Guitar teacher--how to choose?

Interview the teachers. Pay for the lesson so that it's on your own dime, so to speak. Talk to them about your expectations -- the kind of music you like and what you hope to accomplish. Ask them to respond to your comments. Listen to them. Are they honest in their assessment of what you want to do (if they promise too much, I'd be suspicious)? Do they seem to respond in a way that leads you to believe they could mentor you? Do they evince a genuine interest in your aspirations and in the style of music you like? Ask them what you should expect of a typical lesson. What sorts of questions do they ask you? Bring your guitar. If they ask you to play, do so. That will indicate that they're trying to assess where you are at the moment and are thinking of how to help you progress.

Good luck finding a good match.

Hi Mr. Puke,

I agree with Mr. Musenfreund's comment about interviewing the teachers. Narrow them down to maybe a "top three, " before making your decision. The first guy that you mentioned, "Berkee, his own studio, his own orchestra, reasonable price and seems like quite a cool guy-willing to record some of my work if I want for a demo cd" is the one that I recommend that you go with. Oddly enough, this guy sounds like me! I know it sounds radical, but having creditionals such as a music diploma, doesn't automatically make that person a great teacher.
I have been a guitar teacher myself for 21+ years, and I can tell you that the guitar teacher that you should "take a chance on" is the one who shows the most enthusiasm about your musical goals, and gives you straighforward, long DETAILED answers to your questions. I'll bet it was the "Berklee" guy, right? Past that point, unfortunately, you won't really know who is the best instructor for you until you have taken lessons from them for a few months. After that, ask yourself-Did I learn things that I didn't expect to learn? Am I playing any better since I began the instruction? Did they make good on what they promised? Unfortunately, like everything else, this may cost you a little money in the beginning experimenting around, but at least you'll know next time what to look out for.

John Ezell
http://guitarmediagroup.com

Interview the teachers. Pay for the lesson so that it's on your own dime, so to speak. Talk to them about your expectations -- the kind of music you like and what you hope to accomplish. Ask them to respond to your comments. Listen to them. Are they honest in their assessment of what you want to do (if they promise too much, I'd be suspicious)? Do they seem to respond in a way that leads you to believe they could mentor you? Do they evince a genuine interest in your aspirations and in the style of music you like? Ask them what you should expect of a typical lesson. What sorts of questions do they ask you? Bring your guitar. If they ask you to play, do so. That will indicate that they're trying to assess where you are at the moment and are thinking of how to help you progress.

Good luck finding a good match.

Thanks a lot for your reply. I definitely agree that I should look around and talk to the teachers. I called them on the phone but I now think it`d definitely be worth it to actually go down to the music school, shop, college or whatever and meet them face to face. Otherwise, I can`t possibly make a real good decision. What if the guy (and yes, all those I`ve talked to are guys :p) sounds great on the phone but is intolerable in person? It might cost me more money but in the end, it`s probably the best thing to do, hm. Thanks again for your advice--it`s definitely helped. :D

Hi Mr. Puke,

I agree with Mr. Musenfreund's comment about interviewing the teachers. Narrow them down to maybe a "top three, " before making your decision. The first guy that you mentioned, "Berkee, his own studio, his own orchestra, reasonable price and seems like quite a cool guy-willing to record some of my work if I want for a demo cd" is the one that I recommend that you go with. Oddly enough, this guy sounds like me! I know it sounds radical, but having creditionals such as a music diploma, doesn't automatically make that person a great teacher.
I have been a guitar teacher myself for 21+ years, and I can tell you that the guitar teacher that you should "take a chance on" is the one who shows the most enthusiasm about your musical goals, and gives you straighforward, long DETAILED answers to your questions. I'll bet it was the "Berklee" guy, right? Past that point, unfortunately, you won't really know who is the best instructor for you until you have taken lessons from them for a few months. After that, ask yourself-Did I learn things that I didn't expect to learn? Am I playing any better since I began the instruction? Did they make good on what they promised? Unfortunately, like everything else, this may cost you a little money in the beginning experimenting around, but at least you'll know next time what to look out for.

