I go to workshops hoping to play, not necessarily for the workshop. I've been to a good number of them (not a whole lot) - and truth be told - I don't play a single tune I learned at any of them.

It seems that's how a lot of old time music events are organized - either a contest or workshops with a brief concert and a giant slow jam. And I understand - that goes a long way to pay for the guest / event. But I'm looking for other players.

I learn tunes basically the way most have mentioned already. I hear I tune with a "hook" that catches my attention. I get a recording of it and listen to as many other versions from all the sites as I can until "I've heard enough". I hardly ever learn a tune from the original source recording. I don't ignore it, I listen and let it "inform me"   - but...  I'll add my recording to a play list of all the other tunes I play and it becomes part of the rotation. I'll start learning to play it when I've got it pretty well fixed in memory. I'll learn it as a whole and up to tempo. No phrases, slow > fast, or music scores.. I'll play it at a session / jam when I feel like I'm ready. If everyone enjoys it - it gets played regularly.

The risk. Some others know the same tune / different version. Or you like and learn to play 2 different versions of the same tune.

There's a lot of way to go about the task, but this has served me well.

"Interesting discussion and it makes me wonder why a lot of people that do workshops, etc. teach using the phrase by phrase method."

it's a system that works... it isn't horrible.

quote:

---

Originally posted by martyjoe

quote:

---

Originally posted by pmiller510

Interesting discussion and it makes me wonder why a lot of people that do workshops, etc. teach using the phrase by phrase method. That has happened in the 3 workshops I've attended (obviously I don't attend those very much). Maybe some of those that lead the workshops could chime in here.

I much prefer the holistic method in learning and it involves a whole lot of simply listening. However, after listening I may use transcriptions (if I can find them) as there often seem to be a few critical notes I have a hard time finding on my own. Things like the Milliner-Koken can be very helpful with that.

---

Unfortunately (for some) the phrase by phrase method is the most efficient way to teach in a group setting. With one on one teaching the holistic approach works best with some focusing on problem phrases or passages as they arise. I also prefer the holistic approach, luckily I can do the phrase by phrase ok. 

---

Seems to me holistic learning, whatever that really means, isn't at odds with learning tunes phrase by phrase. Learning a tune phrase by phrase seems like  a very natural method of grasping the whole. Why is that unfortunate? The Milliner-Koken transcriptions avoid even the measure by measure division. As well as melody, music is rhythmical units.  Are you saying the best breaking down of a tune for learning is to not break it down at all?

Hmm for me, learning music is kinda like the art process….with art I’ll do a fuzzy rough pencil sketch, just the vague composition of the picture. THere are certain main elements that need to be in certain places and I’ll get them down first. ONce I get those, then the sketch can get tighter, things get nailed down. Then final art where you are polishing/finishing/cleaning up details. THen it’s ready to show/share!

The phrase-by-phrase feels to me like painting one section of the picture at a time - i.e. start with upper left corner, get it tight, then paint center top, get that tight, then paint upper right corner…my brain somehow has trouble absorbing and understanding stuff that way…?

But most people seem to do fine in the phrase-by-phrase workshops! I think people’s brains just work differently… so whatever gets you to playing the tune in the end, it’s about using whatever works best for you!

quote:

---

Originally posted by NCnotes

Hmm for me, learning music is kinda like the art process….with art I’ll do a fuzzy rough pencil sketch, just the vague composition of the picture. THere are certain main elements that need to be in certain places and I’ll get them down first. ONce I get those, then the sketch can get tighter, things get nailed down. Then final art where you are polishing/finishing/cleaning up details. THen it’s ready to show/share!

The phrase-by-phrase feels to me like painting one section of the picture at a time - i.e. start with upper left corner, get it tight, then paint center top, get that tight, then paint upper right corner…my brain somehow has trouble absorbing and understanding stuff that way…?

But most people seem to do fine in the phrase-by-phrase workshops! I think people’s brains just work differently… so whatever gets you to playing the tune in the end, it’s about using whatever works best for you!

---

Tunes are sequential, not upper right corner, center-top, etc. I don't understand that analogy. But, if it works for you who am I to say? I'd never try to teach tunes that way though.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Wood

quote:

---

Originally posted by martyjoe

quote:

---

Originally posted by pmiller510

Interesting discussion and it makes me wonder why a lot of people that do workshops, etc. teach using the phrase by phrase method. That has happened in the 3 workshops I've attended (obviously I don't attend those very much). Maybe some of those that lead the workshops could chime in here.

I much prefer the holistic method in learning and it involves a whole lot of simply listening. However, after listening I may use transcriptions (if I can find them) as there often seem to be a few critical notes I have a hard time finding on my own. Things like the Milliner-Koken can be very helpful with that.

