2freaky4church1 said:

Prince had nothing to do with Mountains.

Except the lyrics??

.

.

Plus Wendy said the crazy chord changes just before the outro vamp and vocal ad libbing were something Prince added even though she said he "didn't know what he was doing" from a theory perspective (i,e, they were compicated chord sequences but he just did it instinctively)

PeteSilas said:

i used to work at a dueling pianos bar, i wasn't and am not good enough to play with most of those guys but.., I did play what I played the best I possibly could, i wanted to be close to the original as humanly possible, and even though those guys had more talent, played more tunes, could do more things, most of the songs they did they mangled and ruined, not just laziness but because they didn't have their hearts in those songs, after a year I realized that I had no interest in being like them even if the pay was great. I had no interest in learning/playing songs that i didn't love. When I cover a song, i want to recreate the magic for me, if i can add something and make it better in my mind, i do, but usually, you're not going to make it better than the original unless the original just wasn't great. Even Prince rarely played most of my favorites like he did on record.

.

I read in one of the Ray Charles biographies that in his teens Ray was playing in some band in bars and restaurants and of course they had to play the pop hits – and sometimes they were asked for songs they never even heard. So what they did was asked the guy requesting the song to sing or hum a bit and they took it from there. They just winged it and everyone was happy.

.
(Other times when they were playing songs they were already bored of, they started improvising by going around the circle of fifths, playing solos in every single key – purely for their own amusement and for practising.)

.

I understand what you mean and I agree with you that it should be the right approach as a musician to at least start from a position of knowing what exactly is the original. But we have to accept that it's rarely the case. Professional musicians often just use a song as a sarting point or as a vehicle to showcase their talent on. Or they just want to entertain by covering something losely, and as I mentioned before, Prince was guilty of doing that too. In most cases he didn't really learn exactly how the original went when he covered something, he just played it how he felt. Even with songs like 'Sweet Thing' that he was playing from his early teens – he didn't play it exactly how Tony Maiden did, he made up his own version. In many cases he probably didn't even bother to learn the full song, he just jammed on what he remembered. And that's OK.
.
But again: I am passionately behind the idea that everyone should at least try playing music. Especially kids. And what I've seen all my life is that most people are discouraged from playing music from sadly a very early age, starting from parents telling a kid that "you shouldn't sing/play, you have no talent" (and that's one of the most poisonous thought you can ever plant in a child's mind), through schools not even teaching any music, to adults not even having left the last fraction of hope or interest to ever pick up an instrument.
.
It just breaks my heart because music shouldn't be a hobby for the "lucky few with talent" – it is an integral part of what makes us humans, one of the most important ways of self-expression. Music is more ancient than speech, it is something everyone on earth has at least some talent for and playing music is the most complex way of learning, developing our skillset; it's the most thorough exercise for the brain.
.
So yeah, I say just let everyone join in with whatever skills and talents they have, let them play however they want to, help them whenever they ask for help and applaud them for even just trying.

.

I'm with you, Kares.

But a practice of an art (oh, the pomposity!) starts to be truly fulfilling once you go beyond the alphabet.
Of course I am not one to discourage beginners. But you seem to be very forgiving whereas myself,
when someone puts him.herself out there, in the public to hear or see (outside of his parents or close friends),
I expect what is presented (again, to all) to be at least a bit meaningful.

Really going for it, even at "amateur" level, even self-taught,
becomes an experience. But it comes with repetition, loneliness, frustration. And then one day,
you go "hey, I start to get it!".

You can't deny the bar has been lowered fucking low. Auto-tune, sample triggering,
instead of being a tad of spice, is too often the whole and only meal served. Yeech.

As for "professional musicians", we clearly don't have the same definition, because the musicians I know,
they know at least, even if by ear only, the concept of 7th major, or a plain fifth (the so-called power chord)...
I'm afraid that, for the sake of "doing art", you pass on the wide-spread, very lazy attitude towards music.

Suggesting Prince of not knowing what he was doing, is pushing it too far.
You can bet he knew exactly what the chords of "Sweet Thing" were. In the MTV special, it shows.
It's just a stripped down version, but the moving "parallel" fourths, he's got them right, and that's the essence of it.
Hey, it's just a guitar and him.

