The perfect method part 2

[Austin]

Something stuck with me the last time I posted about the fact that I wanted to write my own method eventually. "What more could be said on the topic?" I don't think much more could be said on the topic however, The structuring of everything could be done a bit better I think. Right now it seems like Bradbury's method has this gigantic wall of difficulty that you have to get past that starts around sidewalks of New York on page 35. I think it's trying to make music that's too comprehensive rather than making simple exercises. I know there are a ton of those as well, but those aren't very musical. It may first seem that these two statements are contradictory. Not enough sight reading exercises that are comprehensible pieces of music, and too many comprehensible pieces, but I think the difficulty curve is just too steep. I remember when I first started the mountain polka I could memorize in a week but the sidewalks of New York I still haven't been able to memorize or even play through fully after going past page 59. Maybe that's a skill issue, but nevertheless I think it points to an issue that it's introducing way too much way too quickly. Let's look at another example, The caissons go rolling along, it's in cut time. In my eyes, it's way too soon to introduce a beginner to that. That's what I can bring to the table, simple musical etudes that slowly increase in difficulty. Arrangements just do not make the greatest etudes for learning. Instead etudes need to be crafted with a specific lesson in mind. It seems like Bradbury did this at a surface level, but I think he sacrificed alot of The beginner's ability to learn by using arrangements to get his points across. Just my thoughts on the matter as a beginner using this book.

[Joel Hooks]

Really, there aren't any?

Austin said:

I practice my scale work there just aren't any good etudes for it like there are with classical guitar or piano. Etudes need to be engaging on their own in order to draw attention. I know you're saying that scale practice should not be boring and you have to make it not boring, but I feel like playing something actually musical is more beneficial for The purposes of developing musicality and memory. I feel like piano and classical guitar have much better pedagogical tools. Maybe I'm just immature. Idk.

Jody Stecher said:

On the Fun Factor or its absence in practicing scales:  In my 20s I didn't like practicing scales. I thought of it as odious drudgery. And then I met raga musicians and singers from India. They would treat scales, including our garden variety Major Scale,  with the same focus, love, and even reverence as they did for the most beautiful melody imaginable. They did their scale practice not with resignation and gritted teeth but with zeal and enjoyment and mirth and happiness. In doing so they were able to bring out hidden treasures from an ascending and descending scale. In observing them and then in my own practice I discovered scales as a source of beauty. 

On playing The Sidewalks of New York:  I just tried it. The way I tackled it was, after playing it through as written and discovering a few spots where my timing was imperfect, was to play the melody notes without the chords first and impart that timing to my right hand.  Then I put the chords back in, making sure to maintain the proper timing. I would recommend that to any student.

On memorization:  I have played hundreds of tunes, songs, and banjo solos from memory and not once did I undertake to memorize anything. I practiced and played each piece over and over, enough times that everything automatically lodged itself in my mind and hands. Anyone can do this as we all remember things without making an effort to do so.  In order for this to happen easily it helps to practice music you like. If you don't like what you are practicing you won't like practicing. 

Joel Hooks said:

Well, regarding reading, between this website, the Internet Archive, and what is been made available from the ABF,  there is more than a lifetime of reading.  The volume is pretty staggering.  The best sort of this work are the "jigs and reels" collections. 

Etudes and exercises are where a teacher (like Clarke) would assign work.  And just like school assignments, if the student can't pass they need to spend more time on it until they can.  If learning on one's own, one could use various tutors in tandem working on the same skills from the different methods (which is what I did).

Rolling back, if, for example, the student cannot play the scale of C using alternate fingering, in time with a metronome, that is a problem that needs correcting.  It can be a slog and NOT fun.  But what is fun is ultimately playing pieces in time with clear articulation.

A lesson a week might be much too fast for the student, or it might be much too slow as individuals learn at different paces. 

Regarding your question about Sidewalks, I did not do this to be a lesson, I did it because I like the tune as well as the exercise of taking a piano score and arranging for banjo.  Bradbury already did half of it, and established the "method" or flavor of arrangement with melody on the third string.  And frankly, there are very few pieces that I could have concert ready in a week (it takes me much longer, even on the easy stuff).

