How to Play Guitar, by David Fair

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

How to play Guitar
by David Fair [of Half Japanese]

I taught myself to play guitar. It's incredibly easy when you understand the science of it. The skinny strings play the high sounds, and the fat strings play the low sounds. If you put your finger on the string farther out by the tuning end it makes a lower sound. If you want to play fast, move your hand fast and if you want to play slower move your hand slower. That's all there is to it. You can learn the names of notes and how to make chords that other people use, but that's pretty limiting. Even if you took a few years and learned all the chords you'd still have a limited number of options. If you ignore the chords your options are infinite and you can master guitar playing in one day.
Traditionally, guitars have a fat string on the top and they get skinnier and skinnier as they go down. But the thing to remember is it's your guitar and you can put whatever you want on it. I like to put six different sized strings on it because that gives the most variety, but my brother used to put all of the same thickness on so he wouldn't have so much to worry about. What ever string he hit had to be the right one because they were all the same.
Tuning the guitar is kind of a ridiculous notion. If you have to wind the tuning pegs to just a certain place, that implies that every other place would be wrong. But that's absurd. How could it be wrong? It's your guitar and you're the one playing it. It's completely up to you to decide how it should sound. In fact I don't tune by the sound at all. I wind the strings until they're all about the same tightness. I highly recommend electric guitars for a couple of reasons. First of all they don't depend on body resonating for the sound so it doesn't matter if you paint them. As also, if you put all the knobs on your amplifier on 10 you can get a much higher reaction to effort ratio with an electric guitar than you can with an acoustic. Just a tiny tap on the strings can rattle your windows, and when you slam the strings, with your amp on 10, you can strip the paint off the walls.
The first guitar I bought was a Silvertone. Later I bought a Fender Telecaster, but it really doesn't matter what kind you buy as long as the tuning pegs are on the end of the neck where they belong. A few years back someone came out with a guitar that tunes at the other end. I've never tried one. I guess they sound alright but they look ridiculous and I imagine you'd feel pretty foolish holding one. That would affect your playing. The idea isn't to feel foolish. The idea is to put a pick in one hand and a guitar in the other and with a tiny movement rule the world.

Famous article by David Fair. Please respond.

― NA (Nick A.), Tuesday, 23 September 2003 12:06 (6 years ago) Permalink

The amp advice is spot on

― Andrew Thames (Andrew Thames), Tuesday, 23 September 2003 12:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

Bump, fuckers.

― NA (Nick A.), Tuesday, 23 September 2003 13:13 (6 years ago) Permalink

*circa 1981, Thurston Moore reads this*

― nickalicious (nickalicious), Tuesday, 23 September 2003 13:20 (6 years ago) Permalink

It depends on your intentions. It's great advice for having fun on your own, but bad advice for playing in your inlaws' family bluegrass band. Yes, I speak from experience.

― BrianB, Tuesday, 23 September 2003 13:33 (6 years ago) Permalink

This has sat on my wall since I think 1997, when it was reprinted in the Guardian... it is now the colour of a cancerous smoker's fingertip. And I still don't play guitar.

― DJ Mencap (DJ Mencap), Tuesday, 23 September 2003 13:40 (6 years ago) Permalink

++The idea is to put a pick in one hand and a guitar in the other and with a tiny movement rule the world.

HAHAHAHAHAHAaaHAHAa

― kephm, Tuesday, 23 September 2003 14:24 (6 years ago) Permalink

This article has been quoted in many threads, the best one being:
How many chords must someone know to be considered an actual musician?

..and then also..
Can't Play Their Instruments
Alternative Tunings

― dave225 (Dave225), Tuesday, 23 September 2003 14:33 (6 years ago) Permalink

Just get some sampling software on your PC instead.