I'm sorry, but Prince knew his thing, damn well and early on. There is his first interview in the local newspaper,
back when he was still a student, and he's asked "what would you recommend?" and he replies "know your scales, that's the most important thing".

Did you ever see him use a capo? Did he compose in E or G only? Did he use simple chords ad nauseam?
You don't come up with harmonies like in "For You" (the song, or the album for that matter), you don't come up with 8 (the album) like this, he is one of the greatest pop arrangers, up there with Wilson, maybe Nitzche.

There's this legend I come across from time to time, I speak with a casual listener about Prince,
and they go "and he didn't even read music!". What bullshit.
There's a difference between not knowing, and not having to.

I don't expect every one to have the courage, the perseverance and most of all the time (especially since the new meaning it has acquired in the last decade: everyone seems to not have enough of it, yet they spend it in useless shit like, I don't know, posting on the org).

Time is the greatest luxury. But I also know that Keith Richards and Mick Jagger didn't ate for two years and lived in terrible conditions, that the Beatles slept for two years in a porn movie theater in Hamburg, "machen Schau".

Joint to joint, nothing comes for free
If you show your love, you can get with me

Is it him talking to his muse, or is it his muse talking to him?
Commitment, my friend. It makes all the difference, no matter what you choose to do.

Music should stay fun, for sure.
But I go for Big Fun.

[Edited 5/14/18 9:09am]

bonatoc said:

I'm with you, Kares.

But a practice of an art (oh, the pomposity!) starts to be truly fulfilling once you go beyond the alphabet.
Of course I am not one to discourage beginners. But you seem to be very forgiving whereas myself,
when someone puts him.herself out there, in the public to hear or see (outside of his parents or close friends),
I expect what is presented (again, to all) to be at least a bit meaningful.

Really going for it, even at "amateur" level, even self-taught,
becomes an experience. But it comes with repetition, loneliness, frustration. And then one day,
you go "hey, I start to get it!".

You can't deny the bar has been lowered fucking low. Auto-tune, sample triggering,
instead of being a tad of spice, is too often the whole and only meal served. Yeech.

As for "professional musicians", we clearly don't have the same definition, because the musicians I know,
they know at least, even if by ear only, the concept of 7th major, or a plain fifth (the so-called power chord)...
I'm afraid that, for the sake of "doing art", you pass on very lazy attitude towards what music is.

Suggesting Prince of not knowing what he was doing, is pushing it too far.
You can bet he knew exactly what the chords of "Sweet Thing" were. In the MTV special, it shows.

I'm sorry, but Prince knew his thing, damn well and early on.

I don't expect every one to have the courage, the perseverance and most of all the time (especially since the new meaning it has acquired in the last decade: everyone seems to not have enough of it, yet they spend it in useless shit like, I don't know, posting on the org).
.

.

I'm sorry but I don't think you understand what I'm trying to say and you're twisting my words so for the last time:

.

Nowhere in my posts I even just implied that professional musicians don't know music theory and how chords are structured. You're misinterpreting me.
Also, I haven't even implied that Prince didn't know the chords or what he was doing: I clearly said that he made up his own versions of songs he covered (in 'Sweet Thing' he was NOT playing the same as Tony Maiden did and I'm not talking about the chords) and that sometimes he just played a part from a song he probably never even bothered to learn *exactly* and *in full* and jammed on it.

.

There's no need to lecture me about how artists should take their work seriously because I fully agree, but and I wasn't talking about that.
There's no need to cry about modern technology and a supposedly "lowered bar" because if that's what your perception is then you're going to the wrong places for music. Making music just became far more accessible for the masses with the aid of modern technology and while of course what the amateur masses produce will most often fall far behind the highly trained musicians in terms of quality, there's also a GROWING number of highly skilled and trained professional musicians out there who will continue to raise the bar.

.
Technology gives access to playing music potentially for billions of people and it allows them to share their work easily. You don't have to like everything or even anything what you hear in the mainstream media. You can turn away and seek out what you consider real quality and real art. But don't diss people who aren't good. The simple fact that more and more people are joining in is something we should be happy about as it means more and more very talented kids will be inspired too and and they will continue to raise that bar.

.

2freaky4church1 said:

Prince had nothing to do with Mountains.

Before this year is out, we are going to get you delivered from all of this baiting...

OldFriends4Sale said:

2freaky4church1 said:

Prince had nothing to do with Mountains.