As provided by Bradbury, the etude is designed to teach reading and understanding of divided voices.  He uses what would have been a familiar tune (this was a standard played on calliopes at fairs and carnivals, or during carrousel rides).  While not "easy" it is also not "hard" and is a slow waltz that should be played nostalgically (as the song lyrics are nostalgic about the author's childhood). 

[Byron Thomas]

Through the good work of people who've had the foresight to preserve this material, I highly doubt that "there just aren't any good etudes for it like there are with classical guitar or piano". I implore you to peruse not only this site but also Joel's Internet Archive account. The lack of good etudes may come from the lack of exposure and trying to do more than one is capable at that time. Try out W.M.C. Stah'ls (Wm. C. Stahl's International Banjo Method : Wm C. Stahl : Free Down...) or a Herb Ellis Book (https://www.classic-banjo.com/files/TUTORBOOKS/Ellis_Thorough_Schoo...). Don't play anything at what you would consider proper speed starting out. Start slowly and you'll excel in due time. I don't feel as if I'm saying anything new, but I just offer these words a gentle reminder because it's easy to forget in the beginning.

After you get your bearings and also view the vast amount of tutor examples that exist, should you then think about your own tutor. At this point, before you have a handle on your banjo and its intricacies, it seems like a fruitless endeavor. If this ever comes to fruition, let me know. I'll gladly play through your method.

[Austin]

I just composed some etudes based on C major arpeggios and scale work. They are very simple and I think effective. I'm talking about the specific things composed to be studies. Like basic scale work, chord shapes, etc. I don't think there are any figuration preludes that just repeat a simple pattern over and over again that one can use as a basis for improvisation. I could be wrong and likely am. I feel like in their pursuit of trying to get the student playing Music of the time, they tried to introduce too much far too quickly. Farland is the worst at this by far. His pieces are not for beginners by a long shot. Agnew gets the sense of introducing things slowly, but his scale work is very dull. Bradbury has good pieces, but again the in between material, scale work, arpeggios, position work just can't grab my attention. If I could cater to my own skills to push myself, improve and learn to memorize shouldn't I? 

Byron Thomas said:

Through the good work of people who've had the foresight to preserve this material, I highly doubt that "there just aren't any good etudes for it like there are with classical guitar or piano". I implore you to peruse not only this site but also Joel's Internet Archive account. The lack of good etudes may come from the lack of exposure and trying to do more than one is capable at that time. Try out W.M.C. Stah'ls (Wm. C. Stahl's International Banjo Method : Wm C. Stahl : Free Down...) or a Herb Ellis Book (https://www.classic-banjo.com/files/TUTORBOOKS/Ellis_Thorough_Schoo...). Don't play anything at what you would consider proper speed starting out. Start slowly and you'll excel in due time. I don't feel as if I'm saying anything new, but I just offer these words a gentle reminder because it's easy to forget in the beginning.

After you get your bearings and also view the vast amount of tutor examples that exist, should you then think about your own tutor. At this point, before you have a handle on your banjo and its intricacies, it seems like a fruitless endeavor. If this ever comes to fruition, let me know. I'll gladly play through your method.

[Austin]

Not that I've found. Maybe there are. Do you have any recommendations? 

Joel Hooks said:

Really, there aren't any?

Austin said:

I practice my scale work there just aren't any good etudes for it like there are with classical guitar or piano. Etudes need to be engaging on their own in order to draw attention. I know you're saying that scale practice should not be boring and you have to make it not boring, but I feel like playing something actually musical is more beneficial for The purposes of developing musicality and memory. I feel like piano and classical guitar have much better pedagogical tools. Maybe I'm just immature. Idk.

Jody Stecher said:

On the Fun Factor or its absence in practicing scales:  In my 20s I didn't like practicing scales. I thought of it as odious drudgery. And then I met raga musicians and singers from India. They would treat scales, including our garden variety Major Scale,  with the same focus, love, and even reverence as they did for the most beautiful melody imaginable. They did their scale practice not with resignation and gritted teeth but with zeal and enjoyment and mirth and happiness. In doing so they were able to bring out hidden treasures from an ascending and descending scale. In observing them and then in my own practice I discovered scales as a source of beauty. 