― White Rabbit, Tuesday, 23 September 2003 14:45 (6 years ago) Permalink

I posted the same thread to HomeRecording.com's bbs because they tend to be more "conservative" and I thought it would be interesting. There are a couple of good jackass posts on there:
http://homerecording.com/bbs/showthread.php?s=649a0e4f71ac24597ffafa80f9eac3eb&threadid=99550

― NA (Nick A.), Thursday, 25 September 2003 15:48 (6 years ago) Permalink

This article is ridiculous. A guitar should have no strings and should be played with a drumstick.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Thursday, 25 September 2003 19:21 (6 years ago) Permalink

I <3 Half Jap but why anyone would want to get their guitar playing "tips" from David Fair is beyond me.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Thursday, 25 September 2003 19:23 (6 years ago) Permalink

Anybody know if the Half Japanese DVD is worth buying?

― Francis Watlington (Francis Watlington), Friday, 26 September 2003 17:51 (6 years ago) Permalink

Only if you're a big fan... It has its moments (haven't watched it lately, I must admit) .. It's worth seeing - but owning, not so sure...

― dave225 (Dave225), Friday, 26 September 2003 17:57 (6 years ago) Permalink

3 months pass...

i have just bought a guitar and i have no clue what to do?

― steven eden, Tuesday, 6 January 2004 04:42 (6 years ago) Permalink

use it to impress the chicks

― the surface noise (electricsound), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 04:50 (6 years ago) Permalink

If you learn how to play C G and D you can do the entire output of Teenage Fanclub.

― Aaron W (Aaron W), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 05:25 (6 years ago) Permalink

I have enjoyed this article greatly via my 1/2 Jap greatest Hits CD, but always wondered if he was full of shit or not. I am a supreme guitar novice and while I can make cool sound sometimes I can't play fast or string any of 'em together. So what I am asking from all you guitar players is is he half joking here or what?

― christhamrin (christhamrin), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 05:43 (6 years ago) Permalink

it helps to roll around in the dirt

― kephm, Tuesday, 6 January 2004 06:02 (6 years ago) Permalink

The thing is, Jad Fair is, and always has been, a damn good
guitarist. The article doesn't fit his style.

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 07:06 (6 years ago) Permalink

replace Jad with David

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 07:07 (6 years ago) Permalink

If more guitarists adopted at least a bit of David's philosophy, maybe we wouldn't be plagued with so many guitarists who think that cold, mechanical speed exercises are guitar solos. I agree with him. There are no rules. Play the guitar the way you want to. If a proper set of strings, tuned as they 'should' be is your bag - cool. If not, don't let anybody mess with you. You have a chance of saying something in a new way.

― John Bullabaugh (John Bullabaugh), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 22:10 (6 years ago) Permalink

are you smoking crack squirrel police? it completely fits the style of both fair brothers. as always, david's essay is classic and spot on for playing.

― jack cole (jackcole), Tuesday, 6 January 2004 22:43 (6 years ago) Permalink

2 weeks pass...

Dear jack cole,
In regards to your comment on my comment,
I was not smoking crack - besides the occasional avant garde
freakout, Jad Fair plays fairly traditional rock guitar - just
shittier.

P.S: Fuck you bitch, go suck Ben Fold's asshole.

― squirlplise, Saturday, 24 January 2004 10:05 (6 years ago) Permalink

2 years pass...

you are all idiots

― eatpeanuts, Monday, 29 May 2006 11:14 (3 years ago) Permalink

This is the stupidest fucking article I've ever read and I wish that people would stop reminding me of its existence.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 12:09 (3 years ago) Permalink

I vehemently disagree.

― sleeve (sleeve), Monday, 29 May 2006 14:30 (3 years ago) Permalink

this is one of the best articles i've ever read and i wish people would bring it up at every availible opportunity.

― spastic heritage (spastic heritage), Monday, 29 May 2006 14:57 (3 years ago) Permalink

Well, I guess I can't tell if you guys are being sincere any more than I can tell with the original article. Do you like it because you think it's funny? I mean, if it's supposed to be tongue-in-cheek mockery of hippie drum circle types, I guess it's kind of humorours. But if it's in any way sincere, it's mind-numbingly stupid.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 15:15 (3 years ago) Permalink

faux-naivete

― m coleman (lovebug starski), Monday, 29 May 2006 15:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

Steve, I really am being sincere. I think this is a totally inspiring, liberating way to approach guitar playing and if more teenagers read this before learning to copy solos in their bedrooms I really do think we would have many more interesting bands. Plus, it's funny and well written. I have the album this came from and have actually copied this for people before.

