Electric Guitar for a Child

The name says it all! Discuss Steve's studios, your studios and gear set-ups, amps and effects here. This is not for discussing guitars (Steve's or otherwise).
Locked
guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm

Roger wrote:I have been taught classical guitar by teachers for over ten years. Both the first years and in higher education so I know quite a lot about classical guitar techniques thank you. So don't tell me what I know and don't know.
I still don't see much factual info on why learning electric guitar is preferable.


He/she wants to learn electric guitar. It's as simple as that.

well, you don't know about any of the schools I mentioned. If you know a lot about classical techniques, then share them with us. I have mentioned the very basics - these things are base knowledge for classical players. And you didn't know them.




And I agree - the kid should learn on the electric, if that's where the interest lies.


The issue I had was with your post when you were giving completely false information regarding the benefits of learning on electric as opposed to classical (e.g. thickness of strings etc etc). There were false arguments flying around about why electric is best, and I was addressing that issue, since some of the points made were complete nonsense.

The infrormation you were providing was wrong, and that's just a fact.
Roger
Member
Member
Posts: 506
Joined: Sat May 03, 2003 8:59 pm

guitarmanK1982 wrote: well, you don't know about any of the schools I mentioned. If you know a lot about classical techniques, then share them with us. I have mentioned the very basics - these things are base knowledge for classical players. And you didn't know them.
I guess I spent more time playing than learning the names of my hand positions then.
The infrormation you were providing was wrong, and that's just a fact.
Our opinions are not the same. I think you're wrong and you think I'm wrong. Hugs?
guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm

Roger wrote:
The infrormation you were providing was wrong, and that's just a fact.
Our opinions are not the same. I think you're wrong and you think I'm wrong. Hugs?
No.

I was providing accurate and correct information, whereas it seems that you were making things up as you were going along e.g. strings being closer together making chords easier. This goes against the anatomcal principles of the use of the hands e.g. the functioning of the lumbrical muscles, the flexor pollicis brevis muscle, the adductor pollicis muscle etc etc

It seems from that point that you don't understand the functioning of flexors and extensors.


You also wrote about the strings being easier to press down. This is also wrong, and is related to the tension in the strings - of which there is less - hence a classical bridge can be glued to the body.


Like I said, this is all very basic stuff. And you aren't getting any of it right.
User avatar
R1FSR
Member
Member
Posts: 1843
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 3:45 am

at the end of the day its a matter of preference ...
A 8 year old kid will more than likely want to knock out
a few tunes .
i also agree although never being taught any classical guitar
it will be more disciplined (id imagine)

its a bit like having a driving licence for a bike and a car..
yeah i can drive but its 2 completely different animals.

i think a young child will want the easy option and not to
be sat down and have scales,modes,chords,sitting postions,
shoved down thier throat ..that is the quickest way to put them
off a guitar in my opinion.

As for the need to understand classical playing to make you
better is pure bullshit...better at what exactly playing classical ??
i can guarentee more than 95% of guitar players on this site arent
interested in the slightest in that way of playing.
Im not saying its wrong to think that way but it certainly is not
needed to make a good guitarist .

After all look at
vai..satriani..petrucci..page..beck..hendrix ... i could go on and on and fill pages of names who havnt learned classical guitar.

BBB wanted advice on a 8 year old wanting a electric guitar and out of 5 pages hes had about 3 helpfull comments .
LETS HELP HIM OUT .
Last edited by R1FSR on Tue Nov 11, 2008 3:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Stephen Brown
Member
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:04 am

This thread is cool.
Stephen Brown
Member
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:04 am

boswell wrote:
FRETPICK wrote:A child may have more chance of losing an eye with an electric. I've lost count of the amount of times I've seen a steel strung acoustic or electic, over tensioned. To the point of where a parent has no idea of the forces involved & is happy to see their child with their head resting on the fretboard like a pillow.

Errrr "What are you doing youngling?"

Mum's like "He's o.k. He's only playing with it." :roll:

Yes it's ture you can tune both types of instrument to say Eb so there is even less tension. At least with nylon you have more give in the material. Just in case.

I've seen high E,B,G on steel string acoustics snaped, through over tightening. :shock: S^F*n.. even managed a D one time.

Parents do try & watch 24/7. Other's have maturity issues.

String pegs/fixes are mini trebuchet's.

If it makes a pitch it's turned & another pitch is sounded, it's fun! However no thought is given to the results either way by the child. To low or to high.


Then there is going to a students house who already has an electric. You pray he doesn't cut himself on the tuning pegs where he hasn't been taught to clip & tuck for tuning stability. Ya know. He's the dude with 20,000 string turns on the machine head.
Are you a Health and Safety Rep for a Union or something? :roll:
No but if anything goes wrong it's your rep as a teacher that's on the line. Even if your innocent. Some people jump to the wrong conclusions.
guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm

R1FSR wrote:i think a young child will want the easy option and not to
be sat down and have scales,modes,chords,sitting postions,
shoved down thier throat ..that is the quickest way to put them
off a guitar in my opinion.
You misunderstand classical guitar. Classical guitar isn't solely about learning scales/chords etc etc

The classical player will play more music early on than the electric player.

