what musical instruments can you play?

[Debussey]

There is enough stuff out there to never stop learning-ever. From inversions, secondary dominants, sequences/melodic patterns, chord patterns, tonal center approach vs. chord per chord thinking, reharmonization.....the list can go on and on.
For inversions, you can learn to memorize them, or you can learn to transfer them via "string sets" and you can put different notes on the bottom- not just the root, 3rd, 5th or seventh.
Then you have slash chords, which are cool, and are much easier to notate than using all the alterations involved- and many players don't care for seeing an altered major 7th chord.
Modulations; you can think of pivot chords, using ii-V's to get there, Coltrane changes, secondary dominants- all the above......to use in a song or transfer from song to song like a melody of tunes.
Music is really endless. Duke Ellington, Mozart, Beethoven, anybody of their caliber-if they were alive today would still be studying and/or taking ear classes.
Hell, I can practice a la Thelonious Monk- one song for 5 hours. You CAN practice creativity.

Debussey loves you man

[YoungBlood]

Umm, ok?

[Debussey]

Your post = teh awsome. You think like any musician should think. 

[YoungBlood]

Well, thanks. But not everybody agrees with me, or concurs that that is the "proper" way to think.
I fell into the rut many a year ago myself.
Once you learn the minor pentatonic scale, you think "I've learned quite a bit, all five positions of the pentatonic scale!" Then you realize a minor third down, there's the major pentatonic scale and you really think you know your stuff! So you just learn every tune that has a I IV V progression, and if it's got a ii-V, that's a hard song. Not realizing there is so much more beyond all of that.
I still play blues, soul, R&B, and everything I used to play. But knowledge is a great thing, and the way for me to further myself is playing jazz. Classical music is another great way to learn a ton of stuff, but it doesn't have the improvisational aspects that jazz does- you learn a song and that's the song forever. A jazz artist writes a song/melody and will forever change it. You can play "Misty" a thousand different ways. Over a forty year period, there is no reason you can't play it differently every couple of weeks. Compared to "the great Jerry Lee Lewis" (who I like his playing and many others of that genre), he's been playing "Great Balls Of Fire" the same way each night for 60 years now. Each time, it's great for what it is.
I'm getting off on a giant tangent but, I can discuss various genres another time. 

[Debussey]

Well, thanks. But not everybody agrees with me, or concurs that that is the "proper" way to think.
I fell into the rut many a year ago myself.
Once you learn the minor pentatonic scale, you think "I've learned quite a bit, all five positions of the pentatonic scale!" Then you realize a minor third down, there's the major pentatonic scale and you really think you know your stuff! So you just learn every tune that has a I IV V progression, and if it's got a ii-V, that's a hard song. Not realizing there is so much more beyond all of that.
I still play blues, soul, R&B, and everything I used to play. But knowledge is a great thing, and the way for me to further myself is playing jazz. Classical music is another great way to learn a ton of stuff, but it doesn't have the improvisational aspects that jazz does- you learn a song and that's the song forever. A jazz artist writes a song/melody and will forever change it. You can play "Misty" a thousand different ways. Over a forty year period, there is no reason you can't play it differently every couple of weeks. Compared to "the great Jerry Lee Lewis" (who I like his playing and many others of that genre), he's been playing "Great Balls Of Fire" the same way each night for 60 years now. Each time, it's great for what it is.
I'm getting off on a giant tangent but, I can discuss various genres another time. 

As long as you do not become arrogant due to your knowledge on theory and musicality in general, then learning more and more = a great plus.

The more you know, and the more avenues of music you explore, the more creative you can be. Being stuck with the minor pentatonic box and bar chords for 10 years = a tragedy.

 

[BroadStreetBruiser]

As long as you do not become arrogant due to your knowledge on theory and musicality in general, then learning more and more = a great plus.

The more you know, and the more avenues of music you explore, the more creative you can be. Being stuck with the minor pentatonic box and bar chords for 10 years = a tragedy.

 

That's exactly why I don't focus on learning popular songs. They are piss easy when broken down. I was the same way with drums.

[Debussey]

That's exactly why I don't focus on learning popular songs. They are piss easy when broken down. I was the same way with drums.

Good stuff.

If you really wanna become great, learn about theory and composition and start crafting your own style. Just learning other peoples stuff = boring.

 

Perhaps you'll write the first "Getbig theme song".

[BroadStreetBruiser]

Good stuff.

If you really wanna become great, learn about theory and composition and start crafting your own style. Just learning other peoples stuff = boring.

 

Perhaps you'll write the first "Getbig theme song".

LOL, my instructor went/taught at Berklee so he's big on the composition & theory. He's not content on putting me with any one style but rather give me all the tools so I can play any style I want. He happens to be a jazz guy.

[Debussey]

LOL, my instructor went/taught at Berklee so he's big on the composition & theory. He's not content on putting me with any one style but rather give me all the tools so I can play any style I want. He happens to be a jazz guy.

[YoungBlood]

Just learning other peoples stuff = boring.

