Bach fugue.  And for polyphony, give me des
Prez over Bach any day.  See http://youtu.be/yHEOayo0QV0

I think I feel asleep. Now feel the power! This is a man's polyphony.
http://youtu.be/_FXoyr_FyFw

Sorry I seek the sublime, not the carnal.  Anyway Bach didn't write
that, its old news.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -

At this point, it is still attributed to Bach, although there are some
skeptics. Regardless, a great piece.

[Douglas Seth]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Douglas Seth
It is the skill in which he not only wrote, but improvised these
fugues amongst other works.  Someday, if you continue to study music,
I would be shocked if you don't agree.  I guess you aren't there yet.
SY laid out a very convincing case for Bach's place in music.  If that
isn't enough, nothing will be until you see it yourself which clearly
you haven't yet.

Why do you think Bach was more skilled than Vivaldi or Handel?
Because this is the received view?

I certainly don't think this because it is the received view! Look at
the sophistocation of the polyphony in Bach's music. Vivaldi's
concerto's unoffensive enough, but don't approach this level of genius.

[Tommy Grand]

I certainly don't think this because it is the received view!  Look at
the sophistocation of the polyphony in Bach's music.  

Is it more sophisticated than Obrecht?

[Douglas Seth]

Post by Tommy Grand

I certainly don't think this because it is the received view!  Look at
the sophistocation of the polyphony in Bach's music.  

Is it more sophisticated than Obrecht?

Yes, see Art of Fugue.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Douglas Seth

Post by Tommy Grand

I certainly don't think this because it is the received view!  Look at
the sophistocation of the polyphony in Bach's music.  

Is it more sophisticated than Obrecht?

Yes, see Art of Fugue.

See Missa Maria Zart.

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
See Missa Maria Zart.

TG springs his trap!

The art of TG's RMCG fugue:

"I'm too stupid to Google"....z*&$3(zart'nR$* PING!

"I know more about music than you, neeer, needer!"

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Slogoin

Post by Tommy Grand
See Missa Maria Zart.

TG springs his trap!

No trap, I just prefer the MMZ to the Art of Fugue. It's called the
"Sphinx" for good reason, see here:

"To describe Obrecht's Missa Maria zart (Mass for Gentle Mary) as a
'great work' is true in two respects. It is a masterpiece of sustained
and largely abstract musical thought; and it is possibly the longest
polyphonic setting of the Mass Ordinary ever written, over twice the
length of the more standard examples by Palestrina and Josquin. How it
was possible for Obrecht to conceive something so completely outside
the normal experience of his time is one of the most fascinating
riddles in Renaissance music."

Anyway I assume anyone who really loves polyphony is familiar with
this work. Perhaps not someone who just repeats conventional wisdom,
desperately trying to appear cultured....

[Slogoin]

Post by Tommy Grand
Anyway I assume anyone who really loves polyphony is familiar with
this work.  Perhaps not someone who just repeats conventional wisdom,
desperately trying to appear cultured....

If you don't know this "marker" you are a poser.

WE GET IT! You think everybody is a poser...

... buried and deep down inside, somewhere, lies your greatest fear -
that you are the real poser.

[Douglas Seth]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Douglas Seth

Post by Tommy Grand

I certainly don't think this because it is the received view!  Look at
the sophistocation of the polyphony in Bach's music.  

Is it more sophisticated than Obrecht?

Yes, see Art of Fugue.

See Missa Maria Zart.

A great piece, but Art of Fugue is regarded as the highest level
polyphonic piece ever written. Take a 18th century counterpoint class
or study it. If you did, you would have a far better appreciation for
the genius of Bach's polyphonic works. This is the most perfect music
(even mathematically) ever written. Even the study of the
unaccompanied string (really self accompanied!) music is a clinic on
implying polyphony in single line. We could break down a Bach work
and discuss his mastery of the conventions of 18th century
counterpoint if you would like? Maybe that could offer you proof of
his genius since you can't hear it.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Douglas Seth
A great piece, but Art of Fugue is regarded as the highest level
polyphonic piece ever written.  

I'm well aware of how it's regarded. I'm asking *why* it's regarded.
Vivaldi mastered the concerto, Bach mastered the fugue. Why is one
better?