Too many people misunderstand what it is like to learn classical guitar. Once the very basic techniques are down (e.g. holding the guitar, fretting a note etc etc), the kid will be given literally hundreds of short pieces of music for their level. Therefore, their basic technique becomes completely solidified.

And this is all before chords/arpeggios.






I agree that classical technique isn't necessary to make one a good guitarist (since this is purely subjective), but it can make one a better guitarist than the level they are at. What is objective on guitar is technique, and this is something that can be judged.



Like I said, I think electric should be the way for the kid.


But it is wrong to give false reasons for learning the electric (e.g. the string issue).
Stephen Brown
Member
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:04 am

DomitianX wrote:
I will always point out flaws in their techniques, and most kids will observe them but I am not going to go tell a parent, or the student, that they may lose an eye because they play an electric.

------------------------------------------------------------

^
Nor would I but it's a fact that strings are high tension. As a teach I think about these things. Even if they do not have that type of experience or thought process. That's what they pay me for.
User avatar
R1FSR
Member
Member
Posts: 1843
Joined: Fri May 14, 2004 3:45 am

You misunderstand classical guitar. Classical guitar isn't solely about learning scales/chords etc etc

The classical player will play more music early on than the electric player.

Too many people misunderstand what it is like to learn classical guitar. Once the very basic techniques are down (e.g. holding the guitar, fretting a note etc etc), the kid will be given literally hundreds of short pieces of music for their level. Therefore, their basic technique becomes completely solidified.

And this is all before chords/arpeggios

But surely this applies to anyone who is learning a instrument ?

I understand what you are saying as guitarist point
of view ... but ... from a childs view i cant see a kid wanting to
sit there and learn all about those things .. most kids will just
want to learn a quick tune to knock out to thier mums and dads
and friends.
Stephen Brown
Member
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:04 am

guitarmanK1982 wrote:
R1FSR wrote:i think a young child will want the easy option and not to
be sat down and have scales,modes,chords,sitting postions,
shoved down thier throat ..that is the quickest way to put them
off a guitar in my opinion.
You misunderstand classical guitar. Classical guitar isn't solely about learning scales/chords etc etc

The classical player will play more music early on than the electric player.

Too many people misunderstand what it is like to learn classical guitar. Once the very basic techniques are down (e.g. holding the guitar, fretting a note etc etc), the kid will be given literally hundreds of short pieces of music for their level. Therefore, their basic technique becomes completely solidified.

And this is all before chords/arpeggios.






I agree that classical technique isn't necessary to make one a good guitarist (since this is purely subjective), but it can make one a better guitarist than the level they are at. What is objective on guitar is technique, and this is something that can be judged.



Like I said, I think electric should be the way for the kid.
That's what I have been trying to conva. Couldn't of said it better than what you have written.
Stephen Brown
Member
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:04 am

+

We are all player's here.

I've seen 10 year old who are better players on classical guitars then electric player at the same age. I'm talking in the guitar shops here not "youtube". Of course there will be a youtube kid with a JEM who is amazing.!It happens but not very often. Grounded.

------------------------------------------
BBB knows on TV of late they had that competition & the classic guitar player
lost, when really he should not of. The pre-packaged piano girl won. Anyway....Do you think he started on an electric? I don't think so. He was an amazing player for his age.
--------------------------------------------

Really there are two schools of thought.

Those that think it's doesn't matter what you start on as long as you do start.

Others think it's important to have the right start & choose how they apply good grounding.

---------------
Take Jordan Rudess. A classical trained person that can branch into any area he wants. He didn't start on a Moog. That came later.
guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm

R1FSR wrote:I understand what you are saying as guitarist point
of view ... but ... from a childs view i cant see a kid wanting to
sit there and learn all about those things .. most kids will just
want to learn a quick tune to knock out to thier mums and dads
and friends.

The kid learns about the techniques required only when that specific technique is required in a piece that they may be learning. The teacher would normally go over the specific technique before learning the piece.

Classical technique isn't as difficult as what people imagine.

Like I said, if that's all they know, then they don't know an 'easier'.

Basic technique covered would be posture, holding the guitar correctly, how to hold in a note properly (e.g. high in the fret, move from the knuckle in order to push the note down etc etc), how to sound the note etc

These are the very same things that should be covered in electric guitar lessons - however, most teachers only give these issues a second thought.

If the pupil was to learn these things from the very start, these aspects of their playing would be solid in a very short time (say, 4/5 lessons).

Ironically, electric guitarists still struggle with these things - even advanced electric guitarists.

Most kids don't need to learn all the things I have mentioned - but it is nice to know that they have a teacher wo has the skill/knowledge to give them the opportunity to learn such things.

