Is anyone here self taught

prh777

are people scared that knowing more would make them less creative? fascinating.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pablo_Picasso

samzadgan

prh777 said:

are people scared that knowing more would make them less creative? fascinating.....

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pablo_Picasso

it all comes down to how people like learning...and what works best for them.

my comments was that theoretical learning would help now that i've developed my own playing style and sound etc. I dont think i would be playing the stuff i am now if i had lessons.

This is only relevant to me, as with most things in life, i like to do things myself and learn things myself. I lose interest in most things if I'm taught how to do it, because i think my brain perceives it as done, and the challenge of teaching myself is gone.

octatonic

koneguitarist said:

I would admit to not being the most adventurous guitarist, and I know very little theorey, but my mate a local school teacher is a grade 8 guitarist, who is asking me how I play.?

I am not one of those who think you shouldn't learn to read music, but I don't think it is that important if you don't. 

I mentioned Clapton Page etc because they were known guitarists, EVH would be another example.

Picking up theorey as you go along is one thing, learning to read after you have learnt to play is another, but learning to read music is not that important if you just want to play and gig with bands, understanding what music is about is a different thing altogether.

Did Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder spend all their time thinking, what is this Dorian mode, does it fit with this minor pentatonic, or did they just think this sounds nice, wonder what it would sound like if I move my first finger here instead? 

Ray Charles studied classical music as a child, to a pretty high level.

Teetonetal

Regarding lessons,

I have a couple of students that come to me only 3 or 4 times a year. We do a four hour lesson that is basically any thing they've got stuck on, or a topic they really want to break. Without doubt these are my favorite lessons to teach and I think they get a lot from them. They are both quite driven though and proactive in learning. 

RobDavies

My Dad taught me how to play Sunshine Of Your Love and from then on, I'm entirely self taught.  I had a couple of classical lessons at school but the teacher said he couldn't teach me anything because I'd already developed a rock technique that wouldn't transfer to classical.  I took that as a compliment.

My technique is pretty good but I have no or very little knowledge of theory/scales etc.

I don't consider myself a good guitar player these days (especially having heard some of the guys on this forum who aren't pros) but I reckon if I'd had a tutor when I was in my teens, I could have been decent.

Instead, I just played the same old riffs and licks that impressed my peers and dodged band practice so I could go and watch Brentford.

xtedmanzie

M3MAN96 said:

Hi Guys,

So when I first started playing I decided to teach myself instead of having lessons, I've been playing now for about a year and have knowledge of scales, chords etc. In this time I decided to try out a couple of lessons from a guitar teacher but at £25.00 an hour. Basically I just want you're opinions on whether its really necessary to take lessons?

I would definitely have some lessons from a decent tutor - you might need to try a few to find the right 'fit' for you. You're at a good point to correct bad habits early, and look at a good route to learn with what you need to get you where you want to go. 

One of the best tips I ever heard recently was from a pro dismissing the myth of 'practice makes perfect' - he said it is 'practice makes permanent' - so if you spend 10,000 hours practicing badly all you'll ever be is very good at being bad. In other words you have to know exactly what you're practising and how to practice it in order to become expert at it. This is where good tuition would help.

A big regret of mine with guitar is spending 25 years fiddling around aimlessly rather than fiddling with intent (?) !

richardhomer

I had lessons for a couple of years when I was young. I made a lot of progress - my teacher was good - but as I started to gravitate towards improvising, he was out of his depth and was honest enough to tell my parents.

I then did the classic 'lifting the needle off the record' thing and have been self-taught ever since. I've dabbled with scale and chord books - but have a limited harmonic palette to work with. I phrase well, have good timing, vibrato and bending technique - I just wish I could play more sophisticated music.

If I had my time again, I would find a teacher capable of helping me develop that side of my playing.

earwighoney

Here is a Mitch Hedberg quote on the subject

"I taught myself how to play the guitar, which was a bad decision, cause I didn’t know how to play it. So I was a sh*tty teacher. I would never have went to me."

***

I'm in the self taught camp.  

When it comes to lessons it depends what you want to do and what kind of person you are.  Some musical forms are more suited to being taught than others.  As for the student, some need instruction and others can work things out for themselves.  I think in reality for the latter most people are somewhere in between for the both aspects. 

Until quite recently, I had little interest in learning theory and more technical aspects but broke out of the mindset in the last few years and have improved tenfold in the time.  If anything I enjoy playing the guitar more so now than ever before.  