In a way, it reminds me of what Robert Fripp told a friend of mine who attended his school... that it doesn't matter what notes you play or how many, what matters is playing the right note at the right time.

― sleeve (sleeve), Monday, 29 May 2006 15:49 (3 years ago) Permalink

I like the idea that "The skinny strings play the high sounds, and the fat strings play the low sounds. If you put your finger on the string farther out by the tuning end it makes a lower sound" is some NEW MINDBLOWING APPROACH TO GUITAR.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 29 May 2006 15:55 (3 years ago) Permalink

Yes, that's one of the more cliched bits of guitar advice around, but of course it's true. And it's nothing like what this guy is saying.

I feel very confident that no one has ever been moved to produce worthwhile music as a result of reading this article. The advice is completely worthless and can be entirely summed up by saying "think outside the box." Just like saying "What matters is playing the right note at the right time" or "it's not the notes you play, but the notes you don't play," it may be true in some sense, but it's practically useless.

The most fuck-you stupid parts are these:

"If you want to play fast, move your hand fast and if you want to play slower move your hand slower."

Wow, how insightful.

"You can learn the names of notes and how to make chords that other people use, but that's pretty limiting. Even if you took a few years and learned all the chords you'd still have a limited number of options. If you ignore the chords your options are infinite and you can master guitar playing in one day."

One doesn't "take a few years and learn all the chords." That isn't how music works; only a musical novice would conceive of it in those terms.

"I like to put six different sized strings on it because that gives the most variety, but my brother used to put all of the same thickness on so he wouldn't have so much to worry about. What ever string he hit had to be the right one because they were all the same."

The reason for putting 6 different sized strings on a guitar is that each one is meant to accomodate a different amount of tension so you can tune them to different pitches and create chords. Putting six of the same gauge string on a guitar, let alone tuning all 6 strings to the same note, is idiotic.

"If you have to wind the tuning pegs to just a certain place, that implies that every other place would be wrong."

No, it doesn't imply that at all. That's a ridiculous thing to say.

"it really doesn't matter what kind you buy as long as the tuning pegs are on the end of the neck where they belong. A few years back someone came out with a guitar that tunes at the other end. I've never tried one. I guess they sound alright but they look ridiculous and I imagine you'd feel pretty foolish holding one."

Again, it's really hard to believe that this guy is being serious. It's not just that the advice is worthless, it's the way it completely misunderstands the way music and guitars work and then tries to recast that ignorance as "stick it to the man" wisdom.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:13 (3 years ago) Permalink

Wow, we clearly think about music in different ways. Oh well. Lots of room in the world for disagreement.

― sleeve (sleeve), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

The thing is that this article isn't "inspiring" or "liberating" because it doesn't tell people anything they don't already know. Unless you think guitar playing is a grueling training exercise that forces you to copy Joe Satriani solos note-for-note (which is absolutely fine if that's what you want to do!). And if you didn't already know that you don't have to copy Joe Satriani solos note-for-note to be a guitar player, then you probably won't be liberated by this article because you obviously can't think for yourself anyway.

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Monday, 29 May 2006 16:24 (3 years ago) Permalink

Wow, we clearly think about music in different ways.

I guess? I mean, if you want to expand on that maybe we could reach some common ground. How do you figure any of the advice in that article would be helpful to anyone beyond repeating a cliche like "think outside the box?"

And I agree Curt1s, but my problem is more the fundamental misconceptions which underlie the article, like the idea that "tuning your strings to a specific pitch means that all other pitches are wrong." You can't get much more sophomoric. Tuning standards exist so that multiple musicians can play together. But hey, don't take my word for it, put 6 of the same gauge string on your guitar and turn the pegs until you feel like stopping. But I guarantee you it'll sound like shit.