---

Unfortunately (for some) the phrase by phrase method is the most efficient way to teach in a group setting. With one on one teaching the holistic approach works best with some focusing on problem phrases or passages as they arise. I also prefer the holistic approach, luckily I can do the phrase by phrase ok. 

---

Seems to me holistic learning, whatever that really means, isn't at odds with learning tunes phrase by phrase. Learning a tune phrase by phrase seems like  a very natural method of grasping the whole. Why is that unfortunate? The Milliner-Koken transcriptions avoid even the measure by measure division. As well as melody, music is rhythmical units.  Are you saying the best breaking down of a tune for learning is to not break it down at all?

---

The holistic in this case would just simply be a reference to the 'whole' like just playing the whole tune over and over until you get the whole thing to flow. The problem is that in classroom full of fiddlers learning together, different players will struggle over different spots and invariably distract some others in the room. This in turn causes the tutor to tackle the parts that each individual is struggling with, which often ends up being almost the whole tune anyway. So that’s why it is not as an effective working method. Hearing a tune played over once isn't enough for a some people to get the jist of it into their heads so learning short phrases for them is hard to put into context. Usually they do get it eventually. So neither method is perfect. The breaking it down method is the more popular and has the most success. This will unfortunate for some. 
I'm intrigued by this topic and my local Ceoltas branch has a sub committee set up to run a summer school here in Mullingar. This summer school will undoubtedly run to the same format as all the others. I may try to get speak to the organizer/s on this issue. 

Having just given a workshop on fiddle, I dont how else to communicate how to play a tune other then section by section, in the 45 min allocated for the workshop. i mean you could just play the tune for 45 min and say "OK, who got that?". Maybe 1/2 would? Maybe not. More then likely the promoter would just get complaints that "Friggin AL just sat up there any played fiddle for the whole session! Dint teach me nothin'" .

Difference between fiddle and violin:

Fiddle - learn a new tune in 45 minutes
Violin - spend a lifetime perfecting 24 caprices

Another learning method that I have tried to promote is a system of shared learning. So essentially it involves a Grandparent and Grandchild to attend class together and learn together. This way they can help each other through their weaknesses due to the fact that older people and younger people have different strengths in learning and motivation. They can share what they have learnt with each other in different ways. Apart from the obvious bonding that can occur it provides a sense sharing by child to the grandparent what they have just learnt because after all they are a sponge for learning. This sharing reinforces what they have learnt. Often the most benefit is to the grandparent because they are learning a new language (music) that keeps the brain sharp and is proven to be effective against dementia.

I usually try to listen to several versions and try to find sheet music if it's out there, because a lot of old-time records are multiple instruments playing in unison fairly fast, so discerning the melody can be difficult. Tater Joes is really good for most "hot" old time tunes. I just try to find "a" version rather than any specific version. Seems close enough.

I've never personally been a fan of the phrase-by-phrase method, but I grew up playing in school band so I can read most fiddle tunes easily.

quote:

---

Originally posted by wrench13

Having just given a workshop on fiddle, I dont how else to communicate how to play a tune other then section by section, in the 45 min allocated for the workshop. i mean you could just play the tune for 45 min and say "OK, who got that?". Maybe 1/2 would? Maybe not. More then likely the promoter would just get complaints that "Friggin AL just sat up there any played fiddle for the whole session! Dint teach me nothin'" .

---

We were told at the very first class (40+yrs ago) in Milltown Malbay) the tutor played some powerful reel through three times in a row at full speed. An said "there you go, work on that". He went outside to have a smoke and a cup of tea/coffee. When he came back in twenty minutes later he was surprised that nobody had got the tune. I don't think a lot got done that year!

The question from Tuneweaver was "How do you, personally, approach learning new tunes?" Nothing about workshops, as tutor or student.
I like the "whole tune" approach because, after all, that's what I want to learn, not just a string of phrases. At the same time, you naturally realize that a tune is made up of phrases, some of which may need more attention than others. Not to notice that would be like trying to build a pyramid without noticing its made up of individual stone blocks. (Same for an igloo i guess except ice).
That said, I'm not sure that's the most efficient method, but I think it provides the best result. Probably not very practical in a workshop setting, where the group will be held to the pace of the slowest learner, and it may be difficult or impossible to determine and remedy their problem(s).
I've never been a student in a workshop, but I've taught a few, and one course in old time banjo at a local community college. With varying success, mostly best with a small group.
As far as workshops, as a performer, I've always enjoyed the "mini performance/chat" type. If it was just our band, it was a chance to try some new things in a relaxed setting and discuss what we were doing, and if there were other participants they were often friends or people we admired. At places like Brandywine, we often knew members of the audience too, which was nice.

