.
Why do some swear by it while others, like Jeff Berlin, say that time "is an internal event" and that a metronome will not help to develop it?

I'm not sure what your really saying here.....

are we mixing up time with timing....

you dont need timing if your playing in your own time.....

but what do ya do if you want to synchronize and play with others..... ?


as far as metronomes... The movie "The red Violin"
has a very goood demostration in picking up the
pace and puting more in time with your time for a time....

tic tic tic ding
[Edited 10/6/06 7:38am]

groovyiau said:

Can't one's "own time" be bad time?
...and if your sense of time is good, wouldn't your ability to synchronize with others be better?
Read of the upcoming and ongoing Jeff Berlin-Steve Bailey debate and I was curious about opinions here.

While I don't sit everyday and practice with a metronome, I do about twice a week. I use it for scales and arpeggios to make them tight and note for note on time. While it's not the same as timing with the drummer, it's really essential for keeping your chops strong.

Is metronome the same as drum machine? I've never ever practiced with a metronome. But I've recorded with drum machines forever. Same thing, I guess - you're locked into the rhythm, right?

anon said:

Interesting.... but would
this not rely on others
perseptions of what my time should be...

good time bad time.... might be my influence on other peoples timing maybe

again... sense of time does not relate to timing.....
are we talking about timing or time...??? I'm still confused here....
A metronome in my mind is a timer not time itself exactly....

on the other hand..... we are all synchonised
to something whether we like it or not...
everyone has a time pattern of some sort
that they will subconsciously conform tooo...

3 o's makes a double on the 2 too

Slave2daGroove said:

But wouldn't you be working on scales, arpeggios and timing if you practiced without the metronome?
I'm just asking. I wouldn't know 'cause my timing sucks. I need a metronome just to chew gum.

groovyiau said:

Right, the metronome is just a timer. Mozart, Bach and the like, didn't practice with a metronome. Didn't they used it as a reference point and then turned it off?

I mean the basics, like counting...developing a strong internal clock as opposed to one that is strongest when there's a metronome ticking.

I think Berlins argument is that the metronome doesn't help to develop ones time. If anything, it hinders it.

beauhall said:

I don't think it's the same thing. I think it's better. If you have never practiced with the metronome it would seem your time is strong...especially if you can record with a drum machine and keep time. It almost seems contradictory but I know really good musicians that will play with a drum machine only to be able to adapt in studio sessions...but for nothing else.

anon said:

Doesnt it boil down to what ever works for you and your needs.....
all I know is that if I wanted
to play the violin as quick as lightning...
I'd play with a timer of some sort....
sequencer preferably or a really nice sounding metronome

groovyiau said:

But couldn't you just set the tempo with the timer, turn it off and pat your foot(or count inside) instead?
Again, I'm just asking because there's also the Steve Bailey side of that argument.

I try to practice to a metronome as much as possible.They're very handy things,and it's amazing to hear how what you think is playing in time is sometimes hideously out of time. But then I'm of the view that musical proficiency is 1% ability and 99% training. I wouldn't trust my internal timing to keep me actually in time, but then strict timing is only necessary in certain types of music - high tempo, technical metal or complex classical music for example.

It's of no real bearing on the quality of the music though. All great rock'n'roll speeds up towards the end. And Midnight Lightning by Jimi Hendrix is great, even though he's keeping time like a fake Rolex. Jimi is a special case though - mortals can't fuck with time like he did and get away with it.

anon said:

Well I'm debating with my mind whether this is really a debate....

Maybe you could read up on infant child development
and see where coordinatiom stems from....
are we born with it or does it require external
development if so how can that be hindered maybe...????

Rowdy said:

Jimi had incredible time. He could eat a sandwich, take a nap and still wake up on the one. I guess one aspect is basic time...just counting...the other is everything else you can do on time and against time, and still be on time.

Jimi did this effortlessly.

groovyiau said:

I would think it's a combination. You can take two children and train them the same and one will excel because he has the natural aptitude (gift). I think this goes for time too. It's a gift with some.
I do believe that the metronome is good for some things but I was curious about how you guys viewed it in regards to time.

anon said:

Well lets say you take a 100 children that seem interested
in percussion and train them the same way....

How many do you think wont be gifted?

groovyiau said:

It's possible that many of them will become competent and even good musicians and more than likely different ones will have different aspects that they excel at. But the ones who have the natural aptitude(gift), even with the same training, will surpass the others.

natural aptitude.... facsinating....

So are you saying that "gifted" people dont
need metronomes and will tend to excel more than those that do...?

I believe a gifted teacher can create gifted students....
be it at 3 or 33 or whatever age the interest is formed
Although we might be going off track and into the realms
of time and patience...

Does aptitude/gifted for you mean they learn faster
or have less to learn coz they got "it" already or maybe something else... ?

anon said:

See I never find that Jimi had good conventional timing - I think James Brown would have killed him if he'd been in the JBs. Timing was especially whacked out in the Experience days. They were all over the place, in the greatest possible way. The magic with Jimi is that he did being out of time so well. The outrageous lateness of the first chord stab in the first verse of The Wind Cries Mary is my favourite example. It fits in with the spirit of the song perfectly. I've never heard anyone else who's able to do that, to play with being out of time so intuitively.