Before this year is out, we are going to get you delivered from all of this baiting...

Finally

havent u figured about now..wendy thinks she probably should be credited MORE for the writing...since she's only getting partial credit as part of the revolution

prince didn't read music, like many great writers, he knew from his talent what "theory" was. You don't need theory when you have that kind of talent. would it have helped? I don't know. I do know that his ear for harmony most likely came from his father, at least in terms of his keyboard parts, whether he knew the names of those chords or not I don't know. He used his own strange chords in addition to all the 7'ths and 9'ths. Most likely he just played around until he heard what he liked. He surely knew basic stuff, major/minor, arpeggios, scales but as Mark Cardenas wrote to me once, "he's no genius....too many basic things he doesn't know" which is just his opinion but there is probably some truth in the lack of formal knowledge. For me, when I cover a tune, it might seem a lot of time and a lot of work but I go all the way, all the way or I leave it alone. That's just me though, I have no interest in taking the best stuff out of a song just to play a halfass version. Little Red Corvette, for example, is a pop song but what made it so special to my young ears at the time was, the chords were unlike what I was used to hearing, it gave them a mystical vibe and therefore, when I tried to cover it, i wanted the exact chord, not a guess or a version, i wanted what he had. And even Prince, never, ever played little red corvette the way he had it on record, it was alwasy either a revised or a shortened version of it for whatever reason, but I don't do it like that, it's too great a song,everything, from the end of 1999 where a bomb lands and a voice trails off to the rising chords, to the solo, to the outro, just an unusually great pop song.

[deleted]

[Edited 5/15/18 5:39am]

[deleted]

[Edited 5/15/18 5:39am]

Yep, Prince did OK with the "basic things" he knew...

It is funny how a few people who've worked with Prince can be quite dismissive of his talents when it's glaringly obvious what a feckin' genius he was.

jjam said:

Yep, Prince did OK with the "basic things" he knew...

It is funny how a few people who've worked with Prince can be quite dismissive of his talents when it's glaringly obvious what a feckin' genius he was.

.

Perhaps you're misunderstanding them. Stating things like "Prince wasn't a highly trained musician" is NOT dissing his talents. It's a fact. But it doesn't mean he wasn't a genius.

.
Prince was a true musical genius comparable to Mozart – yes, I agree! I absolutely love and respect his incredible talent and even more importantly: his incredible inner drive to work hard and keep creating.

.

But if you think he was capable of either composing or performing things like Bartók's Piano Concerto no.2 or Egberto Gismonti's pieces, for example, then I would say you're out of your mind. Prince wasn't that skilled, far from it, and it would be silly to deny that just because we're true fans of his work.

.

There aren't many professional classical pianists who'd feel entirely comfortable playing Bartok's Piano Concerto No.2, let's face it.

Kares said:

jjam said:

Yep, Prince did OK with the "basic things" he knew...

It is funny how a few people who've worked with Prince can be quite dismissive of his talents when it's glaringly obvious what a feckin' genius he was.

.

Perhaps you're misunderstanding them. Stating things like "Prince wasn't a highly trained musician" is NOT dissing his talents. It's a fact. But it doesn't mean he wasn't a genius.

.
Prince was a true musical genius comparable to Mozart – yes, I agree! I absolutely love and respect his incredible talent and even more importantly: his incredible inner drive to work hard and keep creating.

.

But if you think he was capable of either composing or performing things like Bartók's Piano Concerto no.2 or Egberto Gismonti's pieces, for example, then I would say you're out of your mind. Prince wasn't that skilled, far from it, and it would be silly to deny that just because we're true fans of his work.

.

Yes, but Béla Bartók couldn't compose and perform something like Darling Nikki or If I Was Your Girlfriend. He simply wasn't capable of conceptualizing and realizing something like that.

PeteSilas said:

Mark Cardenas wrote to me once, "he's no genius....too many basic things he doesn't know"

WOW, I've never thought about it like that before. Hearing that just makes you wonder how good Purple Rain COULD'VE been if only he'd known the basics. I mean, I love that album anyway I think it's amazing but now I can't help but wonder what it would've been like with proper knowledge of the basics.

GOD DAMN, I can't stop thinking about it!

Darlink Nikki with proper use of the basics? That track is already cold but with the basics he could have dropped it below freezing.

