What's Best - One Perfect or Several Under Construction?

That's a great question! I'm kind of like you when it goes to learning songs. I hear something I like then go for it, then hear something else, go for it, and the cycle continues.

I guess it all depends on what you want to accomplish.

If I like a song, then I'll just usually just play the rhythm on the acoustic, but I don't really worry about the strumming patterns too much, I use whatever works for me unless the pattern is the essence of the song, I think I read on here somewhere that even the artists don't use the same patterns all the time.

But I also think that variety is the spice of life, getting just one song all the time can get boring, and in my opinion counter-active to the learning process. You need that break to get your mind re-focused I think.

This is an odd concept to grasp, and one I've only recently discovered; but audiences don't actually hear what you play. They hear a combination of what you play with the memory of the song they know. It's like a certain perfume that reminds you of a past love. It's only the scent but it's a powerful tool for your mind to create pictures and remember.

I like to get the song down well, but not perfect. It isn't necessary as the mind of the listener will fill in any gaps for you.

Originals, well that's another story. I like to get them close to perfect since the listener can't fill in the gaps. Don't worry if you miss something in performance though, they've never heard it before.

So get out and play.

I feel it important to know the song. I also know that it is impossible to play it perfectly without mistakes.
we're human. there is no perfect anything. it is good to set high standards otherwise we'd all be hacks.
no matter how long and how well I know a song. I don't play it the same each time. to my ears tho it still sounds like the song.

I like to have a few songs on the go at any given time - that way you never get bored with just going over the same old riffs fills and licks over and over again. Once I've got them down pretty well, I like to play them every now and then. I find if I learn one song to the exclusion of everything else, I get fed up with it pretty quickly!

Case in point - a couple of years ago, I decided I'd learn Band On The Run. It got played every week at the acoustic jam I was going to at the time, so I thought I'd learn the whole song - not just the rhythm chords. It wasn't too hard to work out, so I decided I'd tab it out for easy songs. Now that was where the fun started - having to learn each little section pretty much note-perfect and then writing it down meant I had to play it over and over and over and over again, till it got to the point where I was heartily sick of the song. I don't think I've played it more than half-a-dozen times since, even though it's absolutely burned into my memory!

Just occasionally, though, it'll work the other way around - recently, I decided I had to learn "Substitute" by the Who. Spent pretty much a whole weekend working on that, putting all the bits together - again, it's engraved in my memory (and muscle memory, too!) but because it's a tricky little riff there's still a sense of accomplishment every time I nail it!

Nick's right, though - when isn't he! - when he says the audience will hear pretty much what they want to hear as long as you're pretty close. Chris C mentioned something similar a while back - he was talking about a solo acoustic performance and said something like, "it's funny - I could swear I heard strings!" - the brain filling in the spaces, perhaps?

:D :D :D

Vic

Nick is exactly right your brain hears what it wants to hear and will fill in any missing parts. If you're a solo act I guess a mistake would be more noticable but if you are in a band situation then getting a song good enough will do unless you all screw up at the same time then it might be noticable.

But getting back to Nick's comment the one thing I realized early on as I started to really listen to songs that I loved for years was that there was so much more going on that I never heard ever on those records yet it was always there but your mind focuses on different things liek a memeory or whatever and the music is like background music in your life.

Hi guys

Yeh, I see what you guys are saying - and I agree with the sentiments, but I think you're maybe missing the point a little bit...

Whilst all of you are more accomplished than myself, I just wonder whether I should concentrate on getting a few songs down and as good as I feel I can get them - hey, even add my own little touches (which I normally do If there's a multi-instrumental bit that doesn't convert to a single guitar) (ie - just miss it out) :roll:

I know most artists play their songs differently from their recorded tracks to concerts to unplugged etc etc. Even to the point of using 'cheating' F's and G's :wink: so actually getting their songs exactly as the record isn't really my concern - it's just being able to play it from start to finish without hitting a bum note or miss-stringing a chord.

Maybe I'm just thinking about it too much and should just get on with playing - I've covered a few songs which I recorded and I don't play them now, some were pretty good but I can't just pick the guitar up and play them.. I'd have to look at the tab and probably practice for a week...but hopefully play them better than before.

I suppose I am still trying to learn lots of different things still, so that doesn't help matters....there's always another hurdle. Point in question: Norwegian Wood. I thought I'd learn it because it's a nice tune and it's a good one to help me learn to flat pick. Ok, I need to practice lot's to get my flatpicking down, but it's getting my pinkie to hold down strings and stop it muting other strings - hey not just the pinkie either... so, I practice that for about twenty minutes then go onto something else for variety....