Post by Douglas Seth
This is the most perfect music (even mathematically) ever written.  

No, Palestrina's polyphony is more perfect.

[Stanley Yates]

Post by Douglas Seth
A great piece, but Art of Fugue is regarded as the highest level
polyphonic piece ever written.

I'm well aware of how it's regarded. I'm asking *why* it's regarded.
Vivaldi mastered the concerto, Bach mastered the fugue. Why is one
better?

Post by Douglas Seth
This is the most perfect music (even mathematically) ever written.

No, Palestrina's polyphony is more perfect.

--------

It's also much simpler. Innay case, Ockegham was probably the most
accomplished contrapuntist before Bach.

sy

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Douglas Seth
A great piece, but Art of Fugue is regarded as the highest level
polyphonic piece ever written.

I'm well aware of how it's regarded.  I'm asking *why* it's regarded.
Vivaldi mastered the concerto, Bach mastered the fugue.  Why is one
better?

Post by Douglas Seth
This is the most perfect music (even mathematically) ever written.

No, Palestrina's polyphony is more perfect.
--------
It's also much simpler. Innay case, Ockegham was probably the most
accomplished contrapuntist before Bach.

Why was Bach>Ockegham? Merely because his counterpoint is allegedly
more complex? Sorabji was more complex than either of them.

[Stanley Yates]

Ockengam's cpt is more measureable, assessable, and part of a recognized
canon. Sorabji's isn't.

sy

Post by Douglas Seth
A great piece, but Art of Fugue is regarded as the highest level
polyphonic piece ever written.

I'm well aware of how it's regarded. I'm asking *why* it's regarded.
Vivaldi mastered the concerto, Bach mastered the fugue. Why is one
better?

Post by Douglas Seth
This is the most perfect music (even mathematically) ever written.

No, Palestrina's polyphony is more perfect.
--------
It's also much simpler. Innay case, Ockegham was probably the most
accomplished contrapuntist before Bach.

Why was Bach>Ockegham? Merely because his counterpoint is allegedly
more complex? Sorabji was more complex than either of them.

[dsi1]

Post by Tommy Grand
I have no opinion on whether Barrios and Bach deserve their
reputation. I'm agnostic. But it's a commonplace to say these are
two of the most important composers in history. Since this is so
widely repeated, I assume people have good reasons and can back it
up...unless they're just following the herd.

What exciting Barrios news! OTOH, it might be that you've been hanging
around the classical guitar herd for far too long, heffer! :-)

Here's the real story: a few folks dig Barrios but most other folks will
say "who?" The few folks doing the digging are generally classical
guitarists. That's the breaks.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's so great
about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many suggestions about
musicality. Those suggestions that he has incorporated are themselves
mechanical implemented. He is interested in mechanics and numbers (and
trolling). Now, it may be that this is not what he is really like - most of
us probably appear at least somewhat different here, I'm sure - but I just
find nothing in his posts to suggest that he is otherwise. And, there's
nothing wrong with that if he is enjoying his pursuits, it's just that we
should not expect something different.

Additionally Richard, I am weary of people using alleged "musicality"
as a crutch for neglecting tech practice. It seems like every time I
turn around, I'm seeing another CGist with no chops who nevertheless
claims he's better than JW. It's just phony.

[Dicerous]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's so great
about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many suggestions about
musicality. Those suggestions that he has incorporated are themselves
mechanical implemented. He is interested in mechanics and numbers (and
trolling). Now, it may be that this is not what he is really like - most of
us probably appear at least somewhat different here, I'm sure - but I just
find nothing in his posts to suggest that he is otherwise. And, there's
nothing wrong with that if he is enjoying his pursuits, it's just that we
should not expect something different.

Additionally Richard, I am weary of people using alleged "musicality"
as a crutch for neglecting tech practice.  It seems like every time I
turn around, I'm seeing another CGist with no chops who nevertheless
claims he's better than JW.  It's just phony.

Ha! What a gearhead. You're hilarious tommy.

