A Good Teacher is Just a Bunch of Digits (Feb-14-05)

[moved from old forum:]

Ney wrote in the Power Users Forum, toward truth and functional insights thread:

"I basically dont recommend for anyone to be completely self taught."

Why? because it takes literally a lot of "genius"? in physical intelligence to do that.AND alot of time that could be spent developping ones MUSICAL awareness. I know it because I had to do it and I found that to be true because I had no choice and I wished for 20 years that it was different, but it is not. When I was learning, the great ones had no books or videos out and they did not teach anyone pick technique in the necessary detail. Any teaching was about musical style, musical examples and theory, so very few could figure it out.

JAMIE, myself, and all the other players you see today managed to discover all this but how many of us are there compared to the amounts that could be playing at the same level if taught properly...the answer is not many as you can see compared to other instruments... I would rather have had a teacher to teach me all that instead of having to use my own mind to discover it. It takes an enormous amoount of effort for about 20 years. And I even had classical lessons because there it was available and effective which was great and saved me another 20 years in terms of classical technique. Today we have cracked the technical mysteries of the right and left hand for electric and acoustic pick guitar. No need to re-invent the wheel.

The goal is to make music not to prove how much of a "natural"or "technical genius" you are. So I gladly enrolled for lessons on classical guitar instead of letting my ego tell me that I couild do it on my own.

Most people involved with guitar today think that they can learn to play from the web. But if we really look at it for what it is and put the cybernetic medium and electronic interface aside...This is not different than learning strictly by book reading alone and the results are appalling as can be expected under these circunstances. The web is very limited. It is great at disseminating passive data. It cannot verify if anyone actually understands the data or even the terms and definitions correctly. The web is a two dimentional medium. Guitar technique uses 3 dimentions in space. You cannot work in two dimensions and experience three dimensions.

So there are basically 4 educative mediums needed for effective learning to happen vis-a-vis guitar technique:

BOOKS( LIBRARIES), THE INTERNET, MOTION PICTURES(VIDEO,DVD) AND A HUMAN TEACHER.

I recommend using ALL of them simultaneously.))

I don't disagree with his basic premise. However, the teacher delivery system may turn out differently than he is currently envisioning. That is, it appears Ney is assuming that the Internet/Web is going to remain where it is, which is in fact very limiting for certain kinds of acitivty, like one-on-one teaching. Actually, if we were in South Korea, we might already be shifting how a teacher teaches. That is because in South Korea the average consumer has orders of magnitude more bandwidth available at an affordable cost than we do in the US. Many of the Web's current limitations are a function of limited bandwidth.

In other threads the issue of most principled students lacking access to qualified principled teachers has been referenced. Perhaps a system to qualify more teachers will emerge. However even if the number of qualified principled teachers were increased 10-fold in a year, most very geographically dispersed students would still have very limited access. OTOH, if bandwidth were abundant and affordable, (and ultimately it will be) Ney could critique my bad habits in realtime and/or in delayed time. That will be because in addition to affordable, abundant, bandwidth, we will also have affordable video cameras. We might even station a camera inside our guitars to capture our fingers from an underneath view. In TI swimming, underwater videos reveal much more than above water videos as to what is actually going on. So I could have a one-on-one session (Ney near DC, me in Greenville, NC) that would go part of the way toward being equivalent of me visiting his studio. Or we may elect for him to review my uploaded video within a set time period and respond, likely by downloaded video.

Even when this technology becomes available there will be many nuances in evolving how master teachers can reach a larger audience. But today's Internet, videos, DVDs, are merely the tip of the potential.

Again, I'm not actually altering the premise, just the delivery vehicle.

GeneP
Greenville, NC

[moved from old forum:]

Hi,

We would need a few more things besides bandwidth in order to make virtual guitar lessons viable. The first would be some kind of stereoscopic digital camera system to provide a 3-D effect. Human vision (for a person with two working eyes) is stereoscopic. That's how we perceive depth for short range, which would be critical for picking up subtle variations in movement. There's presently no way to present stereoscopic information in video form. That's what makes TV and movies look so artificial. There's only a single camera perspective available at a time.