Yes indeed, the question was. "How do You learn?"
Not,'How do you teach? Wrench does have a dilemma, I'll agree to that.
I was sitting at a jam once upon a time. An fellow beside me started teaching me, uninvited. I was young and tried to be respectful. The bass player told me, "just tell him, if I wanted a lesson I'll pay for it." It didn't come to that. I removed myself.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Wood

quote:

---

Originally posted by NCnotes

Hmm for me, learning music is kinda like the art process….with art I’ll do a fuzzy rough pencil sketch, just the vague composition of the picture. THere are certain main elements that need to be in certain places and I’ll get them down first. ONce I get those, then the sketch can get tighter, things get nailed down. Then final art where you are polishing/finishing/cleaning up details. THen it’s ready to show/share!

The phrase-by-phrase feels to me like painting one section of the picture at a time - i.e. start with upper left corner, get it tight, then paint center top, get that tight, then paint upper right corner…my brain somehow has trouble absorbing and understanding stuff that way…?

But most people seem to do fine in the phrase-by-phrase workshops! I think people’s brains just work differently… so whatever gets you to playing the tune in the end, it’s about using whatever works best for you!

---

Tunes are sequential, not upper right corner, center-top, etc. I don't understand that analogy. But, if it works for you who am I to say? I'd never try to teach tunes that way though.

---

I guess I was trying to say, when you paint a picture first you do a rough sketch of the whole thing, and then gradually fill it in, adding details. That seems to be the way I best learn a tune, too.

But you wouldn't paint a picture just going left to right on the canvas, finishing one section at a time...that's what phrase by phrase learning feels like to me. But I agree, it's probably the most efficient, universal, time-honored way to teach.

(But try learning a longish reel that way - the number of parts to remember and put in order really adds up! So phrase by phrase tends to focus on jigs, polkas,  simpler reels.)

yes, i get the whole thing first by lilting, then break it up into phrases and practice them, not forgetting the transitions between them.

Workshops are a way to approach to learning tunes.  We're just letting someone else make the decisions about how that works out.  I think perhaps a hybrid of sorts might be a way for workshops to be more effective (from my perspective) - depending on the tune.  

I usually pick a tune to learn based on the "hook" or something about it that make me want to learn how to do "that". Perhaps a better workshop lesson would be to assume that there are part of the tune that would be easy to pick up without "teaching it" - so that the focus could be given to just learning how to do "that" - as part of the whole. Review "that" and then play the whole together - then ask, "do you need help with more than 'that'?"

But still - those workshop tunes have never been tunes I was interested in learning. So, once the workshop was over - I've never spent any more time with the tune. They don't any of "that".

It's the accumulation of - not just those cool tunes - but the techinques I learned in order to do "that" which adds to the tool box. And it's not necessarily anything learned formally (teacher, video, friend). It's the satisfaction of spending time with it myself - and finding ways I can play "that" well enough until I can recognize what I'm playing. I'm not really interested with what "the experts" say about "that." ..not the methods, or the execution. I'm playing with friends - not preppin'n 4 karnee hall. If we ain't having fun playing it - then I'll know it's time to try something else - they're doing the same.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Brian Wood

quote:

---

Originally posted by NCnotes

Hmm for me, learning music is kinda like the art process….with art I’ll do a fuzzy rough pencil sketch, just the vague composition of the picture. THere are certain main elements that need to be in certain places and I’ll get them down first. ONce I get those, then the sketch can get tighter, things get nailed down. Then final art where you are polishing/finishing/cleaning up details. THen it’s ready to show/share!

The phrase-by-phrase feels to me like painting one section of the picture at a time - i.e. start with upper left corner, get it tight, then paint center top, get that tight, then paint upper right corner…my brain somehow has trouble absorbing and understanding stuff that way…?

But most people seem to do fine in the phrase-by-phrase workshops! I think people’s brains just work differently… so whatever gets you to playing the tune in the end, it’s about using whatever works best for you!

---

Tunes are sequential, not upper right corner, center-top, etc. I don't understand that analogy. But, if it works for you who am I to say? I'd never try to teach tunes that way though.

---

Some folks take a bottom up, very linear/sequential view and approach to learning, (some coin as left-brained process).  More just note by note; to measure by measure; to phrase, to part/section... as if reading text instructions (and perhaps rote memorizing). It perhaps seems intuitively more systematically straightforward, follow the sequential instruction, then hypothetically should work.

Others find holistic, global and top down works (as some coin as right-brain process). It is not so initially straightforward, not one approach, more varied with multiple aspects, with varied prior familiarity, musical experience/knowledge; can involve non-linear; and thus can be difficult to describe or explain in any how to, step by step, one size fits all way. It's generally holistic; in it involves starting with whole, listening and developing a good mental aural sense of what the final musicality result should sound like, including the rhythm and phrasing structure; and can often include the qualitative; feel, groove, expression and articulation. How the various aspects fit into the whole. 