And the notion that learning music involves some kind of rote memorization of chords. It's like saying "Yeah, you could learn English the normal way, by going through a dictionary and trying to memorize all the words, or you can make up your own words and master English in a day!"

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:29 (3 years ago) Permalink

And also, of course electric guitars depend on the body resonating for sound.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:32 (3 years ago) Permalink

"faux-naivete"

is it?

i would argue that it's not faux anything. i've played guitar for 15 years and can't play a C chord. or i probably do play one but i don't know it.

he's being naive about traditional technical music language/notation.

but i agree that he's not naive about what rock/blues/folk sounds like.

the important lesson is to not constrict your music to the language with which you encode it.

knowing a C-chord doesn't make you any less likely to play something that's worth playing. art is about ideas though, and if you're stuck in languages and modes defined by someone else, you're always going to be underneath their heel. don't get locked up by blues scales, not unless those chains bruise you up good and you've got something to say.

― msp (mspa), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:35 (3 years ago) Permalink

oh jeeze

xpost: heh. nice.

― bernard snow (sixteen sergeants), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:36 (3 years ago) Permalink

i would argue that it's not faux anything. i've played guitar for 15 years and can't play a C chord. or i probably do play one but i don't know it.

Yes, I'm sure the latter is true. Anyone who says that learning terminology or notation is restricting simply doesn't know what they're talking about. I think the language analogy is a good one; is it better to be able to speak English but not be able to read and write it? Does that make you more unrestricted or creative? No, it doesn't.

Some people get by and manage to do great things without ever learning things traditionally, and that's great for them, but that isn't a good reason to celebrate/promote ignorance.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:39 (3 years ago) Permalink

"Yeah, you could learn English the normal way, by going through a dictionary and trying to memorize all the words, or you can make up your own words and master English in a day!"

see, he's not talking about english, he's talking about Talking. if you have a language that you can communicate, then use it. fuck the standards and syntax.

sure, learn standards and syntax, but you can't keep people from being masters of their own personal modes of communication. a guitar = a mouth.
m.

― msp (mspa), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:41 (3 years ago) Permalink

the idea you're trying to communicate > than the mechanism.

mechanisms are restrictive. all languages are inherently flawed/inconsistent or incomplete. (Godel)

sure, some ideas can be communicated and communicated beautifully... that's why the academy/institutional system has so much power in our society... but there are blessed things we can only bark at in futility. thank the heavens for that too. mystery rules.

― msp (mspa), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:46 (3 years ago) Permalink

see, he's not talking about english, he's talking about Talking. if you have a language that you can communicate, then use it. fuck the standards and syntax.

m, that doesn't make sense. It doesn't matter if it's English, Spanish, C++, or music, we're talking about a language, and communication requires both parties to agree on meaning. If you don't know what chords or notes you're playing, you're going to have a trouble playing with other musicians. Likewise if you don't tune your instrument to standard pitches.

Like I said, there's nothing wrong with saying "think outside the box." Sure, be original, be innovative. It's just that all of the specific advice he offers is unadulterated BS and betrays a complete misunderstanding of the concepts at work, so I think that it's not just useless but would in fact be detrimental advice to someone trying to learn music for the first time.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:47 (3 years ago) Permalink

but we misunderstand eachother all the time. we riff. we roll. we still play.

learn english. learn guitar. but learn to also apply ideas outside of the rule book. that's his point. that's why i like it.

i understand where you're coming from, i just disagree.
m.

― msp (mspa), Monday, 29 May 2006 16:51 (3 years ago) Permalink

but learn to also apply ideas outside of the rule book.