The second thing we'd need is the ability to have mobile camera perspective, so that the people on both ends could zoom in, out, and pan around (kind of like you would with a Steadicam) to observe technique from all relevant angles. Human camera operators might be able to do that, but it would require some very tricky software. An alternative might be to construct some sort of real-time 3D hologram on both ends of the medium.

The last thing we'd need is some way for the person on the instructor end to make physical adjustments to what the person is doing on the student end. An example might be to alter the student's finger position on the strings.

Cheers,

R. A. Williams

[moved from old forum:]

"We would need a few more things besides bandwidth in order to
make virtual guitar lessons viable. The first would be some
kind of stereoscopic digital camera system to provide a 3-D
effect. Human vision (for a person with two working eyes) is
stereoscopic. That's how we perceive depth for short range,
which would be critical for picking up subtle variations in
movement. There's presently no way to present stereoscopic
information in video form. That's what makes TV and movies
look so artificial. There's only a single camera perspective
available at a time."

I understand some aspects of how teachers teach would have to be altered. However, one thing the human eye, alone, cannot do is instant replays or slow things down. So there could be a few trade-offs.

"The second thing we'd need is the ability to have mobile
camera perspective, so that the people on both ends could zoom
in, out, and pan around (kind of like you would with a
Steadicam) to observe technique from all relevant angles.
Human camera operators might be able to do that, but it would
require some very tricky software. An alternative might be to
construct some sort of real-time 3D hologram on both ends of
the medium."

Multiple cameras will ultimately be very affordable. Of course having them in the right place at the right angle will still be an issue.

"The last thing we'd need is some way for the person on the
instructor end to make physical adjustments to what the person
is doing on the student end. An example might be to alter the
student's finger position on the strings."


Granted. Though, using the da Vinci system, heart surgeons in Greenville have performed operations in other countries, I'm not certain how the affordability of that is going to scale.

Thanks for your comments. The transition will not be sudden, smooth, or without failed attempts. But some mechanism for master teachers to be more effective (in terms of the number of individuals they can reach) and the opportunity to learn from master teachers more affordable (in the sense of the travel and coordinated time now required) is happening.

GeneP

[moved from old forum:]

Since we are speculating off in the future, I'll propose an alternative model.

The lessons will be delivered personally by a robot/cyborg/clone or replicant, not by an elaboration of the internet. Too much infrastructural investment would be required by the invididual learner to hook more gizmos to the internet for that scenario to unfold on a widespread basis.

Think of 3CPO as a principled teacher rather than a protocol droid. Or an army of Jamie and Ney clones (maybe that's how SW Episode 3 will end?). Or the Sean Young character (Rachel Tyrell)in Blade Runner (hubba hubba)!

Okay, maybe we still need to create good, principled, human teachers in the mean time.

-AndyH

[moved from old forum:]

"Since we are speculating off in the future, I'll propose an
alternative model."

"The lessons will be delivered personally by a
robot/cyborg/clone or replicant, not by an elaboration of the
internet. Too much infrastructural investment would be
required by the invididual learner to hook more gizmos to the
internet for that scenario to unfold on a widespread basis."

Perhaps that will be a variation, and will be particularly likely when the instruction is being received one-way only. For an interactive conversation (where the pupul is expressing their confusion, etc.) we might need the real thing on the other end. There could easily be some of both.

"Think of 3CPO as a principled teacher rather than a protocol
droid. Or an army of Jamie and Ney clones (maybe that's how
SW Episode 3 will end?). Or the Sean Young character (Rachel
Tyrell)in Blade Runner (hubba hubba)!"

And, also, think that not every possibility has yet surfaced in the minds of movie makers.

"Okay, maybe we still need to create good, principled, human
teachers in the mean time."

Exactly. No matter how well technology can leverage the one-to-many versus the one-to-one equation, there will be a need for more master teachers than currently exist. There may never be an actual surplus.