Starts with more global aspects first...taking the overall, then focusing first on just noticing what are the more important aspects/elements of this tune, musicality of it... how does song or tune make sense. As starting with more overall structure, framework, or outline first, then working down, kind of a heirarchal approach.  Might invlove various aspects to some degree; like general melodic contour, lyrical aspect, melodic/rhyhmic motifs/pattern; maybe noticing a harmonic/chord progression.

Phrasing structure is often part of that. Can be initially noticing the like telling a story; call/response, question/answer, AABA type statement/repeat/counter/repeat final; unresolved/resolved... and others. Then that each phrase has beginning middle and end that marks it as a phrase. (differentiate the degree of connectivity between phrases).

Differnt folks have different experience/familiarity, and might notice one aspect more than others; (ie some might typically notice chord progression, use that as frame). This might initially be a slower approach than sequential; and seem more analytic than it is. With experience it develops a bit of subconscious or intuitive familiarity... to point can quickly pick up tunes by ear, even in real time.

Some tricks I often use, can be described a bit of separate wheat from chaff... strip the tune down, take out notes (esp individuals articulation/ornaments/nuance); reduce the melodic to a simpler idea to get more of gist, or solid core of the tune; minimalism, reduction to what's the least needed. Often I also like to reduce down to more pentatonic version. Kind of the "zoom out" to the first pass impression. Once getting that, as second pass, start going down a layer... but not in any presribed order... just add in what I can notice/familiar; then gradually zoom in a bit more; while trying to keep in mind the big picture; IMO, helps put details into perspective, what are personal individual choices and articulations, expression I can use to shape the telling of tune/story.

In reply to the OP question, to me part of "learning a tune" involves the latter... understanding the tune, not just rote memorization or mechanics of instructions.

Yep, been using the strip down to pentatonic approach also recently. After i have internalised it by lilting. Often the pentatonic version will show where the lead in notes and cadences are more clearly. And also yield some nice double stops, diads, substitute notes, and ergonomic fingering for passages/phrases.

I never understood how stripping down to pentatonic does anything but remove two options from the scale. I know what it is, of course, but how does applying it to a tune that uses the other notes (and maybe accidentals) make anything easier when you're learning a new melody?

Serious question although I'm doubtful it's for me.

It makes the "Function" of the melody notes clear. For me, Maybe not for everyone.

I think a lot of Folk melodies are based on pentatonic scales rather than Major, minor, heptatonic, or chromatic scales.

And stripping a tune down to the pentatonic scale often reveals a tune hidden under layers of added embellishments. And sometimes makes it clearer how and why those embellishments are used by other players.

just another tool in the box

Edit: Also throws a different light on the visualization of the finger board,which in turn offers different fingerings.

quote:

---

Originally posted by pete_fiddle

It makes the "Function" of the melody notes clear. For me, Maybe not for everyone.

I think a lot of Folk melodies are based on pentatonic scales rather than Major, minor, heptatonic, or chromatic scales.

And stripping a tune down to the pentatonic scale often reveals a tune hidden under layers of added embellishments. And sometimes makes it clearer how and why those embellishments are used by other players.

just another tool in the box

Edit: Also throws a different light on the visualization of the finger board,which in turn offers different fingerings.

---

It may be a help for some. My fingering rules are pretty strict so boiling down a tune to pentatonic wouldn't change anything.

YEp I have noticed that there are fiddlers who are very aware of the chord structure, which is another way to know the tune, and that’s so cool because it enables them to do targeted doublestops, drones, and make creative variations within the chord. I am vaguely / subconsciously aware of that stuff, but not to the point where I’m shouting chords at the guitar player while playing a reel at full speed…haha! long way to go!

( I think of those guys as “backseat guitar players” and if I were a backer, I’d find them pretty intimidating!)

quote:

---

Originally posted by NCnotes

YEp I have noticed that there are fiddlers who are very aware of the chord structure, which is another way to know the tune, and that’s so cool because it enables them to do targeted doublestops, drones, and make creative variations within the chord. I am vaguely / subconsciously aware of that stuff, but not to the point where I’m shouting chords at the guitar player while playing a reel at full speed…haha! long way to go!

( I think of those guys as “backseat guitar players” and if I were a backer, I’d find them pretty intimidating!)

---

I'm one of those. I tend to think harmonically.

Some of the older fiddlers, in particular, would occasionally play harmonies or variations inconsistent with the chord structure, presumably because they were not thinking in those terms. Just an observation.

I had a couple online lessons with James Kelly and he used an analogy that has stuck with me, in which a tune is like a landscape painting in which there is a foreground and a background. Your eye is drawn to the foreground by the design of the painting which mainly tells the story the artist is trying to tell-- and it pays less attention to the background images (which can still be important to the story, just more subtlely). Similarly the bowing approach ideally gives emphasis to some parts (the 'core' of the tune) but less to others, such as passing notes. I try to think of a tune in these terms -- which parts really 'make' the tune, and use the bow to make that happen.