Should I concentrate on that tune for more than twenty minutes, because I know I'll just move on to something a bit easier If I don't improve on it....Maybe this is all subjective...Maybe I expect too much of myself too quickly...

And there's always an easier song to play around the corner... Thanks for reading my ramblings once again....

Rock on!
D 8)

This is one of the problems I have. I'm too scattered and so don't really know any song fully (which maybe is why I like the classical stuff... it's written down and I don't have to worry about the lyrics). I have several folders full of part-learnt songs :cry:

I think I read somewhere that it is good to have a new song, and song being refined, and a few songs that you know well that you just "dust off" each session to keep the muscle memory up.

To me, twenty minutes seems like a reasonable amount for an individual session on one song, although I guess it's frequency that counts?

I was inspired by the Beginners' threads so I am going to put in a concerted effort to go back through those folders and actually LEARN the bloody things! :roll:

Don't focus on only one song for long periods of time. Maybe give eac one 10 - 15 minutes at a time and move on to the next. There is a point of diminishing returns so I think you need to have multiple things going on partly so you won't get bored doing the same thing over and over again.

I think you are just going through normal growing pains I was in the same boat a few years back. Just keep practicing and it will all start falling into place.

I remember thinking Man how can I ever remember all the chords/changes in a song let alone 30 - 40 in one night and thinking of solo's and all those notes it started to depress me as something I'd never be able to do but a couple years later learning the rhythm to a song usually takes no more than a day at best (and I can remember it all). The solo's still take a bit longer and I tend to tackle solo's probably a bit above my ability but I'm pretty sure that soon I'll be able to get those down and rememebr them also.

It just takes time.

I dont think I ever get a song perfect but I think that relates to my skill level, so I tend to have alot on the go at any one time. Its interesting to go back to songs a year or so after I've tried to learn them and finding that parts that gave me trouble now come easier.

I always have a lot under various stages of construction. Even my "best" ones get played and practiced or otherwise fiddled with. I do 99% rhythm, but am trying to broaden my horizons. I can say something like "I can play XXX songs", but I can't do any of them perfectly or note-for-note according to recorded versions. If I was to be quizzed or had to gig or something, I'd certainly narrow my focus and learn the proper note-for-note playing. However, I ain't, so I don't. Besides, being a one man guitar effort covering music bands' material affords me certain liberties which I'm more than happy to take advantage of.

The downside for me is that my technique tool-box is rather bare. Full chord strums, partial chord strums and the occasional intro-lick is about all's that's in there. I'm working on it. :)

Hi Dylan-

This is a tricky question, but let me pass alng the advice that was given to me by several experienced players when Iw as getting started. What I was told is that it's much better to know a few songs and play them well than to know a large number and not play any of them well. And I believe that to be true. The real question is what you mean by knowing a song "well". It's a relative term and something you have to define for yourself based on what you are playing, your audience, etc.

You don't want to be so much of a perfectionist as to say you can never make a mistake. If you do that you'll never develop any sort of repertiore. On the other hand, you don't want to have a lot of rough edges. I think the key is really in the performance of the song. I define it for me as having a certain level of comfort with a song, nowing the parts well enough to recall them and play them. I want to feel comfortable enough with a song that i can focus on the expression of it rather than trying to remember how to play it. If I do that, then when I do make the occasional (or more than occasional) mistake I can platy through it and it's rarely noticeable. So for me it's more of a feel thing.

Hope that helps.

I was studying a very famous instruction book here last year: Blues you can use. That book has 21 chapters and each chapter is composed by three parts: scales, chords and progressions, and a study. The question was how many time should you dedicate for each chapter. Should you learn perfectly each study? Each progression? Should you master each scale?

The author recommends to dedicate enough time to each chapter. You must practice all the exercises but you also must learn new stuff and return to previous stuff after some days or weeks. Some elements (for example, chords) are used several times in different chapters, you don't need master them, you will play them many times.

I remember some people practiced each lesson less than a week, sometimes I needed more than three weeks in order to memorize and play more or less correctly each study! Obviously, it also depends on how many time can you dedicate in each session.

I always tried (and try) to maximize the fun. When I was in troubles with a part, just I skip it and I returned with fresh ideas when I was ready. I recorded each study and each progression, that was my 'exam'. I tried to play without mistakes but they were there, and if they weren't, the bends, vibrato, etc. can be always improved. When it sounded enough good, I started with the next chapter.