On playing The Sidewalks of New York:  I just tried it. The way I tackled it was, after playing it through as written and discovering a few spots where my timing was imperfect, was to play the melody notes without the chords first and impart that timing to my right hand.  Then I put the chords back in, making sure to maintain the proper timing. I would recommend that to any student.

On memorization:  I have played hundreds of tunes, songs, and banjo solos from memory and not once did I undertake to memorize anything. I practiced and played each piece over and over, enough times that everything automatically lodged itself in my mind and hands. Anyone can do this as we all remember things without making an effort to do so.  In order for this to happen easily it helps to practice music you like. If you don't like what you are practicing you won't like practicing. 

Joel Hooks said:

Well, regarding reading, between this website, the Internet Archive, and what is been made available from the ABF,  there is more than a lifetime of reading.  The volume is pretty staggering.  The best sort of this work are the "jigs and reels" collections. 

Etudes and exercises are where a teacher (like Clarke) would assign work.  And just like school assignments, if the student can't pass they need to spend more time on it until they can.  If learning on one's own, one could use various tutors in tandem working on the same skills from the different methods (which is what I did).

Rolling back, if, for example, the student cannot play the scale of C using alternate fingering, in time with a metronome, that is a problem that needs correcting.  It can be a slog and NOT fun.  But what is fun is ultimately playing pieces in time with clear articulation.

A lesson a week might be much too fast for the student, or it might be much too slow as individuals learn at different paces. 

Regarding your question about Sidewalks, I did not do this to be a lesson, I did it because I like the tune as well as the exercise of taking a piano score and arranging for banjo.  Bradbury already did half of it, and established the "method" or flavor of arrangement with melody on the third string.  And frankly, there are very few pieces that I could have concert ready in a week (it takes me much longer, even on the easy stuff).

As provided by Bradbury, the etude is designed to teach reading and understanding of divided voices.  He uses what would have been a familiar tune (this was a standard played on calliopes at fairs and carnivals, or during carrousel rides).  While not "easy" it is also not "hard" and is a slow waltz that should be played nostalgically (as the song lyrics are nostalgic about the author's childhood). 

[Byron Thomas]

I started with Stahl so that's where I'll again send you. On pages 15-17 are some etudes plus easy songs. These are Daisy Polka, Marie Waltz, and Bijou Waltz (Wm. C. Stahl's International Banjo Method : Wm C. Stahl : Free Down...). They lay very nicely under the fingers and are great for showing you a basic I-IV-V in C plus your basic chord shapes and sense of timing. I still go back to playing Marie Waltz from time to time because it became that well cemented into my routine. Another etude (well it's not named as such but it's for practice) is Horace Weston's Rock Susana (Complete American Banjo School : Samuel Swaim Stewart : Free Downlo...). This song is to help facilitate the use of the thumb in stroke style. A few pages later (pg. 43) Stewart pulls the C section of Seek No Further March and states "The accented notes should be struck down with the Thumb of R. H. with considerable force." Rock Susanna is where the thumb is trained.

When it comes to memorization, I really can't add more than Jody. I'm basically on that same path. Play lots of tunes. You'll naturally come to add them to memory.

[Joel Hooks]

What could I recommend?  You wrote "I practice my scale work there just aren't any good etudes for it like there are with classical guitar or piano."

Since you have already read and studied ALL the available printed banjo exercises/etudes/short pieces for banjo as well as those for Spanish guitar, then there is nothing left. 

I have to admit that I am pretty impressed that you were able to read and digest everything printed.  How else would one conclude that there "just aren't any"?

Do you ever feel like we are going in a circle?

[Ethan Schwartz]

Just to be clear, there are compositions that:

1) Are titled "etude" and function as a pedagogical exercise
2) Are not titled "etude" but function as a pedagogical exercise
3) Are titled "etude" but were clearly written to be performed
4) May or may not be titled "etude," originated as a pedagogical exercise, but are commonly performed

The original concept of the etude as a pedagogical exercise comes out of the classical/"art" music tradition. It makes pedagogical sense to have short compositions focusing on a particular technique when the typical "real" composition is long, complex, and combines many different techniques—in other words, entirely unapproachable to less experienced players. That's why, along with things like etudes, there is a substantial repertoire within the classical tradition composed specifically for children and beginning students.

