In addition to this forum, I subscribe to several harmonica related mail lists. A gentleman by the name of Winslow Yerxa recently posted an idea to the Harp On! Group regarding the process of learning a new song.
Winslow is a long-standing member of several of the harmonica groups and is an exemplary player, musician, and author… I wouldn’t miss reading one of his posts.
With his permission, I am putting his entire post on this forum. He is proposing an interesting supplementary approach to learning a new tune, certainly an approach worthy of further consideration and a try. He would also appreciate any feedback from this forum on his idea.
Winslow said:
To: harpon@yahoogroups.com
From: winslowyerxa@yahoo.com
Mailing-List: list harpon@yahoogroups.com; contact harpon-owner@yahoogroups.com
Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 18:02:47 -0000
Subject: [Harp On!] The additive method of learning melodies
The standard wisdom for learning new music is to start at a slow tempo that allows you to get to the next note on time. At first it may take time to think about what the note is, how to play it on the instrument, and then to actually do whatever it takes to make the note come out. As you gain mastery at a slow tempo, you bring the tempo up a little, learn it at that tempo, then increase the tempo again, and so on.
I’m thinking about a supplementary method - not a replacement, just another tool along with the method described above, to help “surround the problem”. The supplementary method I call the additive method. Here’s how I see it working.
Start with the first two or three notes of the melody. Play them in time, and at a fairly quick tempo, as quick as you can manage comfortably. Let’s say these are the first three 8th notes in a measure of 4/4. You play those first three 8th notes, and then - this is IMPORTANT - you wait out the rest of the measure. Then, you play the first three notes again, wait out the remainder of the measure again, and keep doing this over and over until it comes with assurance.
You wait out the remaining time in the measure so as to keep the notes in context. If you just kept cycling the three notes without pausing, you would be teaching yourself to go from the last of the three notes right back to the first note, instead of to the fourth note, which is the next thing we add.
OK, so you can make the first three notes in time and with assurance. Now, you add the fourth note of the melody, playing the first four notes, then waiting the remaining time in the measure. You keep repeating the first four notes this way until all four notes come smoothly. Once you can do the first four notes, you do the first five, adding one note each time you have mastered those that come before. And on you go.
I see two possible advantages to this method.
One advantage is that you learn material at a quick tempo. The start-slow-and-work-your-way-up method has one potential weakness, in that the nervous system (mine, anyway) seems to treat quick reflexive actions and slow, deliberate ones very differently, and the additive method is a way of dealing on the level of the quick, reflexive action. This could be helpful if you find that there is a certain tempo threshold, where you can play a piece well at a certain tempo, but have trouble playing the whole piece at a slightly faster tempo. Such an instance might be a good place to bring out the additive method as a sort of specialized power tool.
The other advantage is that the additive method allows you to deal with each difficulty, one at a time, in sequence, and master it before going on. This allows learning at a faster tempo. The slow method, by contrast, forces you to deal with the whole melody or passage and every difficulty in sequence. Therefore the tempo has to be slow enough to deal with everything in the whole passage. This is the gentle, organic, method that makes you learn the melody as a whole. It’s slow but powerful. It’s also a bit daunting, due to the ground you may have to cover with all its perils, and the patience it requires. The additive method allows you to conquer every difficulty one at a time, in sequence and in tempo. It doesn’t put you in the context of the complete melody, only the “story so far.”
In a way, the additive method is just another version of something everyone does, which is to break the tune down into smaller sections that may reflect a phrase or perhaps a problem area, and work on those before putting them back into context. Only here, everything is done at tempo and from the beginning. It’s just a question of how far from the beginning you get, which is always incremented by one note.
As I said before, I don’t consider the additive method as a main method. I see using it in conjunction with the slow method.
I haven’t put this method into practice. It’s just an ideas that came to me yesterday on my Sunday morning stroll, and I used it in my head on a melody that I already “knew” intellectually in that I could tell you what the notes are or even write them down, but hadn’t learned to sing or play in real time.
I’m curious about what other players and teachers think about this method - whether you’ve tried it and what you found if you did, or any other observations.
Winslow
Unsubscribe: harpon-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
Harp On! http://www.angelfire.com/music/harmonica/
[ This Message was edited by: CDon on 2002-03-12 17:16 ]
I had very blinkered vision when I wrote my response, which I think you touch on in your preamble - people have different things they want to get out of their instrument! Also, just playing around is extremely effective when you are still feeling your way around the instrument. I was thinking (but didn’t say) about players who are (a) already comforable with the instrument (b) looking to really get that “pro” sound - at which point, practice must center around weaknesses.