But this is the crux of it, I think (although I wouldn't use the word "rule book," because that doesn't eflect reality - there is no musical rule book) - I say you have to learn the language, study the traditions, and then decide to go against them. This guy seems to be saying don't bother with that stuff, it isn't worth your time. Which is bad advice. That's not how it works. Picasso learned to paint in a traditional style before he invented cubism. Beethoven studied the classical style before he developed his own idiom and segued into the Romantic era, etc. I'm confident that the vast majority of the great pre-20th century musicians would've found the sentiment here risible. It just strikes me as both anti-intellectual, anti-collaboration, and useless in any practical sense.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 17:00 (3 years ago) Permalink

it completely misunderstands the way music and guitars work

So how exactly do music and guitars work?

― Chris Bee (Cee Bee), Monday, 29 May 2006 17:00 (3 years ago) Permalink

Do you feel that what Keiji Haino does isn't "music"?

http://poisonpie.com/sounds/haino/

― Chris Bee (Cee Bee), Monday, 29 May 2006 17:01 (3 years ago) Permalink

So how exactly do music and guitars work?

I've explained the specific misconstruals in several posts now, Chris. Let me know if you need anything specific clarified.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Monday, 29 May 2006 17:02 (3 years ago) Permalink

Oh, sorry, I didn't realize you'd layed out "how music and guitars works"... Hmmm, I'm looking, but I can't seem to find it?

― Chris Bee (Cee Bee), Monday, 29 May 2006 17:04 (3 years ago) Permalink

I just love people who go around telling people what is or isn't "art" or "music"

― Chris Bee (Cee Bee), Monday, 29 May 2006 17:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

Skipping 186 messages at this point... Click here if you want to load them all.

David wrote the "famous article," but Jad was the guitar player, and the writer of all the great songs. Am I right about this?

― nicky lo-fi (nicky lo-fi), Tuesday, 6 June 2006 23:18 (3 years ago) Permalink

i didnt want to so this to you steve but you leave me no choice.

http://www.myspace.com/stevegoldberg

― chaki (chaki), Tuesday, 6 June 2006 23:35 (3 years ago) Permalink

"How to Do It" by the Pythons:

Alan: Well, last week we showed you how to become a gynaecologist. And this week on 'How to do it' we're going to show you how to play the flute, how to split an atom, how to construct a box girder bridge, how to irrigate the Sahara Desert and make vast new areas of land cultivatable, but first, here's Jackie to tell you all how to rid the world of all known diseases.

Jackie: Hello, Alan.

Alan: Hello, Jackie.

Jackie: Well, first of all become a doctor and discover a marvellous cure for something, and then, when the medical profession really starts to take notice of you, you can jolly well tell them what to do and make sure they get everything right so there'll never be any diseases ever again.

Alan: Thanks, Jackie. Great idea. How to play the flute. (picking up a flute) Well here we are. You blow there and you move your fingers up and down here.

― slugbuggy (slugbuggy), Tuesday, 6 June 2006 23:52 (3 years ago) Permalink

Regrettably I believe invoking Python at this point is a corollary of Godwin's Law. And I speak as a Python fan.

*views myspace page*

The Beatles, The Lucksmiths, The Shins, The Decemberists, The Magnetic Fields, weezer, Elliott Smith, Morrissey, Neutral Milk Hotel, John Vanderslice, Camera Obscura, Belle and Sebastian, The Beach Boys, Simon and Garfunkel

Wait, you like all this and you're NOT a Half Japanese fan.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Tuesday, 6 June 2006 23:59 (3 years ago) Permalink

I have a moustache too, suuuckas!

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 00:03 (3 years ago) Permalink

Do you like anything with an actual beat in it?

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 00:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

Hey, just because those are my influences doesn't mean that I like them.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 00:07 (3 years ago) Permalink

I like Sufjan's beats.

oooh snap

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 00:16 (3 years ago) Permalink

**Ignores all of Steve Goldberg's comments**

Isn't it fair to say that Joni Mitchell would agree with much of David Fair's opinion? Isn't it an established fact that she cannot read music notation and used a great number fairly unique guitar tunings?

While it's true that many musicians (including Mitchell herself) have discussed the difficulty in learning her songs due to their unique structure, that hasn't stopped them from being covered time and again. She also appears to have gained the respect and praise of many other highly rated musicians, not only as a singer and songwriter, but also as a guitar player.