Purple Rain? The basics would make the original sound like he's downright fucking BORED during that performance. Heck, it may have actually reached the top spot on the charts instead of peaking at number two. You know, because of that extra emotional connection people get when they hear a song that correctly utilizes the basics?

.

[Edited 5/15/18 5:56am]

dandan said:

PeteSilas said:

Mark Cardenas wrote to me once, "he's no genius....too many basic things he doesn't know"

WOW, I've never thought about it like that before. Hearing that just makes you wonder how good Purple Rain COULD'VE been if only he'd known the basics. I mean, I love that album anyway I think it's amazing but now I can't help but wonder what it would've been like with proper knowledge of the basics.

I'm trying to figure out what "basic" things Prince didn't know. I'm drawing a blank.

I can only presume that Mark Cardenas was perhaps referring to Prince not being able to articulate certain musical things he was doing or wanted in terms of music theory (i.e. a voicing of a chord). If so, it's a churlish comment to make.

jjam said:

I can only presume that Mark Cardenas was perhaps referring to Prince not being able to articulate certain musical things he was doing or wanted in terms of music theory (i.e. a voicing of a chord). If so, it's a churlish comment to make.

Mark is a musician himself and was actually in The Time during a period when Prince was making a movie, writing and recordng material to be on the soundtrack, writing and recording material for both The Time and Vanity 6, rehearsing and performing remaining dates of the 1999 tour, etc, etc. So he is either sickeningly jealous and bitter or truly just a fucking idiot. I imagine he knows more theory than Prince on a technical level and thus can't understand why his career has amounted to him playing covers in clubs for $50 a night, whilst Prince is a global icon and widely considered one of the greatest artists of all time. Maybe if he tried to write and record his own album he'd quickly realise that all that 'knowledge' means absolutely fuck all without the creativity to apply it. Same reason why 90% of Berklee students, who I imagine all have a 'better' understanding of theory, end up working at Target. The VAST majority of people aren't musical, so when they hear a song all they know is if they like it or not, and whether it elicits an emotional response in them. Prince knew this and thus never let technicalities get in way of the feeling. There is a quote from an engineer that says something like 'Prince would grab the EQ knobs and twist them to add some excitment here and there, he didn't know or care what he was doing specifically, he just cared about how it sounded and how it made him feel.'

[Edited 5/15/18 9:30am]

dandan said:

jjam said:

I can only presume that Mark Cardenas was perhaps referring to Prince not being able to articulate certain musical things he was doing or wanted in terms of music theory (i.e. a voicing of a chord). If so, it's a churlish comment to make.

Mark is a musician himself and was actually in The Time during a period when Prince was making a movie, writing and recordng material to be on the soundtrack, writing and recording material for both The Time and Vanity 6, rehearsing and performing remaining dates of the 1999 tour, etc, etc. So he is either sickengly jealous and bitter or truly just a fucking idiot. I imagine he knows more theory than Prince on a technical level and thus can't understand why his career has amounted to him playing covers in clubs for $50 a night, whilst Prince is a global icon and widely considered one of the greatest artists of all time. Maybe if he tried to write and record his own album he'd quickly realise that all that 'knowledge' means absolutely fuck all without the creativity to apply it. Same reason why 90% of Berklee students, who I imagine all have a 'better' understanding of theory, end up working at Target. The VAST majority of people aren't musical, so when they hear a song all they know is if they like it or not, and whether it elicits an emotional response in them. Prince knew this and thus never let technicalities get in way of the feeling. There is a quote from an engineer that says something like 'Prince would grab the EQ knobs and twist them to add some excitment here and there, he didn't know or care what he was doing specifically, he just cared about how it sounded and how it made him feel.'

[Edited 5/15/18 8:48am]

For some reason this thread now reminds me of the cheesiest '80's movie I ever saw. I don't even remember its name, but it revolved around college kids and music. There was some wunder-kid dork nerd unlikeable guy who was a "star", and there was the goofy hero. Both of them wrote songs and played the keyboards, and both were in love with the same girl.

In the ultimate scene, the nerd dork wonderboy took to the stage and explained how hard song-writing was, and how he could spend months looking for the exact right turn of phrase for a verse.

About that time the goofy hero turned on his keyboard, played a chord, and basically sang, "Girl, I love you, I love you, I love you!" Of course, the kids went wild.