That's not classic banjo. The target market for all of this was amateur, largely self-taught players. Most pieces, however technical they may be, are short and focus on a few techniques and compositional ideas. There are hundreds of very easy pieces in the repertoire; but they are "real" compositions that just happen to be easy, not exercises. If you don't like something Bradbury or whoever did in their method book, move on to something else. There's nothing an etude can teach you that an actual composition (of an appropriate level) cannot. 

[Joel Hooks]

I call much of this stuff "short pieces" for lack of a better term.  Usually, two parts (though sometimes 3) and fairly easy. 

When presented as part of a well graded method book I consider them "etudes" (also lack of a better term) even if they are common pieces (such as Rattlesnake Jig, Green Corn, Spanish Fandango, &c).

I use this stuff as personal entertainment. 

Then there are the lesson based pieces.  I regularly review these things.  It might be a waste of time, but I feel like these lessons provide me with something.  Drilling down on exercises based around octaves has allowed me to stop raising the bass for pieces marked as such. 

I often do "reps" as, I do with dumbbells, 1 set of ten scale exercise from Parke Hunter, 1 set of ten random Trinkaus RH pattern study, Harmonics and Octaves study from Harry Turner-- all warmed up and ready to go.  

Since this is a hobby for me, it has to be entertaining or I won't do it.  All the stuff I work on is amusing, even the lesson based exercises. 

[Jody Stecher]

About elevated bass: When the 4th string goes up to D it generates different overtones than it did when tuned to C. These overtones, also called "upper partials", color the sound of the notes played on the higher strings. This happens when the well-tuned 4th string just sits there untouched. Providing tone color is one the functions of the low string of any stringed instrument.     So gDGBD is not only a device for ease of fingering. It is also a way of providing a particular resonance.  This can be verified by playing a  G major scale in gCDGD and then again in gDGBD. The tone color is noticeably different. A worthwhile experiment:  try playing the same G scale with no 4th string at all (loosen the tension or try this when changing strings).  The best banjo in the world will sound comparatively insipid and lacking character without the support of the overtones of the 4th string.

Joel Hooks said:

I call much of this stuff "short pieces" for lack of a better term.  Usually, two parts (though sometimes 3) and fairly easy. 

When presented as part of a well graded method book I consider them "etudes" (also lack of a better term) even if they are common pieces (such as Rattlesnake Jig, Green Corn, Spanish Fandango, &c).

I use this stuff as personal entertainment. 

Then there are the lesson based pieces.  I regularly review these things.  It might be a waste of time, but I feel like these lessons provide me with something.  Drilling down on exercises based around octaves has allowed me to stop raising the bass for pieces marked as such. 

I often do "reps" as, I do with dumbbells, 1 set of ten scale exercise from Parke Hunter, 1 set of ten random Trinkaus RH pattern study, Harmonics and Octaves study from Harry Turner-- all warmed up and ready to go.  

Since this is a hobby for me, it has to be entertaining or I won't do it.  All the stuff I work on is amusing, even the lesson based exercises. 

[Joel Hooks]

I suppose Van Eps and Vess Ossman sound insipid then.

[Byron Thomas]

"The best banjo in the world will sound comparatively insipid and lacking character without the support of the overtones of the 4th string."

As long as they kept the 4th string on the banjo so that it could support the sound structure of the other 4 strings, then they should have been fine. But hearing their skills, I'm sure they could have managed without a 4th string and still proceed to drop jaws in the audience.

[Jody Stecher]

They always played a five string banjo. Always with a bass string.

Take off your 4th string and play something. See if it sounds any good. This is physics, not my personal crazy idea.  Same thing applies with a guitar. Play anything on the higher strings in standard tuning. Then tune the bass down from E to D. Play the same thing. The sound is  different. Better or worse is a matter of opinion  Then remove the 6th string. Whatever is played on the treble strings will sound thin when compared to how it sounded when the tuned untouched 6th string is on the instrument.  There can be too much of a good thing. When I've played 6 and 7 string banjos I found that whatever I played sounded muddy when compared to how it sounded on a 5-string banjo. One bass is enough. More than that and things get soupy. Overtone soup.

Joel Hooks said:

I suppose Van Eps and Vess Ossman sound insipid then.