alan2007
Sore Fingers
Must try harder
Posts: 7
|
Post by alan2007 on Apr 29, 2024 22:05:42 GMT
Hi everybody,
I have recently been taking a few guitar lessons from a local teacher to support an on line training course, and one of the things he has said is that you don't have to play something exactly as the original for listeners to recognise what is playing as long as you capture the spirit of what you are playing. With that in mind I can play a reasonable rendition of Hey Joe, which is certainly not an exact copy of the Hendrix version however listeners recognise it and I enjoy playing it. I am currently working through Shallow by Lady Gaga and Bradley Cooper, however during the learning process I have inadvertently been playing it slightly differently aka wrong, however I quite like the way I am playing it. So should I correct my mistakes in order to improve or should I persevere to play it more correctly? Or is this bad practice that will impede my progress? Where do i draw the line? I am not aspiring to take exams or become a perfect or professional musician but play for my own pleasure and the occasional jam session.
I would appreciate your thoughts and observations.
Thanks in advance.
Alan
|
|
|
Post by delb0y on Apr 29, 2024 22:45:14 GMT
Hey Alan
Good question. I think there are two opposing, but complimentary, answers.
Firstly, to improve as a guitar player it can be beneficial to try and copy something as closely as you're able, at whatever your current level ability. This doesn't have to be a whole song, it may be just an intro, a riff, a few bars of a solo, even just the chord changes. As you improve you can copy more of a specific piece, maybe get it more accurate, faster, work on tone, specific chord shapes etc etc. This is a life long pursuit. There are pieces I've been working on for years - no exaggeration - and I'm still working on them.
On the other hand, originality is the best thing about music. This doesn't have to mean writing your own music, but it does mean putting your own stamp, and personality, on it. I love it when people play music their own way. All of the stuff mentioned in the previous paragraph is, for me, about developing the chops to do the stuff in this paragraph. I've played Hey Joe scores of times at gigs and never once like Hendrix - I may use his intro and a couple of the riffs - but the rest is different. I did once learn his solo, but I've long forgotten it. I once supported a band who did a version of Johnny B Goode and they did it all on one chord. It was great. My favourite version of that song! I used to drive to Bob Dylan nights in Birmingham, fifty miles away, just to play three songs. My buddy and I would choose the three songs and then we'd randomly choose a style - say Tom Waits or Johnny Winter or Carl Perkins - and we'd try to play our chosen three songs in those styles. The rest of the evening usually consisted of people playing Dylan songs in the style of Dylan. Nothing wrong with that, but as far as I'm concerned you could simply stay at home and listen to the originals.
So, you can see where my preference lies, but you still have to put in the work to get there.
And I'd guess even now, after almost fifty years of playing, most of my practice time, maybe 80%, is working on those chops to enable the good stuff to happen when the time is right.
Not sure that helps, really...
Derek
|
|
leoroberts
C.O.G.
Posts: 24,644
My main instrument is: probably needing new strings
|
Post by leoroberts on Apr 29, 2024 22:50:20 GMT
If you play something exactly as the original is played - you're a tribute band. If you play something the way it makes you feel - you're an artist. Also, what delb0y said. I have spoken. Case closed, I think we can all agree, yes? does anyone dare defy me?
|
|
|
Post by martinrowe on Apr 29, 2024 22:58:07 GMT
“I quite like the way I’m playing it” “I enjoy playing it” Is right in my book
You could still learn it note for note, that’s up to you
|
|
ocarolan
Global Moderator
CURMUDGEONLY OLD GIT (leader - to join, just ask!)
Posts: 34,091
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"c0cfe1"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 182a3f
Mini-Profile Text Color: 733a1c
|
Post by ocarolan on Apr 29, 2024 23:04:01 GMT
alan2007 - I suspect that hinges on what exactly you mean by "wrong"! I agree completely with your teacher's view that your versions don't have to be exact copies, and indeed it can be better if you have put your own take on a song, especially when playing a "band arrangement" on a solo guitar. Lots of liberties can be taken without destroying the essence of a song. Just to take one particular example from many, I often speed up or slow down a song eg I play the Beatles song All my lovin' ( originally a fast strummy one) much slower and with a fingerstyle accompaniment. It changes the whole style of the thing but it is still recognisably the same song. Changing the key is obviously fine too - it's pointless trying to sing something with either high or low notes you can't reach. Pitch it where it feels best to you. I do try to keep to the expected chords though - my ears really grate if I hear someone playing what are obviously the wrong chords. Substitutions and reharmonising can be fine, but when something follows an original except for one particular chord it tends to stick out. Again, just one example - the ubiquitous Streets of London - "... kicking up the paper with his worn out shoes..." the chord on "worn out" is often rendered as D7 (with either a D or an F# in the bass). This sounds OK and works alright if you've never listened to the original which plainly has an F in the bass - 1x3231 - which you could call Dm/F though I think of it as an F with an added D on the second string to allow the melody to be picked. Vocal phrasing is often a personal thing and many versions do this deliberately. But again, if all the song follows the phrasing and emphasis of the original except for one or two words or phrases, that jars for me. Many artists who perform their own songs frequently and over a long period do this deliberately just for variety Often the bits between verses can be changed/simplified/shortened/omitted without spoiling a song, especially when playing with simpler instrumentation than the original. And recordings often have repeats, particularly in extended endings that can be pruned. A friend always used to reckon he would learn something as close to the original first, which he felt earned him the right to start changing it. I reckon that's not a bad thought - and helps in progressing with playing - if you always simplify things to where you are at now, then no progress happens. I feel it's always good to keep aiming a tiny step further than you think you're capable of. Maybe that gives at least a flavour of what I'd regard as OK and what may not be. I could probably go on for ages on the subject, but I too would like to hear other views. And, to return to the beginning, I'd love to know what you reagard as "wrong" Alan. Keith