My 2 cts: sure, every player has his own timing and feel. However, once people start to play together, they have to adapt (the drummer playing behind the beat, the guitar ahead and the keys on top? Might sound great. But don't count on it.) Metronome practice will improve your sense of time and make you more aware of your personal timing quirks. Then you have the choice to play in your own timing or follow the drummer or whoever. I suppose some people are born with that ability, but most of us aren't.

groovyiau said:

Gifted or not, the metronome topic is a separate issue. It's been an ongoing debate, I see the benefits to both sides of the argument. The way some use the metronome here, for example, I think is good. But I agree with Berlin that it can't teach or help to develop good time...not if you use it as a crutch. An aid, yes, but not a crutch.

About the kids...what if you change that up and take 100 kids and give them each a piano, but no training. How do you explain the one that hits a few keys and discovers that he speaks that language? This happens but it's far less than 1 in 100. And no, everyone has to learn but to some it comes easier...these grasp it very naturally. I do believe that everyone has their gift but it's not always musical.

Rowdy said:

Jimi and James might have been accenting the beat differently but I wouldn't say Jimi's time wasn't as good. It takes good time to come in behind the time.

I'm thinking that you're playing devil's advocate but I'm not sure. You can't play like Jimi or even come in behind the time and then talk against that time, the way Jimi did, unless you have incredible time. Jimi breathed good time.

anon said:

Fair enough.....

anon said:

and what about 100 kids
that dont have access to pianos...
where is the gift there.... ?

I do hear what you are saying.... but to me there
are so many reasons why that 1 child you speak of
is more in tune or has an attraction/appreciation
to sound, more than the other 99....
I'd like to keep on thinking that anyway....

This subject could take us down several rabbit holes
and I've been down down a few to many already....
Do you really want to study and observe that much or
would you rather have a musical world?

and you are right the gift of creativity
is available to everyone... some value it
more than others I guess... metronomed or not..

cheers

anon said:

I'm firmly of the belief that Jimi is the greatest guitarist and one of the most expansive musical minds ever to strut the earth, but I've heard a number of instances of him losing the time, be it on live shows or bootlegs. But he was so musically astute that it became something great.

If an alien came down and read my posts, they'd think that Jimi Hendrix never played in time, which absolutely wasn't the case, and I'm not trying to rag on Jimi at all. But as we all know, he was freewheeling in his playing, especially live, and he took it wherever his mind carried him often regardless of the form and structure behind music in the strict technical sense.

Returning to the point I was made originally with the Hendrix example, metronomic 1234 timekeeping is often important, but it is not of central importance to lots of genres of music, where the 'feel' overrides the discipline aspect. I was thinking about this more last night, and realised that the opposite can also be true. Chic's relentless, micron-tight playing sprang to mind - the sheer precision of it is amazing. Incidentally, I read in an interview with Nile Rodgers in a guitar magazine that they never rehearsed to a metronome, but rehearsed hard, with lots of repetition, which would lend itself to the 'internal event' school of thought.

I use this one



The idea that a metronome hinders ability or truly gifted musicians don't need one rings of utter hogwash to me.

First of all, when you're first learning a piece (no matter how brilliant you are) or practicing scales, you're mainly concentrating on getting the notes down. To keep up with time, intonation, and fingerings is difficult -- so the metronome can act as a support while you concentrate on the other things.

It cleans up your act and pushes you forward, so you don't start dragging through the notes and getting overly caught up in the intonation/fingering aspect. I use it when I've gotten the notes down fairly well, but want to "up the ante" and challenge myself.

Also, there are many passages in pieces that can lend themselves to either dragging or rushing, due to the way they are written, your internal tendency, and/or your ability to play them. The metronome is a way to track and clean up your accuracy, like tracing a line through paper.

As far as one's internal timing, every musician needs it and needs to develop it. A metronome is an indespensible tool for doing just that.

heartbeatocean said:

Co-sign

without the use of a metronome, musicians sometimes loose the experemintation of different timings...
locked into that 4/4 groove the standard of all pop music...

not many cats can write a song in 9/4 time of 9/8 time without the use of a metronome,

heartbeatocean said:

He doesn't believe in tuners either.

Anyway, his philosophy and teaching process is interesting and his thought is not that truly gifted musicians don't need one...he believes that no one should use one. Neither of these things are allowed in his school.

anon said:

No tuner either, not even to A? I can't believe that because no one could tune their instrument properly unless they happened to have perfect pitch. I can see not using a tuner to check their intonation, however. That would be lazy when you really need to train the ear. But you need to have an open A to orient the instrument especially if you're playing with others. He probably means not using it for other notes as well, and I agree with him there.

I've played in a lot of orchestras where the conductor's baton serves as a kind of visual metronome. It gets so the orchestra really leans on it to keep time. I've had conductors refuse to conduct a piece for us and then the players are forced to find their inner sense of timing, and truly listen to themselves and everyone else. It kind of wakes you up, because you can start playing like a robot in that situation.

heartbeatocean said:

I think that's what Berlin is trying to make his students aware of. It doesn't seem he's as rigid as he comes across based on his quotes. He does strongly believe that this is something everyone is capable of...says you won't find the metronome in many countries where you find very intricate rhythms.