I'm really glad I got that out of my system.

dandan said:

jjam said:

I can only presume that Mark Cardenas was perhaps referring to Prince not being able to articulate certain musical things he was doing or wanted in terms of music theory (i.e. a voicing of a chord). If so, it's a churlish comment to make.

Mark is a musician himself and was actually in The Time during a period when Prince was making a movie, writing and recordng material to be on the soundtrack, writing and recording material for both The Time and Vanity 6, rehearsing and performing remaining dates of the 1999 tour, etc, etc. So he is either sickengly jealous and bitter or truly just a fucking idiot. I imagine he knows more theory than Prince on a technical level and thus can't understand why his career has amounted to him playing covers in clubs for $50 a night, whilst Prince is a global icon and widely considered one of the greatest artists of all time. Maybe if he tried to write and record his own album he'd quickly realise that all that 'knowledge' means absolutely fuck all without the creativity to apply it. Same reason why 90% of Berklee students, who I imagine all have a 'better' understanding of theory, end up working at Target. The VAST majority of people aren't musical, so when they hear a song all they know is if they like it or not, and whether it elicits an emotional response in them. Prince knew this and thus never let technicalities get in way of the feeling.

.

I'm sorry but if you seriously think that "90% of Berklee students end up working at Target" you don't know what you're talking about. No, they don't. A vast majority of them end up working in music, at least a third of them end up building a successful career solely in music – they will be professional touring musicians or teachers or whatever they chose. Being a teacher, for example, is a happier and far more rewarding place than becoming a star for a lot of people! Not everyone is striving for money and fame. (A friend of mine has 2 degrees in music and is a very highly skilled and amazing artist – she's even young and beautiful, yet she never wanted to be on stage, she's far happier teaching children!) And the ones that do end up at Target can either thank themselves for that, for not putting enough work into their chosen careers or a lot of them simply lack the complex skill set (business skills, social skills, determination etc) needed to achieve success.
.
Berklee, just like any other school on earth is no guarantee for success and it certainly won't do the work for you if you want to study there. And in some cases it cannot even give you the training you'd need (like another friend of mine who's been asked by Berklee's teacher on his first day whether he'd like to teach there instead of being a student because he was already a world-class musician winning the best soloist prize at Montreux... needless to say he left Berklee after a year because there was no point...), but still, it is one of the highest rated music schools for a reason.
.

The two things that a lot of people here don't seem to realise and have been bothering me for years on the org are:
1. Music > popular music. Some of you will need to broaden your horizons as most of the comparisons I read on prince.org are limited to popular artists and sometimes I get the impression that people don't even see past the popular genres.

2. Commercial success in music has very little to do with musical talent and skills, except in rare cases such as Prince's. Still, talented as he was, he never would've achieved worldwide fame simply with his music, he needed management, marketing, controversy, image etc, etc too. Playing in bars or the Superbowl is NOT a measure of musicianship or talent or skills. It is far more complex than that and comparing artists based on this criteria is ridiculous.
.

[Edited 5/15/18 11:21am]

dandan said:

PeteSilas said:

Mark Cardenas wrote to me once, "he's no genius....too many basic things he doesn't know"

WOW, I've never thought about it like that before. Hearing that just makes you wonder how good Purple Rain COULD'VE been if only he'd known the basics. I mean, I love that album anyway I think it's amazing but now I can't help but wonder what it would've been like with proper knowledge of the basics.

that's just one mans opinion, doesn't mean much. doesn't mean anything really, especially when you know musicians like I do, they are all competitive and backstabbing. but the "too many basic things he doesn't know" i could see being true not just for prince but for any pop musician, elvis, bruce, the beatles, whoever. It would probably hurt them to even know theory really. The proof is in the pudding, what has Mark Cardenas ever done? Probably the most accomplished thing he ever done was work in the time. As I've said to people before, trained musicians graduate by the thousands every year from colleges all over the country, very few of them have any real talent for turning that into money.

and there it is.

dandan said:

jjam said:

I can only presume that Mark Cardenas was perhaps referring to Prince not being able to articulate certain musical things he was doing or wanted in terms of music theory (i.e. a voicing of a chord). If so, it's a churlish comment to make.

