I’m not the most intuitive guy. And that’s been a big problem for my development as a guitar player, because it seems that most people who become what you could call ‘decent players’ found their way to mastery less by thinking and more by feel.
If American English is your first language, you know about the blind men and the elephant - everyone’s trying to describe the same thing, but doing so without clarity. Looking at the book “Shredders!” and the chapter there on practice just confirms this. Lots of great players there doing their best to describe the journey, but very little in the way of useful, practical take-aways.
I’m actually about ready to finally toss my practice schedule out the window. Regimented, strategic planning has turned me into a “student,” rather than a “player.” That’s not what I was aiming for. But if CTC has taught me anything, it’s that while ‘conventional wisdom’ is not always reliable (I’m finally over my metronome addiction;), there is some kind of unspoken wisdom about improvement on guitar.
Maybe only Troy, who appreciates cheesy last-century analogies, will get this, but… Does anyone remember Greg Brady donning a beatnik vest and hep-cat lingo, thinking that if you look the part, maybe then you’ll actually be cool? It didn’t work out too well for him, granted. But with guitar practice, I think somehow it’s different.
And so what I never tire of is trying to piece together what that ‘way forward’ might look like - to ‘crack the practice code,’ if you will. Not without a lot of speculation on my part, granted; maybe you’re already ‘there,’ and so for you, less. Anyway, this is what I’d offer so far. Can you add anything to the list?..
- Successful players rarely if ever spent lots of time on method books. Their ‘exercises’ are licks and riffs from actual songs.
- They recognize that when something mechanical isn’t working (e.g. stringhopping), ditch it (rather than believe that by dutifully pounding away, it will somehow work out).
- They didn’t take the shmorgasbord approach to practice (a little bit each of like 17 different things).
- They intuit when a challenge must be met by a ‘method’ (e.g. develop fluent chording by dropping each finger cat-like on its fret - simultaneously), by discovery of correct mechanics (e.g. single-escape picking), and when it just needs to be done over and over again (maybe most fingerstyle play).
- They are great experimenters. (I’m thinking of @Pepepicks66’s super-long list of all the stuff he tried while developing his picking.)
- They were often playing out within a year or two of picking up the instrument (though probably not at nearly the level of playing they’d ultimately reach). Lots of learning and encouragement involved there.
- They didn’t play 30 minutes a day. 3-4 hours is more the norm, and often there’s a ‘rage to master’ phase of a more intense schedule that lasts 2-4 years. (Not saying you can’t get anywhere with short sessions, but it’s clear from all the interviews you read that some major time was invested.)
- At least as often as not, it’s a DIY job. For every Vai who learned with Satriani, there are several more guys who say they never even took a lesson.
- There seems to be a bit of impatience, actually, that goes together with the work ethic. Someone out there said that solemnly accepting that ‘this is gonna take 10 years at least’ is a good way to never get good at guitar.
- They learned to distinguish between helpful/useful (e.g. learning to read music) and essential (or nearly so; e.g. knowing the notes on the fretboard), and made practice decisions accordingly.
- They followed their instincts about primary and secondary (e.g. maybe first learn to play fast-ish with a lot of POs/HOs, and then later figure out that seriously fast, alt-pick thing).
- Watch a lot of tv (with guitar in hand; watch the chunking magic happen).
- And this I gotta say, just to beat Troy to the punch: they spent way more time playing than writing posts on forums. I know, I know…