And therein lies the main difference with classically-trained tutors to non-classically trained tutors.



It's about giving the kid opportunities. And good technique is giving a kid lots of opportunities.

By some of the posts here, it would seem that some people see technique as a hindrance. I say it is the very opposite. It is the very thing that opens doors for the player.



RE learning tunes: most kids would learn a quick tune by learning in the classical manner. They would actually be playing the melodies, rather than strumming. The parents - and the kid - would have more difficulty recognising a tune were the kid to strum just the chords, rather than playing the melody.
DomitianX
Member
Member
Posts: 212
Joined: Tue May 13, 2008 7:18 am

guitarmanK1982 wrote:
Roger wrote:If they are so similar in your opinion then why all the fuss about that you have to learn classical technique?
I didn't say that one 'has' to learn classical technique.
Actually you did and thats my whole point. You literally said that if they dont learn classical technique they will never be technically competent on their instrument. I will quote you for the 3rd time:
Many electric players really dislike any form of classical technique - it is usually because proper technique shows just how much their own technique is lacking, and how much they would have to unlearn in order to be of any technical competence on their instrument.
So you are saying that in order to be technically competent you *need* to use classical technique and "unlearn" any other techniques. My whole point is you dont. Its not required. I am not dismissing anything. I am just saying that it isnt required. I wont force it on anyone and I wont dismiss it as not relevant. I will point how technique may help if they are struggling with something but I will never ever tell any student that in order to be proficient they must learn classical technique because its a flat out lie and doing a disservice to the student. There are thousands of guitar players out there that are proficient on their instrument and they rarely ever use classical techniques if at all.

So get off the soap box about it already. You obviously are dragging this on just to beat a dead horse. Twice now people have agreed with you to shut you up but you just need to drive another nail in the coffin and not letting it go.

You're superior? Is that good? You are a god among us lowly mortals!!! Is that good? I will sell my guitar and clean you feet with my tongue? Is that good? Will you get off it already. You can never ever say any technique is better for everyone because music has no limits, no boundaries and you can whatever you want, however you want and there are thousands, possibly millions, of people that have become proficient on the guitar without learning classical techniques or using nylon string guitars.
Stephen Brown
Member
Member
Posts: 1774
Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2005 10:04 am

I can understand what guitarmanK1982 is saying & I agree with him.
guitarmanK1982 wrote: Many electric players really dislike any form of classical technique - it is usually because proper technique shows just how much their own technique is lacking, and how much they would have to unlearn in order to be of any technical competence on their instrument.
^
I've seen that. People are all at different stages of development & guitarmanK1982 doesn't mean any scorning by it. It happens. There must be a difference between bad habits, poor techniques & rutts.

It's true in soem cases you have to un-learn some things. Like finger auto pilot.
guitarmanK1982
Member
Member
Posts: 202
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm

DomitianX wrote:Actually you did and thats my whole point. You literally said that if they dont learn classical technique they will never be technically competent on their instrument.
Yes - and I stand by this.

I'm talking from a technical standpoint, and you have admitted yourself that many electric player's technique isn't anywhere near perfect.

Them being musical isn't the issue. We are discussing technique here.

The full purpose of my posts has been to state the technical benefits of learning classical guitar.


Satch doesn't have perfect technique. His wrist throws out when he does his legato runs.

But he can write good music, and to listen to him, it sounds great. However, it is uncomfortable to watch him play, due to the form his wrist takes.




DomitianX wrote:So you are saying that in order to be technically competent you *need* to use classical technique and "unlearn" any other techniques. My whole point is you dont. Its not required. I am not dismissing anything. I am just saying that it isnt required. I wont force it on anyone and I wont dismiss it as not relevant. I will point how technique may help if they are struggling with something but I will never ever tell any student that in order to be proficient they must learn classical technique because its a flat out lie and doing a disservice to the student. There are thousands of guitar players out there that are proficient on their instrument and they rarely ever use classical techniques if at all.
I'm not talking about enabling 'proficiency'. I'm talking about setting the foundations for someone in such a way that they could reach the top levels with their playing.



DomitianX wrote:So get off the soap box about it already. You obviously are dragging this on just to beat a dead horse. Twice now people have agreed with you to shut you up but you just need to drive another nail in the coffin and not letting it go.

You're superior? Is that good? You are a god among us lowly mortals!!! Is that good? I will sell my guitar and clean you feet with my tongue? Is that good? Will you get off it already. You can never ever say any technique is better for everyone because music has no limits, no boundaries and you can whatever you want, however you want and there are thousands, possibly millions, of people that have become proficient on the guitar without learning classical techniques or using nylon string guitars.

You are avoiding answering my question about hand positions. It is best just to be honest and say if you know what you are talking about, or if you don't.

I'd still like to know if you actually do have the slightest clue about hand positions and if so, then add to the thread why you think the classical approach to left hand positions is not of importance to the electric guitarist.

And what 'classical techniques' are.
Locked