I disagree here. Strongly.
In order to know what you like, you have to hear it first. In this day and age, little Mozart's hardly exist. They can't write 27 piece orchestra symphonies with a pen and manuscript at a table and not even having an instrument on hand. They just don't come around anymore. So, you have to hear it first, and you hear it by listening, to many different things.
I started out, as an SRV fanatic. Then, I heard his brother, Jimmie. Then Ronnie Earl and Magic Sam. Each time I heard one of these guys, it excited me. I sat down for hours, playing their rhythms, leads and learning the nuances of each persons style as much as I could. What made them play this lick, was it a lick or did they do that instinctively, what made them play that there? Was there a reason...did they play it to connect to another lick, do they think in "licks" or do they just "play?" Joe Pass, though he downplayed how much he would think about it, had to think about what he would do and where. But he played for hours, days, nights and endlessly practicing so he could play what he heard in his head.
But, how do you know what you want to sound like, unless you hear it somewhere else? It might be John Coltrane, the way he runs scales. It may be the sheer power of SRV, or the finesse of Eric Johnson as he integrated all the arpeggios together to make his own style, after he was strongly influenced by Hendrix. Maybe you want to play like Yngwie Malmsteen, who just rips off (very well though, and at a ludicrous volume!) Paganini for days.
But, at the end of the day, in order to make your own style, you have to know what you want to play like, and you do that by hearing the players that inspire you, and then imitating them. We learn to walk, talk, play baseball or many other things in life via imitation.
Why should music be any different?

[beatmaster]

does the gazou count for one? 

and the thing with the hole........... yeah, pussyflute 

[BroadStreetBruiser]

I disagree here. Strongly.
In order to know what you like, you have to hear it first. In this day and age, little Mozart's hardly exist. They can't write 27 piece orchestra symphonies with a pen and manuscript at a table and not even having an instrument on hand. They just don't come around anymore. So, you have to hear it first, and you hear it by listening, to many different things.
I started out, as an SRV fanatic. Then, I heard his brother, Jimmie. Then Ronnie Earl and Magic Sam. Each time I heard one of these guys, it excited me. I sat down for hours, playing their rhythms, leads and learning the nuances of each persons style as much as I could. What made them play this lick, was it a lick or did they do that instinctively, what made them play that there? Was there a reason...did they play it to connect to another lick, do they think in "licks" or do they just "play?" Joe Pass, though he downplayed how much he would think about it, had to think about what he would do and where. But he played for hours, days, nights and endlessly practicing so he could play what he heard in his head.
But, how do you know what you want to sound like, unless you hear it somewhere else? It might be John Coltrane, the way he runs scales. It may be the sheer power of SRV, or the finesse of Eric Johnson as he integrated all the arpeggios together to make his own style, after he was strongly influenced by Hendrix. Maybe you want to play like Yngwie Malmsteen, who just rips off (very well though, and at a ludicrous volume!) Paganini for days.
But, at the end of the day, in order to make your own style, you have to know what you want to play like, and you do that by hearing the players that inspire you, and then imitating them. We learn to walk, talk, play baseball or many other things in life via imitation.
Why should music be any different?

To revise my previous statement: At my current level anything I CAN play I choose not to due to it being simple. Once I'm at a level where I can read and understand what some of the more complex songs are I will dive in. I'd rather play simple stuff off the top of my head then the latest Greenday song.

[YoungBlood]

I didn't disagree with you, BSB. I didn't care for Debussey's statement, that's why I quoted that and not you.
Simplicity can be great too. Again, my main passion has always been blues, and really it's not much simpler than that. Listen to the way BB King can hit one note, but the way he digs into that one note or the vibrato he uses on it....simple but extremely effective.
You have Coltrane "vs." Miles. Coltrane seems like he's going to blow his horn apart and his technique is second to few. Miles, warts and all, flubbing notes but using taste.
Each one is it's own.
I was just pointing out that I think it's erroneous to not imitate to some degree. Too many people these days don't want to play like anyone else, but they can't play to begin with so they never progress-yet they still sound like their own style-because it's so crappy nobody else cares to play like that!

[Debussey]

I disagree here. Strongly.
In order to know what you like, you have to hear it first. In this day and age, little Mozart's hardly exist. They can't write 27 piece orchestra symphonies with a pen and manuscript at a table and not even having an instrument on hand. They just don't come around anymore. So, you have to hear it first, and you hear it by listening, to many different things.
I started out, as an SRV fanatic. Then, I heard his brother, Jimmie. Then Ronnie Earl and Magic Sam. Each time I heard one of these guys, it excited me. I sat down for hours, playing their rhythms, leads and learning the nuances of each persons style as much as I could. What made them play this lick, was it a lick or did they do that instinctively, what made them play that there? Was there a reason...did they play it to connect to another lick, do they think in "licks" or do they just "play?" Joe Pass, though he downplayed how much he would think about it, had to think about what he would do and where. But he played for hours, days, nights and endlessly practicing so he could play what he heard in his head.
But, how do you know what you want to sound like, unless you hear it somewhere else? It might be John Coltrane, the way he runs scales. It may be the sheer power of SRV, or the finesse of Eric Johnson as he integrated all the arpeggios together to make his own style, after he was strongly influenced by Hendrix. Maybe you want to play like Yngwie Malmsteen, who just rips off (very well though, and at a ludicrous volume!) Paganini for days.
But, at the end of the day, in order to make your own style, you have to know what you want to play like, and you do that by hearing the players that inspire you, and then imitating them. We learn to walk, talk, play baseball or many other things in life via imitation.
Why should music be any different?

Debussey said that just learning/playing other peoples stuff = boring (a subjective statement). It = more fun when you start composing yourself as well. (again: Subjective statement).

[Manatee]

Used to play acoustic&electric guitar at highschool in a small band, but nowadays I would be surprised if I remember even one chord...