Mark is a musician himself and was actually in The Time during a period when Prince was making a movie, writing and recordng material to be on the soundtrack, writing and recording material for both The Time and Vanity 6, rehearsing and performing remaining dates of the 1999 tour, etc, etc. So he is either sickeningly jealous and bitter or truly just a fucking idiot. I imagine he knows more theory than Prince on a technical level and thus can't understand why his career has amounted to him playing covers in clubs for $50 a night, whilst Prince is a global icon and widely considered one of the greatest artists of all time. Maybe if he tried to write and record his own album he'd quickly realise that all that 'knowledge' means absolutely fuck all without the creativity to apply it. Same reason why 90% of Berklee students, who I imagine all have a 'better' understanding of theory, end up working at Target. The VAST majority of people aren't musical, so when they hear a song all they know is if they like it or not, and whether it elicits an emotional response in them. Prince knew this and thus never let technicalities get in way of the feeling. There is a quote from an engineer that says something like 'Prince would grab the EQ knobs and twist them to add some excitment here and there, he didn't know or care what he was doing specifically, he just cared about how it sounded and how it made him feel.'

[Edited 5/15/18 9:30am]

the only real way to make money for most of those educated folks is to be a teacher. I've known many, most are not fulfilled. the old saying "those that can, do, those that can't, teach" applies. I've had some talented musicians that I've run across, one big thing they lack has nothing to do with music, it's having BALLS, they don't have the balls to go out there and do things, risk humiliation, risk disrespect, which is neverending, and so they just get discouraged and teach kids and if those kids get too high and mighty, they discourage them too.

Kares said:

dandan said:

Mark is a musician himself and was actually in The Time during a period when Prince was making a movie, writing and recordng material to be on the soundtrack, writing and recording material for both The Time and Vanity 6, rehearsing and performing remaining dates of the 1999 tour, etc, etc. So he is either sickengly jealous and bitter or truly just a fucking idiot. I imagine he knows more theory than Prince on a technical level and thus can't understand why his career has amounted to him playing covers in clubs for $50 a night, whilst Prince is a global icon and widely considered one of the greatest artists of all time. Maybe if he tried to write and record his own album he'd quickly realise that all that 'knowledge' means absolutely fuck all without the creativity to apply it. Same reason why 90% of Berklee students, who I imagine all have a 'better' understanding of theory, end up working at Target. The VAST majority of people aren't musical, so when they hear a song all they know is if they like it or not, and whether it elicits an emotional response in them. Prince knew this and thus never let technicalities get in way of the feeling.

.

I'm sorry but if you seriously think that "90% of Berklee students end up working at Target" you don't know what you're talking about. No, they don't. A vast majority of them end up working in music, at least a third of them end up building a successful career solely in music – they will be professional touring musicians or teachers or whatever they chose. Being a teacher, for example, is a happier and far more rewarding place than becoming a star for a lot of people! Not everyone is striving for money and fame. (A friend of mine has 2 degrees in music and is a very highly skilled and amazing artist – she's even young and beautiful, yet she never wanted to be on stage, she's far happier teaching children!) And the ones that do end up at Target can either thank themselves for that, for not putting enough work into their chosen careers or a lot of them simply lack the complex skill set (business skills, social skills, determination etc) needed to achieve success.
.
Berklee, just like any other school on earth is no guarantee for success and it certainly won't do the work for you if you want to study there. And in some cases it cannot even give you the training you'd need (like another friend of mine who's been asked by Berklee's teacher on his first day whether he'd like to teach there instead of being a student because he was already a world-class musician winning the best soloist prize at Montreux... needless to say he left Berklee after a year because there was no point...), but still, it is one of the highest rated music schools for a reason.
.

The two things that a lot of people here don't seem to realise and have been bothering me for years on the org are:
1. Music > popular music. Some of you will need to broaden your horizons as most of the comparisons I read on prince.org are limited to popular artists and sometimes I get the impression that people don't even see past the popular genres.

2. Commercial success in music has very little to do with musical talent and skills, except in rare cases such as Prince's. Still, talented as he was, he never would've achieved worldwide fame simply with his music, he needed management, marketing, controversy, image etc, etc too. Playing in bars or the Superbowl is NOT a measure of musicianship or talent or skills. It is far more complex than that and comparing artists based on this criteria is ridiculous.
.

