Music and MA study

[2Green]

I started this thread separately both to congratulate Dana on beginning her musical (guitar) studies, and also to explore some comparisons on the study of music and the study of Martial Arts.
Music and Karate both call themselves "arts" so I consider the comparisons valid.

Let me start by qualifying myself as a musician from age 5, professional from age 15 (yes that is correct) to 35, semi pro to present.
My primary instrument is keyboards, secondary vocals, tertiary woodwinds.

In MA, I began training in 1998, I'm presently a Brown Belt in Uechi Ryu.
I don't study any other MA.

I encountered, to my great frustration, a very different learning methodology in MA than in music, and I've pondered why this is so.

I have coined two terms to describe these: I call them

1: Progression by refinement; and
2: Progression by substitution.

The first example, progression by refinement, assumes that there is a defined physical goal, and a proscribed methodology for reaching it.
This goal is musical performance at the highest level you can attain.
The methodology is undertaking, at the VERY OUTSET, the CORRECT way of performing the physical patterns and habits required to execute musical performance.
These include efficient fingering, physical stances or hand positions, and the performance of non-musical patterns called "scales" which imbed the ease of physical effort into your playing.
THESE NEVER CHANGE.
In short, there IS a "right" way of doing it, and you learn the right way from the start, and you refine it through practice.

#2: Progression by substitution. (MA training.)
This example also assumes that there is a defined physical goal, but the methodology for reaching it is very much less defined, contested by opposing experts, and the results themselves are then disagreed upon.

Typically, the training path starts out like this:
"Do it like this."

(One year later)..."now do it like this."

(Two years later)...you shouldn't be still doing that, do it THIS way."

(Three years later) "Only white belts do it that way, change it to this."

My point here is that at every juncture, an entire mental paradigm has to be thrown away and a new one substituted. I would say that in my experience this applies to every single technique, some of which I know four or five COMPLETELY different ways of performing.
Each one was a substitute for, not a refinement of, the previous one.

In music there is no such thing.
The correct way is clearly laid out, and a learning path of continued physical refinement is followed to bring you as far as possible.
You NEVER have to change any habits or patterns or physical stances; they are shown to you, correctly, at the very outset.

I must say, this is one reason why I have to bite my tongue when comparisons come up about the "similarities" of learning music and MA.

Given my above qualifications, I see, and have experienced, NO similarities whatsoever between the two, in fact I find them to be the opposite as far as learning them is concerned.

NM

[wes tasker]

Great topic! First, to qualify, I have no musical skills whatsoever - with some type of hand-drumming being on my list of things to learn in the future...... With that being said, I am a huge fan of Jazz. I can not speak for the learning methodology of Uechi-ryu, which would be difficult anyway because I believe that may largely depend on the teacher and not necasarily the art.

So I will be speaking from the context of how I learned, and how I teach Pekiti Tirsia Kali. I've always believed learning Pekiti was similar to learning Jazz, and please correct me if I'm wrong. One starts out with basics-

Pekiti - footwork, offense, counter-offense
Jazz - scales

One then learns to connect these in rudimentary forms-

Pekiti - putting the offense and counter-offense on the footwork
Jazz - basic melodies, and songs

Then one puts these combined elements into drills-

Pekiti - timing drills and two person work
Jazz - playing music with a band, with perhaps minor chances for limited improv.

Finally one gets better and better at the "essence" of the aformentioned "techniques" and learns to extract their true principles that fit the situation when drilling or sparring-

Pekiti - sparring and free-form drilling
Jazz - improv play, jamming

One still practices scales/basics, but they then manifest themselves as the practitioner/player needs them in various ways to fit the situation. Whereas these things never change, but instead become more and more "internalized". That's one of the things I love about high level Jazz, Middle Eastern Music, and Martial Arts - you may see the same "framework" done by two different practitioners, but they'll always be differences because of the process and internalization......

-wes tasker

[MikeK]

But there are always the guys who have limited ability but great feel, example Carlos Santana.

[JimHawkins]

I would say that in my experience this applies to every single technique, some of which I know four or five COMPLETELY different ways of performing.
Each one was a substitute for, not a refinement of, the previous one.

IMO you have touched on something that is indicative of a problem in terms of training progression/goals and should be looked at closer. If what you see does not seem to make sense then trust your eyes man. Learning is learning; Skill building is skill building; For any learning objective involving complex skill acquisition there must exist a logical process and path that will move from A to B to C.

In music there is no such thing.
The correct way is clearly laid out, and a learning path of continued physical refinement is followed to bring you as far as possible.

Applies 100% to the way we train WCK. Each element, concept, movement, etc, learned from day 1 to day 1000 builds directly on the last. With each layer we add depth and flexibility while maintaining the common objective thread found in all the training.

[Dana Sheets]

hmmm,

there are several methods of learning guitar. I'm following two. One had you learn notes and strings and little songs first. Then chords, the variations of plucking, strumming, and picking.

The other method starts with natural movements on the guitar. Doesn't bother teaching you the notes and goes immediately into alternative plucking with the goal of getting you to play one classical tune quickly.

I'm enjoying both.

Is one better than the other? Is one correct?
The first is giving me more theory than skill. The second, more skill than theory.

I'm glad I'm studying both. I like knowing both.

[JimHawkins]

I don't see what was mentioned as comparing one meaningful progression with another; I see it comparing a meaningful progression with something that is comparatively erratic, contradictory and therefore not a logical progression at all, or a progression with no destination in mind.

Correct me if I am wrong with the characterization of the original post.