Danny1969

Some of my friends have a great natural feel for the guitar and can play some lovely stuff despite not knowing any theory. They are a pain to work with though because you can't just ask them to "harmonize in thirds" or whatever and have them do it instantly, they need to work it out first ..... where someone with a bit of theory can do it instantly. The same with chord building, transposing, you need a bit of knowledge to be able to do these things off the cuff and not torture bystanders with a load of duff notes before you hit the right ones !

I will say the most interesting music I record tends to be from people who aren't that clue'ed up though but I see no reason why that should be, as knowing the rules doesn't t stop you breaking them. 

ICBM

GavRichList said:

Yes self taught. Technically awful as a result.

Same.

axisus

Cabicular said:

I've got no problem if people can't read or write music but if they don't know how to count 7/8 or the difference between a BbMaj7 a Bb7 or Bbmin7 then it is a pain 

Simples. They are all just Bb to me .....

axisus

Self taught but I was a lousy teacher. I'm sure glad I didn't pay myself anything, I'd have demanded the money back

EricTheWeary

There's self taught and self taught isn't there? Most of us most of the time would or have already made a half arsed job of it. I was watching one of those Tim Pierce (spll?) videos where he was giving a private lesson. He was able to pick up on stuff a year spent in front of YouTube tutorials wouldn't have achieved because it was so personalised to the guy he was teaching. Sight reading for rock/ pop guitar probably isn't for everyone. The source material is on the recordings not on the manuscript ( even if you can find the appropriate score). So I have realised, if rather late in the day for me, that learning through transcribing ( never sure if that's the right word but working stuff out by ear) is the way to go. But that should be tied in with developing the technique to play the stuff and the theory to make sense of it and explain it to someone else. I don't see how this stiffles originality, it's the process pretty much every recognisable guitarist went through on their way to honing their own style. The number of untutored savant guitarists who have done anything interesting is probably a pretty short list. No one comes to mind at all for me, even the Derek Bailey's of this world understood the rule book first before they ripped it up.

randomhandclaps

octatonic said:

koneguitarist said:

I would admit to not being the most adventurous guitarist, and I know very little theorey, but my mate a local school teacher is a grade 8 guitarist, who is asking me how I play.?

I am not one of those who think you shouldn't learn to read music, but I don't think it is that important if you don't. 

I mentioned Clapton Page etc because they were known guitarists, EVH would be another example.

Picking up theorey as you go along is one thing, learning to read after you have learnt to play is another, but learning to read music is not that important if you just want to play and gig with bands, understanding what music is about is a different thing altogether.

Did Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder spend all their time thinking, what is this Dorian mode, does it fit with this minor pentatonic, or did they just think this sounds nice, wonder what it would sound like if I move my first finger here instead? 

Ray Charles studied classical music as a child, to a pretty high level.

As was Stevie Wonder and EVH who are both classically trained pianists.

koneguitarist said:

Did Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder spend all their time thinking, what is this Dorian mode, does it fit with this minor pentatonic, or did they just think this sounds nice, wonder what it would sound like if I move my first finger here instead? 

See this is a complete an utter misconception by guitarists intent on finding an excuse for not understanding theory, even though they usually proclaim theory to be irrelevant.  Again it doesn't seem to apply to other musicians.  Alicia Keys for example is both a soulful and well trained musician but I doubt she ever said to her piano teacher (wrongly as it would have been) "Well Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder didn't need this theory bollocks!".  David Bowie is another trained musician who did seem to let theory become a barrier to both creating 'nice' sounds or pushing the boundaries.

I am a trained musician.  Classical guitar as a child and then a music degree in modern guitar and I have continued to learn from there.  I NEVER think "does this dorian fit here?" *, which maybe because it has become so natural.  My sole focus is on internal expression rather than regurgitating learnt frameworks.  That's me but I would probably bet that @Octatonic and @Viz (as two others I  can think of with really solid theoretical grounding) equally don't feel chained by rules or spend their time focused on what should go where.  It's a bit like saying the learning English the correct way will stop you communicating with the natives, ignoring the fact that whilst you are learning you are also picking up colloquialisms.

*In fact the modal obsession safety net some guitarists seem to rely on bemuses me also as modes are only relative, but that's a whole other subject.

Phil_aka_Pip

koneguitarist said:

You can talk and hold a conversation without learning how to read and write, why is music any different, just another language. 

Except that if you can't read & write, communication over a distance is really difficult, you can't give someone a part to practice in their own time, and if you can be bothered with "the language" ie the theory, why not go the whole hog and use the notation as well?

octatonic

randomhandclaps said:

octatonic said:

koneguitarist said:

I would admit to not being the most adventurous guitarist, and I know very little theorey, but my mate a local school teacher is a grade 8 guitarist, who is asking me how I play.? 

I am not one of those who think you shouldn't learn to read music, but I don't think it is that important if you don't. 

