Is it better to learn an instrument through classical training(such as lessons with a player, books, etc)?
Or is it better to explore the instrument yourself first with no guidance or knowledge of its proper use?
Personally, I prefer to learn instruments through classic training so that I can know the inner workings of them and what manipulation of certain parts of the instrument causes. After I know the basics and can play well, however, I experiment with their sound.
What are the benefits of your preference? What are the drawbacks?
Interview with experimental artist Keiji Haino about his experience with learning instruments(whole interview is very interesting, but skip to 12:05 for Haino's approach to learning): https://youtu.be/xyIEbcwz_n8
Classical training is just faster. Other than that i really don't see the difference.
It depends on the person. I would say that learning from a professional is the best option 99% of the time.
I started playing synths and learning theory by myself and the way that I approach other instruments is from a sonic characteristic first.
I think its good to have at least some classical training
if you start without classical training you might learn incorrect technique which will be hard to correct later
>>65892194
this is true, muscle habits are harder to break than mental habits. It was extremely hard to correct my swing in tennis since I was doing it improperly for several years
classical or give up the instrument
self teaching only reaps slow progress and shitty habits
>>65892426
What if the instrument is something basic, like the bongos? Would it be alright to self-teach then?
Informal training may be good because it makes you approach the instrument in a different way, instead of the way they teach you the formal way.
>>65892468
I guess so imo. I just immediately assume a complex instrument like flute or guitar, not basic african shit
in pleb cases I'd say its ok
>>65892375
You know what wasn't hard? Swinging your mom. Easy as Smoke on the water
Proper training is gay. Why would you pay money to some jew to learn things you can learn yourself?
idk personally i wouldn't want training unless the teacher was somebody really good. if it's just some ma and pa piano teacher you might as well just learn via youtube videos. just my imo desu.
>>65892194
Yeah, this would be preferable. Although, the Keiji Haino picture brings up an interesting point. If you commit only to proper training, you won't be able to utilize the full functionalities of the instrument. This is why I'm not a huge of Berklee graduate musicians. They seem too stale and emotionless, not to mention very safe and unadventurous. So yeah, begin with formal training, for that would definitely help with technique, but don't be afraid to break the rules once in a while.
you have to do both or else you will suck also if you want to be pro you have to roam the fucking earth in search of masterfull guitar players or else you will suck and even then you dont take what they teach you as the fuck all end all to guitar technique you gotta do shit your way because your the one playing not that dickbag joe the guitar teacher cause y ou can be better than dickbag joe dickbag joe is a fucking dickbag i believe in you /mu/
>>65891725
Proper training is definitely better, provided that the instructor is good and the lessons aren't too expensive. Which is not guaranteed.
With the internet, it's easy to get 'classically trained' if you want
lots of people are innately talented enough to just learn to play
lots of people who can't play for shit turn their noses up at people who can and try to rationalize their incompetence as "soul" or "art" and try to act like they just DISLIKE whatever technique/genre/style whatever that they are too lazy/untalented to master
