[Dixielandjazz] Theory vs. Ears

[AL LEVY]

Larry Walton wrote:
"I wish the Suzuki method had been around when I was three."
====
I taught for Harry Davis in Westchester NY. He was a
champ at Suzuki although he didn't call it that.
Harry was a student of Schnabel.
I learned fairly quickly and could teach in the Suzuki
tradition pretty damn well.

After a year or two it bothered me that although every
student could play and sound good, none of them knew
what they were doing. Proof was they could only play
the last few songs. They certainly couldn't read with
any intelligence.
Years later I took courses at Columbia T.C. in N.Y.
The piano courses were given by Robert Pace. He went
the other route. Much in the way of understanding but
boring as dish water. I have to credit Bert Konowitz,
Robert Pace's assistant with spicing things up a bit.
When I mentioned to Billy Taylor that I thought Konowitz
came up with a great idea on improvisation.. included in the
Pace books, Billy smiled at me. He said "where do you think
Bert got the idea?" Ohhhh! Of course. Billy is and was the source.

Referencing a former discussion on this list, it is a very "horizontal",
melodic + rhythmic way of thinking with knowledge of what's happening
but immediate imporovs.

Years later I combined Harry's "shmote" with Pace's routines and ran
a piano school with 500 piano students a week. All learned to sight read
in time. Every one could improvise. It's not a trick, it's all natural.

With reference to modes. I thought the educational system was in trouble
when George Russell published a book. Even worse when John Mehegan
followed suit. It was only last week that I realized that they could be of
some value to some instrumentalists who don't own a keyboard. 
(another time)

Bottom line:
Ears are good, comprehension is good, both is better.

Cheers,
Al
Pianist, Composer, Arranger, Conductor, Teacher and Music Prep.
Please visit me at
http://alevy.com