Now I finished the book but I keep using the book and its knowledge. I keep playing some studies (my favorites), chords progressions or scale exercises. Sometimes I play them on guitar but I also play them on bass. And I have fun!

Hope it helps.

It's really a bit of both. You need to be learning new stuff and polishing the old. One useful way to do this is to split your repertoire time (as opposed to drill time - scales, left hand technique, etc.) into 3 parts - new material; polishing old material; and review of old material.

In the new material time work on a new piece. This can be just one at a time. Work it until you can play it with the metronome at a decent tempo. It may not be at full tempo yet, it's probably not memorized, dynamics need worked on, etc. This could take a couple of days to a month or so depending on your level and the level of the material. If it takes more than a month then you are working on something too hard and need to break it apart into pieces.

In the polishing section take one of the previously worked on new material items and "polish" it. Pick one or two things you want to work on to make it better. Perhaps you want to make it faster - then spend that day working on that piece with the usual tempo improvement techniques. Or maybe you want to make the bends more accurate, or memorization, or anything. You might stay with one song (or section of a larger song) for a day up to a few days.

Finally, in the review section you simply play a number of the songs you know. Play them as best you can and from memory as much as possible. Rotate through your repertoire so that you keep it fresh and playable.

How you divide your time amongst these will depend on how much time you have, how big your repertoire is, etc.

This sort of study technique can apply to lesson books like "Blues You Can Use". Each practice session you can work on one current lesson (new material), polish one lesson from the the last few lessons, and then play through some of the old lessons.

Hi Dylan,

I guess it all depends on what you want to accomplish.

I agree with Joe.

I fairly quickly decided two things -

1) That the most important thing was to stay enthusiastic and motivated to play, and that the precise tactics didn't matter nearly as much as the fact of staying in the game and enjoying the process.

2) Like many arts, music is never really finished, so it seemed pretty pointless to treat it like a mathematical equation to be solved or a table that will get its final coat of varnish and then be sold. My version will never sound exactly like any song that I might try and cover, and even if I write something myself there will be endless possible re-arrangements and tweaks. There's no way that I'll ever "perfect" any song and then want to play it over and over in an identical fashion. Others may have that goal, but I know that I don't. So it helps to know that about what, as Joe says, I "want to accomplish".

So, like you, I have dozens of 'works in progress' at any one time and the columns with the 'perfected' songs in is still empty. Yet I can sit down with the guys and play an acceptable version of most things that we put on the music stand and have a crack at. I think the secret behind why I can do this, with what are still very mediocre skills, lies in one of Wes Inman's insights that I read here a couple of years ago - timing. Wes said that he felt the most important requirement to be able to play in a band was the ability to play in time. So I've always tried to go for putting some heart into my timing and rhythm first. If that means playing a simple version - e.g. substituting easier chords - then that's what I'll do. I believe that if I can get the rhythmical heart of a song right, then whoever hears it will know what's being said, even if all the 'words' aren't there (so to speak...).

I know that what I want to accomplish with music isn't primarily a perfected set list (performance standard songs) - it's an endless journey of enjoyment and discovery that will last me for the rest of my life. However, one day I will want to have a few songs that I can pull out on demand. So, in a small way I've started doing some modest work in that direction. Bit by bit I'll cheerfully put in the time needed - but I'll be doing it because I want to, not because I feel that I 'ought' to, or because the book says I must (a sure fire way to put me off.... :wink: ).
But I still want to be able to play well enough to get through a song without any massive errors, so - should I stop learning new stuff and just concentrate on the few I have started and hone them to perfection, or will the act of playing lots of different stuff naturally improve my playing that I suddenly find that the old songs are played easier and better?

Trust your instincts. You have all the tools needed to be a good player, singer and songwriter, and a mixture of being able to learn from others and following your own instincts has brought you a long way in 19 months. I suspect that you're starting to feel that you want to spend more time putting more polish on specific songs, so I'd certainly give it a go. But my guess is that you'd go best with just adding that goal in a fairly low key way, rather than trying to make a complete switch in your approach. I've found that my pretty random and unstructured way of learning, through focusing on whatever takes my interest on the day, has certainly meant that I can go back to my beginner songs and find them easier. I can also bring a whole lot more to them than I originally could - not just in extra complexity, but in knowing how to add more feeling, interpretation or whatever you'd call it.

But we're all different, so what works for me might be a disaster for somebody of a different character and temperament. :mrgreen:

Good luck with it all.

Cheers,

Chris