I mentioned Clapton Page etc because they were known guitarists, EVH would be another example.

Picking up theorey as you go along is one thing, learning to read after you have learnt to play is another, but learning to read music is not that important if you just want to play and gig with bands, understanding what music is about is a different thing altogether.

Did Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder spend all their time thinking, what is this Dorian mode, does it fit with this minor pentatonic, or did they just think this sounds nice, wonder what it would sound like if I move my first finger here instead? 

Ray Charles studied classical music as a child, to a pretty high level.

As was Stevie Wonder and EVH who are both classically trained pianists.

koneguitarist said:

Did Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder spend all their time thinking, what is this Dorian mode, does it fit with this minor pentatonic, or did they just think this sounds nice, wonder what it would sound like if I move my first finger here instead? 

See this is a complete an utter misconception by guitarists intent on finding an excuse for not understanding theory, even though they usually proclaim theory to be irrelevant.  Again it doesn't seem to apply to other musicians.  Alicia Keys for example is both a soulful and well trained musician but I doubt she ever said to her piano teacher (wrongly as it would have been) "Well Ray Charles and Stevie Wonder didn't need this theory bollocks!".  David Bowie is another trained musician who did seem to let theory become a barrier to both creating 'nice' sounds or pushing the boundaries.

I am a trained musician.  Classical guitar as a child and then a music degree in modern guitar and I have continued to learn from there.  I NEVER think "does this dorian fit here?" *, which maybe because it has become so natural.  My sole focus is on internal expression rather than regurgitating learnt frameworks.  That's me but I would probably bet that @Octatonic and @Viz (as two others I  can think of with really solid theoretical grounding) equally don't feel chained by rules or spend their time focused on what should go where.  It's a bit like saying the learning English the correct way will stop you communicating with the natives, ignoring the fact that whilst you are learning you are also picking up colloquialisms.

*In fact the modal obsession safety net some guitarists seem to rely on bemuses me also as modes are only relative, but that's a whole other subject.

100% correct.

The can be an intermediate step where you get a bit deep with the theory- there was for me.

Music I was making at that stage was still fun and cool but it was also 'musicians music' and to misquote Zappa 'as serious as cancer'.

These days I don't really do that sort of thing- I know the theory of music well enough that it has become part of the logical thought process of playing music, where during the intermediate steps it was all still too new and I had to actively engage with it in order to utilise it.

Essentially you learn the rules, then you learn to forget them and just play.

This isn't the same as never having learned the rules in the first place- it is like learning a language, you learn verbs, you learn sentence construction, you learn grammar, then you forget all that just converse.

You don't sit down and have a conversation and think 'adjective, verb, noun, preposition' and you don't do that with music theory.

When I am playing I am not thinking "right ok, a ii V I, hit the 3rd there, avoid that 4, oh there is a nice b9, substitute here'.

It is all going by too fast for that to happen.

You spend years doing that in your bedroom/living room.

I also don't practice at a gig- what I mean is if I am working on something new- like an approach to a chord change, or a turnaround, or even a little shreddy thing- that doesn't get pulled out and waved around like a big 'shred cock' until it is well, well beyond the 'I've learned this new thing' phase.

Firstly because it will probably fall in a big heap and secondly because it means I then have to go back to thinking about 'the rules' again and that bums out a gig.

octatonic

Something else no-one has touched on is the workload.

It takes a lot of effort to learn music properly and it has been my opinion for some time that a great many people who refuse to learn music theory are justifying it under 'it will rob me of my creativity' when actually they simply won't admit they aren't prepared to put the work in. 

That is fine- I'm not saying we all have to do this and I can absolutely see the argument for a hobby to be fun and not a chore.

I never found music theory to be a chore- I found it tough and maddening at times but never a chore.

I've had (trained) musician friends claim that it comes down to laziness- I'm not sure it always does.

I know that a great many music students only do the bare minimum and expect results that are frankly unachievable even if they trebled their efforts. When I take a new student on these days, I only take folks who I think will benefit from my approach- I don't teach kids anymore and I don't often teach beginners.

I tell them that if they want to progress that they need to be playing minimum of 2 hours a day and then describe how I spent my 20's and 30's playing about 5-6 hours a day, every day, didn't take holidays, when I was working full-time I was sleeping less and playing all the time when I wasn't working for sleeping.

I also say that I don't expect them to be doing this but the guaranteed way to get results is to double your efforts and then double then again.

I also tell them to have fun, because that is why I did it- it was fun, I loved it and I love it now.

I started doing it because I saw it as the most efficient path to being a good musicians and I just wanted to be a good player- I wanted to be skilled.