[Edited 5/15/18 11:21am]

PeteSilas said:

the only real way to make money for most of those educated folks is to be a teacher. I've known many, most are not fulfilled. the old saying "those that can, do, those that can't, teach" applies.

.

Where do you think all those highly skilled and talented musicians who play in big orchestras and ensembles worldwide come from? They come from great music schools. And all those amazingly talented young musicians who happily play in clubs or on tours with people like Herbie Hancock, Jeff Beck, Richard Bona or whomever else? They come from schools! A lot of them are incredible musicians, far more skilled than most big names in the pop-rock world. The comments here really amaze me sometimes... .

.

*There is a VAST universe of music out there, outside of the pop-rock comfort zone of stars acknowledged by the mainstream media.*

.

And regarding that old saying: it might sound funny for some, but it's wrong and ignorant and actually quite offensive to a huge number of great teachers worldwide. Being a great (talented AND skilled) musician is never enough for success. Success requires a totally different set of skills IN ADDITION to the musical skills. Just because a lot of great musicians lack these additional skills (or they don't even have the interest in acquiring them) does not mean that they are not as good musicians as those that do achieve success. These are totally different things!
Also: teaching requires yet another set of different skills IN ADDITION to the musical skills. A lot of highly successful musicians are terrible teachers – yet you don't accuse them of not being good enough musically, because they're successful. But you accuse great teachers of not being good enough musicians simply because they don't have successful solo careers as performing musicians. Totally unfair and ignorant.
.

[Edited 5/15/18 13:09pm]

Kares said:

PeteSilas said:

the only real way to make money for most of those educated folks is to be a teacher. I've known many, most are not fulfilled. the old saying "those that can, do, those that can't, teach" applies.

.

Where do you think all those highly skilled and talented musicians who play in big orchestras and ensembles worldwide come from? They come from great music schools. And all those amazingly talented young musicians who happily play in clubs or on tours with people like Herbie Hancock, Jeff Beck, Richard Bona or whomever else? They come from schools! A lot of them are incredible musicians, far more skilled than most big names in the pop-rock world. The comments here really amaze me sometimes... .

.

There is a VAST universe of music out there, outside of the pop-rock comfort zone of stars that's acknowledged by the mainstream media.

.

they don't make no money,not many of them anyways. Including Mr. Cardenas, I last saw him the very night Prince died, playing purple rain and hating it, in a bar in south seattle, with a tip jar out that I generously placed 20 bucks in. His dislike of Prince was still there as he said "let's play some bowie, he died too" and the drummer glared at him and said "let him have his day". that night was surreal and i must say, they killed Purple Rain, not a dry eye in the house.

Indeed, it's geting harder and harder to earn a living from being a musician/singer. I don't know of a single musician who doesn't teach.

jjam said:

Indeed, it's geting harder and harder to earn a living from being a musician/singer. I don't know of a single musician who doesn't teach.

ya, and i hate teachers, i've said it directly to some teachers, feeling be damned "I never had a teacher worth a damn". Unfortunately, we are all socialized to believe we need them, we really don't, not all of us anyways. You are your own best teacher, the rest is more about power and place than "teaching" fuck em all.

PeteSilas said:

they don't make no money,not many of them anyways. Including Mr. Cardenas, I last saw him the very night Prince died, playing purple rain and hating it, in a bar in south seattle, with a tip jar out that I generously placed 20 bucks in. His dislike of Prince was still there as he said "let's play some bowie, he died too" and the drummer glared at him and said "let him have his day". that night was surreal and i must say, they killed Purple Rain, not a dry eye in the house.

Oh man, I was actually being a bit facetious with my 'his career has amounted to him playing covers in clubs for $50 a night' comment!

Apparently I couldn't have been more on the money! That's amazing.

PeteSilas said:

jjam said:

Indeed, it's geting harder and harder to earn a living from being a musician/singer. I don't know of a single musician who doesn't teach.

ya, and i hate teachers, i've said it directly to some teachers, feeling be damned "I never had a teacher worth a damn". Unfortunately, we are all socialized to believe we need them, we really don't, not all of us anyways. You are your own best teacher, the rest is more about power and place than "teaching" fuck em all.

The main problem is that a lot of teachers either forget/aren't aware that they are there to inspire. Nothing worse than being taught by a teacher who doesn't want to be doing it and makes that clear in their behaviour.