― shorty (shorty), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 00:54 (3 years ago) Permalink

The Beatles couldn't read music either, but they obviously understood theory intuitively.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:01 (3 years ago) Permalink

According to AMG, Joni Mitchell learned to play guitar from Pete Seeger instructional books.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:04 (3 years ago) Permalink

There's also no such thing as a "fairly unique" tuning or a "fairly unique" anything. And it's not really such a big deal to play in non-standard guitar tuning. Guess what, other string instruments are in other tunings. There's nothing radical about it.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:06 (3 years ago) Permalink

You used the term "radical" Abba, not me. I was simply trying to state that (as far as I've read) the tunings Mitchell used were not standard. I wasn't trying to make a grand statement here, I just thought that Mitchell's opinion wouldn't be that far off of Fair's.

As far as whether or not Mitchell learned from Pete Seeger instructional vids, I think were talking semantics. Having said that, if she taught herself to play guitar from Pete Seeger's instructional books on how to play the banjo, she certainly wasn't learning standard guitar tuning was she. Perhaps that's what gave her the idea that she didn't have to follow the norms.

― shorty (shorty), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:17 (3 years ago) Permalink

Btw, my comment about semantics was confusing. I don't mean to call into question whether or not Mitchell used Seeger's books or not, I simply mean that some people (yourself I assume) would certainly believe that she therefore did not teach herself, while others would argue that unless you actively take lessons with two-way communication you have taught yourself.

― shorty (shorty), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:23 (3 years ago) Permalink

I think the whole idea of "teaching yourself" versus "music theory" is semantics.

Do you play guitar? I'll bet there was a moment early on where you were playing a C chord and then went to a G chord and you said "Hey, that sounds pretty good." Well, that's music theory. It's also not music theory, it's just what sounds good. Now, let's say a few weeks later you tried playing the G chord, and then when you went to the C, you held one of the notes from the G chord, the one on the 1st string, 3rd fret. Well that's music theory too, and again, it's also just what sounds good.

But all music theory really is is a system of trying to explain and catalogue what sounds good, and not even so much "good" as more or less consonant/dissonant. It happens to be a really useful for this, especially if you want to write complex music, though you certainly don't have to know any theory to write interesting music.

Say you had a progression with a C major chord in it, and you noticed you could put in an A minor in place of the C major and it "worked." Well, if you knew a little basic music theory, you'd know that A minor is the "relative minor" of C major. As a result, you'd also know that you could put a B minor chord in place of a D major chord for the same effect, or a C# minor chord in place of an E major. In fact you'd know the relative minor of every major chord. And you'd also be aware that you didn't just "invent" the idea of playing A minor instead of C, that in fact it's done all the time in all kinds of music. It's just one more tool at your disposal if you happen to want to write a sonorous chord progression. And if you don't, you don't have to follow that idea. It's not a "rule," just a concept you can use as a tool.

Joni Mitchell is brilliant, but most of what she plays "works" quite well and often even follows very traditional chord patterns. And that's probably because she has a good ear and grew up listening to lots of people who either formally or intuitively knew a thing or two about Western harmony.

Composers like Stravinsky, OTOH, have used music theory to make music that strayed much more from "norms" and was much stranger-sounding and harder to learn than anything Joni Mitchell ever wrote, because ultimately there aren't really any "norms" in music theory. Music theory also allowed them to write out parts way too difficult to learn by ear.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:33 (3 years ago) Permalink

And anyway, I'm not saying any musician needs to learn music theory. I'm sure there are at least as many pop and rock greats who didn't as who did. I'm just saying that the knee-jerk reaction against theory and the lionizing of people specifically for not learning it is kind of silly.

― Abbadavid Berman (Hurting), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:36 (3 years ago) Permalink

We agree.

― shorty (shorty), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 01:39 (3 years ago) Permalink

Critical analysis of Fair's little monograph there is kinda the antithesis of Fair's little monograph there. You can learn theory or you can eschew it. Whatever results you're going for/ whatever gets you there.