John Ezell
http://guitarmediagroup.com

Firstly, it`s Miss Puke. ;)

Secondly, you`ve guessed right. The Berklee guy did show the most enthusiasm about my playing and all. That`s actually what really marked me. He asked me about my musical goals (or lack of, as he soon found out :p) and we chatted a little and he just seemed genuinely interested in my playing. When we finished talking, he kept repeating that I could call him back whenever. I found that really nice. Because basically, I`m not only looking for a guitar teacher that will give me some weekly work and then, send me off until the next week. I`d really like to find someone who would be willing to follow me a little--kinda like a mentor, I guess. I`m not sure if I`ll ever find someone like that though, but I feel like I have to try. And at the moment, he definitely seems like my best bet. Also, I do know that the fact that he has a music diploma doesn`t automatically make him a great teacher but chances are, he probably knows how to teach better than an average joe in a music store. Another bonus to him is the chance it would give me to perhaps have something recorded. I`d really like to be able to live off music someday, and that could maybe help me out. So yea, I`ll definitely give him a try. At least go meet him for a first lesson, if nothing else. :D

Anyway, I`ll definitely listen to Musenfreund`s and your advice and go meet a couple of the teachers. Thanks to both of you! :)

Guitar medis is right you really won't know until you have taken some lessons to get an idea whether or not they are the right person for you. And beleive me travel will probably become an issue sooner or later so that will come into the equation, but if you really connect with the Berklee teacher then go for it, it's difficult to find that connection.

The first question I would ask of the instructor is whether he/she teaches students to play by ear or by reading music. I've been teaching guitar for 40 years and I have taught both methods. If you want to learn fast get an instructor that teaches you to play by ear. Moreover, I've found that students that learn to play by ear are less likely to quit than those trying learn to read music first. A good instructor should be able to teach you an entire song during one session and as you progress each song should become more difficult. Remember, you can always learn to read music and/or tabs at a later date if you really feel the need.

There's seldom a post I disagree with as strongly as DickDale's.

Part of the problem in choosing a teacher is that a new guitarist has little background to evaluate different teaching methods and make a sound decision, so I'm going to explore his blanket statements in detail:

1. If you want to learn fast get an instructor that teaches you to play by ear.

This seems true, but it's really false progress. You pick up skills by investing time in learning them; a student spending time learning note reading isn't spending that same time on chord changes or improvisation. They'll seem 'better' at the guitar for the first few years because they're focusing on the most visible skills first, but the reader who keeps at it will overtake them in the end - because they're spending time building a foundation that eventually lets them do things the ear guitarist can't.

We've beaten the topic of reading at lengthbefore, so I won't restate the arguments

2. I've found that students that learn to play by ear are less likely to quit than those trying learn to read music first

I don't find that to be true. I've known a lot of guitar teachers over the years, and most 'turn' their students three times a year on average - meaning some students take one or two lessons, some study with the same teacher for years, and the average works out to be about four months with a teacher. My average student is with me for 6-8 months, nearly twice as long as the average.

Of my present students, just under 3 percent are not learning to read music. I won't force the issue with adults, but after I explain the advantages of reading almost all adults agree to learn the basics of reading (single notes, first position - essentially the first 25 pages of Mel Bay's book 1). The majority of students who get that far end up wanting to learn more.

Given the fact that my students aren't quitting at nearly the rate of other teachers, and the fact that almost all of my students are learning to read standard notation, I say DickDale's statement that reading makes students quit faster is false.

The length of time a student remains with a teacher depends on some factors outside the control of the teacher (like the student's finances or other commitments), but two factors that the teacher can directly control: how much fun the student has at the lessons, and how much progress the student realizes. Neither of these have anything to do with a student's decision to read or not.

It could very well be related to how reading is presented, though.

3. A good instructor should be able to teach you an entire song during one session and as you progress each song should become more difficult

Partly true. There are songs that can be learned in one lesson, but there are songs that can't. Over the years I've had many students wanting to learn Stairway to Heaven... that's an 8 minute tune. How can it possibly be taught in a 30 minute lesson, simply because of length?

In addition, you've got techniques to explore - if the student doesn't do any fingerpicking yet, the intro alone is going to require about an hour of instruction - because the learning goal isn't "how do I play this song?", it's really "what is this technique, and how do I use it?". The second section, with the G-D-C-D chords on the neck brings up chord inversions - if they're new to the idea that a chord can be played in a number of ways, that takes a while to explain. Then there's the lead break - using a hexatonic scale. A decent teacher will explain not just what Jimmy does, but why, and how you can apply that technique to other tunes.

A teacher who presents an endless series of tunes may be handing the student musical fish instead of teaching fishing. The real question hers isn't wheter or not they use songs to tech, but how they use them: how does each song develop a specific musical skill, and how is that skill explained in a way that allows the student to apply it to other songs?

There's also the area of musicianship to be addressed - you may be able to play a song in one lesson, but have you learned to perform a song?