|
|
|
Post by scorpiodog on Apr 30, 2024 8:53:27 GMT
Great thread, alan2007. Some really good responses so far, and I suspect there may some more to come. This is a really interesting subject to which there is no right answer. I agree with everything said so far, but, in my opinion, playing something in a different style or with changes to tempo, key, harmonisation and, to a degree, melody, is what music is all about. One of your examples, "Hey Joe" was not written by, nor originally recorded by, Jimi Hendrix. In fact, its origins are disputed as this article shows. There are many interpretations of it in various styles, and if you add your own, that seems perfectly fair. If you choose to give it the flavour of JImi Hendrix, that's also fair. Let's face it, if a song is considered sacrosanct and needs to be true to the exact way the composer wrote it, we'd have no jazz, and other genres (pop, blues, reggae/ska/bluebeat as examples) would have to have many recordings deleted. Even in the classical world, where scores are the foundation of a piece, different performances are nuanced and quite different if listened to back-to back. In fact, as this question seems to have been prompted by something your teacher said, I'd suggest that you have found yourself a darned good teacher. And welcome to the forum, by the way. This is a great start.
|
|
|
Post by jangarrack on Apr 30, 2024 8:55:54 GMT
This is a fascinating and informative thread. It's a question I've always asked myself and the answers given here all make good sense to me. My problem is that everything I play starts by trying to be as accurate as possible, then adapting the parts I know I will never master to something that sounds fitting to me, but within my ability to play. The problem I find is that by doing that, the more I play my adapted part, the more it begins to sound right to me. Then, when I listen to the original again, I'm surprised how far I've deviated from it. The truth is just about everything I play is based on an arrangement I have found somewhere, then adapted to my own style and capability, so nothing from me could ever be exactly as any original. I really admire those who can do it though. That and the fact that I can very rarely play anything all the way through without fluffing it somewhere is why I have never had the confidence to post anything on the Plucky Duck. Maybe a 'Not so Plucky Duck' or a 'Plucky Duckling' section on the forum could be option as somewhere to post some less ambitious playing for comment and guidance. Sorry, I'm going off on a tangent again, but just a thought. ocarolan Keith, "I do try to keep to the expected chords though - my ears really grate if I hear someone playing what are obviously the wrong chords. Substitutions and reharmonising can be fine, but when something follows an original except for one particular chord it tends to stick out. Again, just one example - the ubiquitous Streets of London - "... kicking up the paper with his worn out shoes..." the chord on "worn out" is often rendered as D7 9with either a D or an F# in the bass). This sounds OK and works alright if you've never listened to the original which plainly has an F in the bass - 1x3231 - which you could call Dm/F though I think of it as an F with an added D on the second string to allow the melody to be picked." Thank you, I've always played that wrong as you described and just tried your correction, much better. Jeff
|
|
alan2007
Sore Fingers
Must try harder
Posts: 7
|
Post by alan2007 on Apr 30, 2024 10:43:36 GMT
Oh my goodness I wasn't expecting so many responses in such a short space of time, it is obviously a topic much thought about and I thought when I posted may have been done to death elsewhere. My primary reason for asking was I guess for endorsement in that I am not cheating if I get it wrong and that enjoying playing is the most important thing - the overall message I am getting back is that enjoyment it the most important thing. Therefore "cheating" is okay and it should be considered as making life easier and it would appear to me that a lot of top guitarists male life a whole lot easier for themselves.
With regard to Shallow I have spent a couple of hours this morning playing it more correctly and suddenly I heard a complete difference, I think I may end up playing a mix of the two.
As to what I consider wrong then to me that van be a whole load of things, if I don't play something as original then obviously that is wrong in comparison even if in real terms it is only "different" after all that is what blues guitarist do, which for me is one of the appeals with messing about with blues progressions and riffs. However another wrong for me is when artist are sacrosanct and they should never be covered in my opinion, two that immediately spring to mind are John Martyn and Kate Bush, although EC made a decent fist of May You Never and conversely KB did a great version of Elton John's Rocket Man. I fully accept that these are only my opinions and others have thiers which I respect and of course it is very subjective.
There is loads more already written above to which I may reply further, but I will let you know how I progress and maybe even post a recording for observation and feedback at sometime in the future, I will need to get my fingers working it a bit better beforehand though.
|
|
|
Post by borborygmus on Apr 30, 2024 11:30:08 GMT
Great question! Excellent answers given, with which I agree.