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 11:08 (3 years ago) Permalink

That's true Dave, but I think the question is what approach affords a novice the best chance of realizing their desired results. I mean, nobody really knows what's going to get them where they want before they start trying, right? Learning any kind of new and complex skill tends to involve a commitment to some sort of method, so the question becomes which method is the most effective tool.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 11:15 (3 years ago) Permalink

.. but there's no rule against trying it on your own.

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 11:23 (3 years ago) Permalink

...of course not.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 11:36 (3 years ago) Permalink

See, the thing is, he writes the thing to remember is it's your guitar and you can put whatever you want on it which is of course completely right, but then he writes Tuning the guitar is kind of a ridiculous notion which is bullshit. So we can go around and around on this for years, because we're comparing two different, nearly opposite viewpoints.

The goal of learning guitar is so that when you hear something in your head you can put it out there for people to hear, and to be able to do it in that split-second between when an idea pops into your head and the part of the song where you want to use it comes up. You can't do that if you don't know what note is going to come out when you finger a certain string at a certain fret, and you can't know THAT unless the answer is the same as it was yesterday. So you can tune it to whatever, but you have to tune it to something.

As for theory, you need to learn the theory appropriate to the music you want to play, which could mean gobs of theory of none at all. If you want to sound like Green Day, you have to learn standard tuning and the most common chords. If you want to play jazz, you have to learn a bit more. If you want to sound like 1/2 Japanese, apparently, you don't have to learn any. Whatever.

― Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:13 (3 years ago) Permalink

I think part of the thesis though is that you don't need to sound like anybody.

I don't think the piece is really about playing the guitar or music theory.

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:32 (3 years ago) Permalink

I think part of the thesis though is that you don't need to sound like anybody.

"Then don't play the guitar" would be my snarky answer.

I think the piece is about guitar playing and music theory, though. But I don't think it's really worth talking about this much, despite how much I already talked about it. It seems kind of like one of those "have you ever really looked at your hand, man?" kind of things.

― Steve Goldberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:40 (3 years ago) Permalink

There's a faux-naivete to Fair's article, not sure if it's worth calling bullshit on it? It's not a manifesto.

He does speak to a certain approach towards music-making that can be freeing for some people, and valuable even to those who know music theory, e.g. the Eno quote above, where Robert Fripp was not even willing to try something because, according to music theory, it wouldn't work.

― Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:45 (3 years ago) Permalink

Robert Fripp was not even willing to try something because, according to music theory, it wouldn't work.

But see, I don't know Robert Fripp and I wasn't in the room when that anecdote took place, but no musically-educated person I know would think that way. There is nothing that music theory says "won't work." This misunderstanding is at the heart of a lot of these discussions.

― Steve Schneeberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:48 (3 years ago) Permalink

[Insert picture of mouse sniffing cheese-baited trap]

― Sons Of The Redd Desert (Ken L), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:52 (3 years ago) Permalink

no musically-educated person I know would think that way. There is nothing that music theory says "won't work." This misunderstanding is at the heart of a lot of these discussions.

OTM.

I think part of the thesis though is that you don't need to sound like anybody.

The electric guitar has been played by millions of people for more than 50 years. You're going to sound like somebody.

― Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:54 (3 years ago) Permalink

but you don't need to.

xpost:

I think the Fripp think sounds reasonable.. by "won't work" he meant "I think that'll sound like shit and I don't even want to try it." and Eno said, "Just try it you pretentious fuck." and then Eno said, "See? I was right, ya bastard. Wait until I tell everyone at Guitar Player magazine what an ass you are."

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 13:58 (3 years ago) Permalink

Right Dave, but that was Fripp's fault, not music theory's fault. His theory-fu failed him when he was unable to imagine what the part would actually sound like.

― Steve Schneeberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:01 (3 years ago) Permalink

but you don't need to.

I don't get it. Do you mean you don't need to try to sound like anybody? True, but you're going to anyway, and I'd rather know who I sound like and where he/she took it from there.

― Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:05 (3 years ago) Permalink

OK.

So I've lost the point in all of this.

Anyway, I play the guitar - I play what I want to play, and I play whatever sounds good to me. I'm not doing it for anyone else's enjoyment. I never tune to standard tuning. I tune to how the strings sound good together. That may be a tuning, and it may not be - I don't know/care. I sometimes play along with records and I like the way it sounds most of the time. But I don't relative-tune to them - I adjust which frets or strings I use to make the sounds I want. I never play the same thing twice.

Would this be easier or more enjoyable if I "knew" how to play the guitar? Maybe.
But I can continue doing it the way I'm doing it because, as David says, it's my guitar.

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:09 (3 years ago) Permalink

Freedom is on the march!

― Steve Schneeberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:13 (3 years ago) Permalink

Sure Dave, do whatever you want. All I've been saying is that "it's your guitar" is a freeing, undogmatic notion, while "tuning the guitar is kind of a ridiculous notion" is just as dogmatic as the reverse statement. And the argument on this thread is fated to go on forever, because those who love this article are responding to the first statement and those who hate it are responding to the second.

― Rick Massimo (Rick Massimo), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:44 (3 years ago) Permalink

Now that's a very good point Rick.

― shorty (shorty), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 14:59 (3 years ago) Permalink

Good point. We've put way more thought into this than David Fair has.

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:02 (3 years ago) Permalink

am i the only person who gets a kick out of a light-hearted statement about music that, through the power of sheer charisma, somehow transcends its essential cognitive dissonance?

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:06 (3 years ago) Permalink

"tuning the guitar is kind of a ridiculous notion"

File under irony, irreverence.

― Edward III (edward iii), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:09 (3 years ago) Permalink

by "statement about music" do you mean music for enjoyment purposes or music theory?

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:10 (3 years ago) Permalink

by "statement about music" do you mean music for enjoyment purposes or music theory?

I don't understand - what distinction are you trying to point out here?

― Steve Schneeberg (Steve Goldberg), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:16 (3 years ago) Permalink

That we could make another 300 posts on stevie's post alone...

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:19 (3 years ago) Permalink

― Jack Cole (jackcole), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 15:24 (3 years ago) Permalink

That we could make another 300 posts on stevie's post alone...

please, please, don't...

― i am not a nugget (stevie), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 16:28 (3 years ago) Permalink

just passing through this thread and noticed this:

I'd rather listen to a 3 year old child experimenting with an electric guitar than listen to a Belle and Sebastian record

-- Chris Bee (noaddres...) (webmail), May 29th, 2006 3:01 PM. (Cee Bee) (link)

I'd say Half Japanese sound more like the former than the latter!

― Curt1s St3ph3ns, Wednesday, 7 June 2006 16:37 (3 years ago) Permalink

Jack, team 11's robot looks a little like Jad Fair.

― DAVE, for #1 Hits of yesterday and today! (dave225.3), Wednesday, 7 June 2006 16:38 (3 years ago) Permalink

3 months pass...

"We didn't even know about tuning," recalls Watt. "We didn't equate string tension with pitch. We thought some dudes liked their strings tight, others liked them loose. But if you played "Down on the Corner" and it sounded right, we were in tune"

― autovac (autovac), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:09 (3 years ago) Permalink

i think this might be the most annoying thread in ILM history

― mango selassie (teenagequiet), Tuesday, 3 October 2006 18:29 (3 years ago) Permalink

i like it.
ps. robert fripp rocks

― Squirrel_Police (Squirrel_Police), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 01:14 (3 years ago) Permalink

Note to self: every time I get intent on making a "point" on ILM, I'll return to it less than six months later wondering what I was on about.

― A-ron Hubbard (Hurting), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 01:20 (3 years ago) Permalink

ha, yeah. I wasn't making any sense at all with the Fripp comparison.

― sleeve version 2.0 (sleeve testing), Wednesday, 4 October 2006 18:29 (3 years ago) Permalink

You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.