I usually have advanced beginner/early intermediate students working on two songs at a time... one is a 'quick' tune that they'll learn in 1-2 weeks; the other is a 'study piece' that they'll ready for performance over the course of 1-2 months.

4. Remember, you can always learn to read music and/or tabs at a later date if you really feel the need

Tabs yes, standard notation - probably not.

Reading music is like reading any language; it's a fairly complicated skill to acquire. If you can already play, learning to do so through writing seems boring and childish, because in the beginning you can only handle short 'words' - the musical equivalent of Hop on Pop.

If you can already play by ear, it's not likely that you'll have the discipline required to learn to read by playing pieces such as Twinkle Twinkle Little Star.

On the other hand, if you're just learning to pick out notes on individual strings, that tune (or others like it) will challenge your playing ability as they develop your reading skills.

People who learn to read from the beginning end up being fair to good readers. People who start by ear, and try to pick up reading later, will give up at an incredible rate - less than 1% will develop any meaningful reading skills.

5 - implied in DickDale's post is the reading/ear question as an either/or choice

It isn't. My students learn both; reading without any practical connection to the music you want to play makes for a bored student (and a wooden performance); ear performance without reading will limit them in the end - have you noticed that almost all amateur guitarists don't read, but almost all professional guitarists do?

As another teacher, I'll disagree with DickDale strongly as well.

Ear training is vitally important, on that we agree.

Learning to "play by ear" over "learning to read music" is a false choice. If you aren't learning to do both, you are missing an essential element of your musical education.

And there is very little real success in people going back after playing the guitar for years and learning to read music.

Learning to read music well takes a serious investment of time and effort for the guitar. That investment is easy and natural at the start of the learning process. The more capable you are as a player, the more difficult it is to tolerate the inevitable frustrations of learning how to read music and thus the more likely it is to not follow through completely.

Wow Tom, that was quite an explanation.

Like I said before get an instructor that will teach you to play be ear. Within two months you will be able to teach yourself. These guys want you to learn to read music so they can stretch out the learning curve, hence more money for them. Take my advice, go get yourself some lessons, shouldn't take you more than three months. Teach yourself how to reads tabs, even a caveman can learn tabs. Take the extra money that you were going to pay these guys and buy yourself a quality guitar.

Stretch out the learning curve?

Mr. Dale wants it both ways - earlier he said students who learn by ear don't quit taking lessons as fast as students learning to read standard notation. If what he said then is true, what he's saying now can't be - and vice versa.

Just over 75% of my students come to me through personal referral. If a student sees real progress, and the value of lessons, they may recommend me to their friends. Would I really give up the 75% of my teaching income that comes from referrals to 'stretch out' the learning curve and make a few more bucks from the other 25%?

That makes no business sense. I do well when my students do well.

If you have an idea of which way you want to go, you might want to get in contact with some of the students to get their opinion of the teacher.

Denny

Like I said before get an instructor that will teach you to play be ear. Within two months you will be able to teach yourself. These guys want you to learn to read music so they can stretch out the learning curve, hence more money for them. Take my advice, go get yourself some lessons, shouldn't take you more than three months. Teach yourself how to reads tabs, even a caveman can learn tabs. Take the extra money that you were going to pay these guys and buy yourself a quality guitar.

Being able to pick out notes in solo and finding basic chords is a great point to get any student to.

And is one of the first goals I have for any student. Though never at the expense of the student progressing as a musician.

Any notion that at that point a student can "teach themself" is ludicrous.

I'm going to disagree with King on a studen'ts ability to teach themselves.

If you truly have a groundbreaking insight, there are no teachers that can assist you. Case in point: Andres Segovia. The techniques of classical guitar refined by Tarrega didn't make sense to him, so he followed his heart and taught himself. Along the way he created a couple of twists of his own - most notably the way the thumb moves - and reinvented classical guitar technique. Almost all classical guitarists now bend the thumb at the palm (Segovia's concept), rather than the first joint (the earlier 'correct' technique)

But a guitarist like that may come along once in a generation or so.

I know a few decent guitarists (even some decent readers) who taught themselves. There are plenty of books, videos, etc., so I don't think it's impossible to be reasonably good without a teacher.

But I can tell you the downside of not having a teacher from personal experience: I started out self-taught, and got reasonably good - good enough to be getting some paid gigs. I felt I'd hit a stumbling point, so I went to a teacher.

It turned out the stumbling point had actually happened a couple years earlier... I'd developed some very bad habits because I didn't have correcting feedback. I spent a couple years undoing what I'd done - proving, at least, that I'm no Segovia.