1) Genre matters. If you are in a quartet, playing Haydn's String Quartet, Op 76 No 3, 'Emperor', then you can't really play it differently to suit you. On the other hand, most music is "folk" (including rock, blues, country, etc), and all the songs derive from other songs, changing and developing organically over generations. It's the nature of the beast. And that's fine. For jazz, all bets are off, do what you like!
2) I think that if you are playing a piece differently than it is written because you are lazy or because it is beyond your skill level, don't let that prevent your learning and development. Don't let this stop you playing it as you do now, but have an aspiration to get better, and learn the tricky parts one day.
3) I am playing a contemporary fingerstyle tune which is an RGT Grade 5 piece, and I change it in one little section because I think here it is designed to show off technique at the expense of musicality. I won't pass the exam, probably, and I don't care.
4) Don't let anything like rigour or pretension or regimentation prevent you from enjoying your guitar and your music. There is an element of "don't do things right, do the right thing" for yourself here.
We'd like to hear your version of Shallow one day. Peter
|
|
|
Post by fatfingerjohn on Apr 30, 2024 11:46:17 GMT
Hi,
Very brief answer from me. It depends on 2 things mainly.
1. Your ability. Just because my skills mean I can't play it exactly like Paul Simon, or James Taylor or Knopfler or Neil Young etc does not in any way bar me from playing it to a standard I can reach. If it means a bit of cheating (simplifiying?) tough chords/stretches/changes or transposing, then that's fine so long as it still sounds good. I think my repertoir of say 200 songs which I go to at times would be reduced 10 fold if I had to mirror the original in every way. 2. Mood, style, interpretation. You have your own way of expressing yourself so who should tell you not too. If it means say, slowing down a song (which I do a lot) and adding pauses, moments of reflection etc then do it. I often say to my mates that I rarely play something the exact same way twice anyway, particularly if I change the guitar being used and/or the tuning e.g. I find some good songs are enhanced even more played in an open tuning and using differnt mood chords.
Do your own thing.
FFJ
|
|
|
Post by delb0y on Apr 30, 2024 15:08:31 GMT
Excellent thread, and interesting to read various folks' views. As Peter borborygmus said, with jazz all bets are off. When I first started trying to play jazz tunes I became very flummoxed trying to find the chords to songs. There were so many different versions of the same tune that trying to find the "proper" one seemed, and was, impossible. Even tunes one would think there would be consensus on, like, say Autumn Leaves have different chords on different versions. I then discovered that the same thing happens in bluegrass. Every time you think you've learned a song you hear someone who plays it differently. Blues, too - I recently started thinking about playing How Long Blues, but am yet to settle on my favourite set of chords out of the various versions out there! Keith ocarolan - apologies for inflicting my version of Streets of London on you back in the Plucky Duck a few months ago. I'm sure my version must have grated awfully. Not only do I play a D7 and a D6 at the moment you referred to, I also use an alternating bass of D and A - no F, or minor sound in earshot. I then proceed to miss out a whole chord in the chorus, too. All of which are deliberate decisions, but apologies... Derek
|
|
brianr2
C.O.G.
Posts: 3,069
My main instrument is: Brook Lyn guitar
|
Post by brianr2 on Apr 30, 2024 15:46:28 GMT
“And what is good, Phaedrus, And what is not good— Need we ask anyone to tell us these things?”
― Robert M. Pirsig, Zen and the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance: An Inquiry Into Values
|
|
ocarolan
Global Moderator
CURMUDGEONLY OLD GIT (leader - to join, just ask!)
Posts: 34,091
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"c0cfe1"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: 182a3f
Mini-Profile Text Color: 733a1c
|
Post by ocarolan on Apr 30, 2024 16:06:12 GMT
delb0y - Certainly no need for apols Derek - the problem is mine, firmly embedded in my brain after having spent countless hours geekily needle hopping in the 1960s! Keith
|
|
|
Post by lavaman on Apr 30, 2024 16:48:02 GMT
In interesting question alan2007 to which you will find your own answer through developing your own style. Over the years established artists often play their well known ‘hits’ with small changes to keep the audience (and themselves) interested. Early blues players did the same. If they can do it, so can you. Always worth trying to follow Woody Mann’s advice: “play to express, not impress”.
|
|
Akquarius
Cheerfully Optimistic
Posts: 2,510
My main instrument is: Towet Fingerpicker, Dreizehnter SJ15 "Akquarius"
Mini-Profile Background: {"image":"","color":"020202"}
Mini-Profile Name Color: f9a507
Mini-Profile Text Color: f9a507
|
Post by Akquarius on Apr 30, 2024 18:15:45 GMT
It's always amazing to read so many excellent answers to one question. I love this forum My comment is not an answer, but a different approach to the matter. Music is art, right? So is painting. If you were a painter who is fascinated by a picture and eager to try your skills with it, would you copy it to the tiniest little detail? Or would you dive into it and try to paint the impression, the light, the details, but in your own way? Just my humble thought.
|
|