The 2 years where I was recovering from hand surgery was excruciating.

Pat Metheny gave a keynote address in 1996 at Berklee that had the following contained in it.

Because for as much as I can stand here and claim to be a successful player, with Grammy awards and winning polls and now honorary degrees and all that stuff; one very fundamental thing has not changed, and I realized that it will never change, and that is this—that the main thing in my life, even as I stand here right now, right this second, is that I really need to go home and practice.

Every time I read this (and I've read it often) it hits me right where I live. The feeling that I need to go home and practice music is always there- it never leaves me and I never want it to. 

Rowby1

Well I'm self taught pretty much, but that includes teaching myself some theory too.

I'm very much an "ear" player and my knowledge of theory often lags behind what I play/hear/feel harmonically.

Having said that I'm seriously considering having a few lessons for the first time because I feel like my technique isn't improving much at the moment and I can hear that I should be playing better than I am. I've been playing for nearly 40 years now I feel like I really should be better at it than I am after all this time so, need to find a teacher.

I think claiming ignorance of theory as some kind of virtue is a bit strange.

stratman3142

@Danny1969 Wise words

I went back and checked the OP:  Perhaps the title of the thread should have been: "What are your views on taking guitar lessons".

The next bit echos what was stated @octatonic

I think the best you can get out of a teacher is a grounding and the tools to develop yourself. I'm probably stating the obvious, but if you're going to be any good, you're going to have to do the vast majority of the work yourself. Any highly skilled person (in any walk of live) is largely self taught. Perhaps I should add the word 'autodidactic' to the other thread . It's the way I like to learn most things (including things relating to engineering and mathematics).
http://www.thefretboard.co.uk/discussion/67413/words-that-are-your-absolute-favourites/p1

Firstly a disclaimer: I'm not a professional guitar player, although I have played in bands for many many years often working with professional musicians. I'm sure many of the forum members are professional and probably better qualified to comment.

At any given time in your development, the right teacher might vary. It's a good idea having a rough plan of what your hoping to get from lessons. However, I know that's difficult in the very early stages, because it's hard to define exactly what you want. So maybe try a teacher and see how it goes. Listen to what's being said, but don't assume it's all correct and right for you.

Ultimately it's best to take charge of your own development, drawing on whatever resources you need to progress in the way you want to. Which in my case is having fun, enjoying learning, gaining sense of achievement, working with other musicians and, most importantly, - showing off at gigs

I suspect things are different now regarding lessons. When I started playing I was obsessed with Paul Kossoff and then Jimi Hendrix. There simply weren't any guitar teachers around that could teach that stuff. I pretty sure that, if I'd gone to a guitar teacher at the time, they would have been rooted in the past and would have told me "that's not the way to play guitar!".

When I took lessons in my mid 20's, after 11 years of playing, I'd reached a kind of rut, in that my ear wasn't good enough to take me outside a rock/blues style of playing. Many people would be happy to stay there and there's nothing wrong with that. I wanted to include some of the more jazzy notes and chords, without actually wanting to become a jazz guitarist in the strictest sense. I now recall that I tried four teachers, before settling on one that worked for me.

After 47 years of playing, I've been considering taking a few lessons from a guitar player that used to dep for me in one of the bands I used to play for. We once did a gig together, when we couldn't get a keyboard player, and he did the keyboard parts on midi guitar. A phenomenal player and much more technically proficient and inventive than me. I'm sure I'd learn something.

randomhandclaps

octatonic said:

I also don't practice at a gig- what I mean is if I am working on something new- like an approach to a chord change, or a turnaround, or even a little shreddy thing- that doesn't get pulled out and waved around like a big 'shred cock' until it is well, well beyond the 'I've learned this new thing' phase.

Firstly because it will probably fall in a big heap and secondly because it means I then have to go back to thinking about 'the rules' again and that bums out a gig.

Completely agree with all and there definitely is a transition period.  I remember a point at Uni where I felt listened to some stuff I was doing and thought although technically it was impressive I had lost and element of the pure balls my playing in particular once had and massive credit to both Barry Langdon and Shaun Baxter at the time that they both also highlighted to me that you couldn't learn the feel I started with but could possible write over it.  As a result I had to strike a balance.  For me if we had to play a Malmsteem track (Far Beyond The Sun was on the curriculum) as much as I wanted to nail it I also want to impart an element of life over mechanism on it.  I'm sure a lot of guitarist who start young and chase shredding as teenagers goes through this issue at some point.

The comment above about gigs is something I live by.  I will try stuff with unlimited time in the studio but live I use stuff only one I know that even if I was pissed and Christina Hendricks was jiggling her boobs on the back of my head I could still pull off.