This looks REALLY interesting! (the drag paradiddle exercises in the attachment). Please, is this originally from a book and if so which book? Looking at it I can kind of hear it in my head.
It's an exercise from "Modern Rudimental Swing Solos" by Charles Wilcoxon. The book begins with a few individual rudiments. The main part is a collection of solos. You can listen to all of them here (click on the title to watch it on youtube - there you'll have the complete playlist):This looks REALLY interesting! (the drag paradiddle exercises in the attachment). Please, is this originally from a book and if so which book? Looking at it I can kind of hear it in my head.
Drag away, Swissward. I love your posts.My last post probably sounds harsher than intended, so I probably need to rectifiy a few things. Sorry for dragging you into this lengthy discussion!
Quite so.I guess the discussion reminds me of a similar recurring one: Will a metronome make my playing robotic? / Does it mess with my natural time and ability to listen and groove with a band? I'd say definitely not, as long as you still use your ears. What it will do is showing you that some things are actually not as great as your hearing suggested at first. So it might actually improve your listening abilities.
I'm still with you.Unfortunately, metronomes and notation seem to be sidelined quite often, because they might be a little bit frustrating at first. However, the learning curve picks up rather quickly and then you've acquired something very useful and the initial frustration will be gone for good.
Yup. It's a matter of finding good authors. And if nothing else, you can use a transcription as a guide and modify parts to suit your own tastes and style.I've found that transcriptions by good authors are often very accurate.
No complaints there. That's the definition of being well rounded.Definitely, use your ears and listen to the original. Transcribing yourself is a great way to develop your hearing, too. So again, I feel like eyes and ears can work together.
I teach for a living and there is an innate insecurity of many students that if you are providing or explaining something they don't know of, you are 'condescending'. The word ends up on every teaching evaluation.It's not really about the knowledge, it's about how it's conveyed. People, in my experience, are willing to learn as long as the person with the knowledge isn't condescending with said knowledge.
When someone comes in and immediately starts using technical jargon and multi-syllable words like they read the thesaurus beforehand makes the majority shut down as they feel as though they're being talked down to or being told in an offhand way that they're less than.
....The ability to decipher drum charts can be very useful, but I wouldn't trade my ear for the best sight-reading skills on the planet.
I teach for a living and there is an innate insecurity of many students that if you are providing or explaining something they don't know of, you are 'condescending'. The word ends up on every teaching evaluation.
Any teacher worth his/her salt is an awful teacher if resorting first to jargon and technical detail. 'Blowing them away'. Thats ineffective and of course poor communication. They are either showing off to impress, or oblivious to their audience. Not somebody to listen to or learn from. Next please.
But you have to admit there is basic musical jargon to learn at first in any genre to converse with bandmates. If buddy in the R&B or rock band says something about the downbeat, backbeat, ritard, or the middle 8, we need to learn what these words mean. Jazz has its jargon, something I've personally never learned but would like to.
There is arrogance and chest-puffing in all fields - science, literature, music, sports, .....gotta set up your filter. Can't let a poor teacher or communicator turn us off from a subject one is interested in.
A great thread for discussion.