GeneP

[moved from old forum:]

"Too much infrastructural investment would be
required by the invididual learner to hook more gizmos to the
internet for that scenario to unfold on a widespread basis."

Don't limit your imaginative concepts to what is doable today. Soon enough the gizmo you carry in your pocket will do ALL of that and more, so the participants will not have to become technology geeks to pull it off (though they would have to be to do it today.)

GeneP

[moved from old forum:]

Gene,

This is a great subject, thanks for posting.

The internet is revolutionizing the way the world perceives learning and teaching. What is so great is that it isn't an either/or choice between humans and on line. Some of the greatest innovations in teaching are combining instructor contact and on-line learning. Jamie is an early innovator in this paradigm. This forum is an unbelievable place to interact with other students and teachers. And Jamie and Ney both have options for doing video reviews. They aren't waiting for the next great technology, they are applying what is available. This is what true innovation is all about.


ckriefall

[moved from old forum:]

Since we are speculating on ways technology might enhance guitar playing, I'll mention something else:

As I've practiced chords I think my main problem has been fingers encroaching adjacent strings. (Of course, a master teacher, might see some other main problem <grin>) I am making improvement. Somewhat related I've noticed whenever I do something to tempo with metronome, that being able to visually see the "pace" helps me synch to the tempo. So, I've been wondering, if my guitar were sending signals to my laptop that was converting the actual string vibrations into something visual per string, would that help me synch in avoiding touching strings that should be open? I wouldn't go so far as the "shock-collar" notion (send an electrical current based on a sensed violation) <grin>) but I think being able to see the sounds I'm creating might help my brain train my fingers. That is because the amount of information that the eye captures is orders of magnitude more than the amount of information we can otherwise receive. Of course the eye captures a lot more than the optic nerve transmits to the brain, apparently forming some basis for discarding a lot of it, so I don't know what would happen, but I find the notion intriguing.

GeneP

[moved from old forum:]

Gene,

I'm not limiting my viewpoint, I am accepting and elaborating on a different model, not based on the internet, but on personal delivery that doesn't require some internet connection. The biggest limitation to overcome is the "laying on of hands" in my opinion. It goes back to some entity that holds your hand literally and shows you where and how things should be done physically.

I, as a consumer, might buy some cheap robot arm, that I hook up to an internet connection and someone manually manipulates from a remote location. Or as I am suggesting, that intelligence is local and the investment is paid for by the teacher/entrepeneur.

Both of these models are technologically possible in the future (so what isn't?). My bets for a high tech solution would be based a competition between the cost of buying, installing, maintaining a hands on device vs. the cost of just renting the service.

It would probably create segmented markets. Those who have enough committment to go through the effort up front vs. those who don't want to be locked into something that becomes obsolete in short order or who are not committed enough to go learn the instrument through all of that effort.

Its fundamentally the issue of how committed someone is to learn the instrument and all of the costs and benefits of the various ways of getting that learning. There won't be only one answer to those questions. We are both playing the game of envisioning a far-fetched future. My vision is just different from yours.

-AndyH

[moved from old forum:]

((The biggest limitation to overcome is the "laying on of hands" in my opinion. It goes back to some entity that holds your hand literally and shows you where and how things should be done physically.))

I agree with this, which is consistent (I think) with Ney's original premise. An example, I was able to achieve reasonable success in relearning to swim the TI way .... with access to ONLY books and DVD. However, it was at a weekend workship (with four credentialed TI coaches for 12 students) that I learned I was over-rotating (most under-rotate). Even if I had been aware, I wouldn't have known what to do about it, and may never have figured it out on my own. The reason for the over-rotation was "where my elbow was in relation to my rib cage" prior to intiating a stroke. It only took a knowledgeable teacher a moment to spot it, a couple of minutes to correct it, which literally included "laying on of hands."

There would be, however, lots of things the same coach could teach me with words about things he notices from a realtime or near realtime video.

GeneP