[Richard Yates]

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's
so great about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many
suggestions about musicality. Those suggestions that he has
incorporated are themselves mechanical implemented. He is interested
in mechanics and numbers (and trolling). Now, it may be that this is
not what he is really like - most of us probably appear at least
somewhat different here, I'm sure - but I just find nothing in his
posts to suggest that he is otherwise. And, there's nothing wrong
with that if he is enjoying his pursuits, it's just that we should
not expect something different.

Additionally Richard, I am weary of people using alleged "musicality"
as a crutch for neglecting tech practice. It seems like every time I
turn around, I'm seeing another CGist with no chops who nevertheless
claims he's better than JW. It's just phony.

My guess is that everytime you turn around you are just going in circles
and seeing the same guy in that shiny picture on the wall.

[Dicerous]

Post by Richard Yates

Post by Tommy Grand

Post by Richard Yates
Kent, the upshot of TG's posts is that he has little interest in, or
appreciation of, music as music. Consider that he has asked what's
so great about Bach and about Barrios and he resists many
suggestions about musicality. Those suggestions that he has
incorporated are themselves mechanical implemented. He is interested
in mechanics and numbers (and trolling). Now, it may be that this is
not what he is really like - most of us probably appear at least
somewhat different here, I'm sure - but I just find nothing in his
posts to suggest that he is otherwise. And, there's nothing wrong
with that if he is enjoying his pursuits, it's just that we should
not expect something different.

Additionally Richard, I am weary of people using alleged "musicality"
as a crutch for neglecting tech practice.  It seems like every time I
turn around, I'm seeing another CGist with no chops who nevertheless
claims he's better than JW.  It's just phony.

My guess is that everytime you turn around you are just going in circles
and seeing the same guy in that shiny picture on the wall.

We live in a culture of narcissism; one could get really good at
*mirror games* and still be totally lost in the *hall of mirrors*.
Lacan was very informative about the developmental stages of this at
around 1-2 years old. It doesn't mean one is programmed this way for
the duration, just that it's a ubiquitous issue for many.

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Richard Yates
My guess is that everytime you turn around you are just going in circles
and seeing the same guy in that shiny picture on the wall.

Oh please, you know exactly the type. The one who shuns virtuoso
showpieces "on principle" and plays Bach real slow "to bring out the
counterpoint". Lol..

[Dicerous]

Post by Richard Yates
My guess is that everytime you turn around you are just going in circles
and seeing the same guy in that shiny picture on the wall.

Oh please, you know exactly the type.  The one who shuns virtuoso
showpieces "on principle" and plays Bach real slow "to bring out the
counterpoint".  Lol

Is this a tribute to *the catcher in the rye* to commemorate j.d.
salinger's passing Tommy?

[Tommy Grand]

Post by Dicerous
Is this a tribute to *the catcher in the rye* to commemorate j.d.
salinger's passing Tommy?

You think I'd be that phony?

[Eric E]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

Hi Tommy,
I think generally, I've stopped lessons, when I've felt like I
had reached a particular skill level that I wanted to be playing at.
As a performer, there have been certain elements that I wanted to
encorporate into my playing and improvisation, so I'd study with
someone until I developed that particular skill and then I'd move on.
After college I continued both jazz and classical studies. For the
classical lessons I practiced what my teacher gave me every week and
then stopped lessons after four years of study--that was probably
because I was really a jazz player and not going to go anywhere as a
classical player. The education was great though. That was about 18
years ago.
I currently study on-line with Jimmy Bruno (jazz guitarist). I
would study with Jimmy in person if I lived closer to Philly. I would
base my current philosophy of study on that of Mike Longo. Mike was
Dizzy Gillespie's long time pianist and a former student of Dizzy's.
He once said of Dizzy, "I'm gonna hang with this guy until that shit
rubs off." That's how I'll know when to quit lessons with Jimmy
Bruno.

--Eric E

[TonyMorris]

This is directed at those of you who didn't attend music school.  How
did you know when you were ready to stop taking lessons?  I don't mean
why did you quit a particular teacher, but rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary for your
development as a player.

When your checks start to bounce.

[David Raleigh Arnold]

Post by Tommy Grand
rather how you came to the
conclusion that further formal instruction wasn't necessary

That has nothing to do with it. You quit when you don't want
to go to lessons any more. daveA