--- In MusicTranscribers@y..., reed@r... wrote:
> --- In MusicTranscribers@y..., "sean.ahearne" <sean.ahearne@n...>
> > Using transcription software for ear training is patchy at best.
> You shouldn't look at the process of transcribing music as the means
> to developing a good responsive ear. You transcribe a piece of music
> so that you can then reproduce it on your instrument later. You also
> transcribe music to learn the odd riff and the particular 'style/note
> choices' a player makes. You should not transcribe music with the
> sole aim of improving your aural skills. Why not do some
> concentrated work using some ear training software. Check out
> Improvisor at www.invite-software.com, there is a demo you can
> > Sean.
> > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> I'm not sure what you are saying here.
> Transcribing is great ear training. It can also be used to develop
> vocabulary as well as for many other purposes. It is the most
> holistic form of music practice that I have found.
> John Clayton, the great jazz bass player and arranger, prescribes
> transcribing as the cure to whatever musical problem you are having.
> Anything you are doing wrong he claims is because you havent
> transcribed enough. If you are rushing the time, it's because, you
> havent transcribed enough. If the band is getting lost, it's
> because, "they havent transcribed enough".....
> Now in his case, he doesnt like any kinds of slowdown devices or
> software. He thinks you ought to only transcribe things you can hear
> at full speed.
> He's in the minority in this particular opinion and while a great
> player, he is not a professional transcriber and I can tell you for
> sure that all the professional transcribers I know use slowdown
> devices though I do know some with perfect pitch that can do most
> things at full speed.
> For my own product, I sell a lot to famous musicians so I know for
> sure that not only do they continue to transcribe but they need help
> from slowdown devices.
> I can assure you that for the average, and more than average ear,
> without having slowdown devices you will not transcribe most things
> very accurately and for more than 90% of the musical population, you
> will not transcribe much of anything without slowdown aids of some
I have to disagree from experience: I developed my transcription chops
in the 70's when there was very little available for 1/2 speed. I
didn't have 16 rpm on my turntable, and only the cheeziest cassette
machine, so there was tons of trial and error. However, accuracy
develops over time, and I really feel you lose a lot of potential
development by resorting to 1/2 speed everytime there is a
challenge.I'd say I spent a good 15 years or so transcribing things at
tempo until I got the Marantz cassette machine with a speed control in
the mid 80's. 1/2 speed would have made life easier, but I truly feel
I'd have missed a lot if I didn't have the experience (and
determination) to stick with a phrase sometimes for days until cracking
it (well I had a lot more time on my hands then, too!)
That said, for transcribing Dolphy, Coltrane, Holdsworth etc. thank God
for 1/2 speed!
I think the actual writing down of the notes is much less important
than the act of getting those notes from the recording onto your axe-if
you can bypass the paper, you may be better off (after all, I found
myself compiling more transcriptions than I could actually play away
from the paper- a common "visual trip trap" as John LaPorta mentioned
to me at Berklee way back).