how many lessons do you think

[1954pip]

hi all
how many leeson would say you need to take to get to a reasonable player:welldone
i know it is like asking how long is a piece of string ,but just wondered a sort of average person.
it is just for guide.

 

[kevgermany]

I think a lot depends on how much wok you put in between lessons. I have a lesson every two weeks and mostly don't have to repeat the wok I've been set. But it does limit pogress, as my teacher insists on me playing everything in the book (I need it) and in the lessons there's not a lot of time to go through more than 3 or four pieces. But a year or two of good work should show good progress.

 

[MandyH]

I have a 30 min lesson weekly. I aim to practice 30-45 mins three time a day. My teacher picks pieces for me she thinks I'll like and that stretch me a little. It's just coming up to 2 years since I started. I suspect amount of practicing rather than number of lessons might be more important once you've got the basics sorted.

 

[Mamos]

It is generally accepted that it take 10,000 hours to become expert in something. That equates to around 3 hours a day for ten years.(Charlie Parker did it in 3 years of 10 hours or more a day)

So I would say one 1 hour lesson a week for 10 years thats 520 lessons

mamos

 

[TomMapfumo]

When I first started sax in 2006 I had 1hr lessons weekly for the first 2 years, then fortnightly. By that time (2 1/2 years) - with 90mins practice a day I had reached Grade 5 ABRSM Jazz Standard, and had learnt a lot of the basics of music. In 2008 I started trombone lessons at 1hr per fortnight and had reached Grade 5 in 1 yr, with similar practice levels.

I would say that I could have got to that stage on Sax in perhaps 50 lessons - beginning music seriously for the first time. 2nd time around I needed 25 lessons to get to that stage. I had the time and money to fit it all in, which was great. By 20 lessons you should reach a decent standard and be able to play a number of tunes well, with backing tracks, and improvising to a reasonable level.

Well, that is my experience - just great to have a good teacher, for inspiration, feedback, challenge, encouragement and similar.
Kind regards
Tom

Anyway back to the trumpet.........:shocked:;}

 

[Sunray]

"Loads o money" ...

It is generally accepted that it take 10,000 hours to become expert in something. That equates to around 3 hours a day for ten years.(Charlie Parker did it in 3 years of 10 hours or more a day)

So I would say one 1 hour lesson a week for 10 years thats 520 lessons

mamos

Bugger!! I had better get me a paper round - lmao ;}

 

[Moz]

hi all
how many leeson would say you need to take to get to a reasonable player:welldone
i know it is like asking how long is a piece of string ,but just wondered a sort of average person.
it is just for guide.

Some people don't need lessons but they also need many more years playing and still don't end up as good players. Some people need many lessons and are still crap at the end. Some people have many lessons and end up very good. Some have no lessons and are brilliant. I have enough lessons to tell if other people are any good -- that gives me inspiration!

Cheers

Martin

 

[saxnik]

It's definitely quality of practice rather than number of lessons, and as Tom says, if you just learn the sax having already learnt the theory and practical side of music in some other way, it's much quicker. This is because you're only learning technique, not everything!

Starting from scratch I'd hope to get you to the standard of playing in a band in two years or less, even if you're fairly busy! Playing in a pro band, now that's a different matter...

Nick

 

[TomMapfumo]

BTW Jan Garbarek was self taught, as is Raymond Blanc in another sphere..............

 

[VirusKiller]

BTW Jan Garbarek was self taught, as is Raymond Blanc in another sphere..............

Nothing wrong with being self-taught, but to rise to the top you really need to immerse yourself in whatever you're doing. You need to be doing so much of it that you make all the mistakes (that you might avoid with a teacher) and learn from them independently. Probably the best way of doing it actually, if you have the time, motivation and extreme dedication.

 

[singlereed]

Get playing with other people as soon as you can. Join a wind band or anything - it will revolutionise your sense of timing and music reading. Expose yourself to other opportunities like playdays and summer schools. I found I needed fewer lessons as things went on but I'm constantly learning and (hopefully) improving.

 

[Moz]

Get playing with other people as soon as you can. Join a wind band or anything - it will revolutionise your sense of timing and music reading. Expose yourself to other opportunities like playdays and summer schools. I found I needed fewer lessons as things went on but I'm constantly learning and (hopefully) improving.

Good advice. I play in a band but I still take lessons every other week to keep me on track, keep me focussed and remind me to keep loooking at the little things that matter a lot.

Martin

 

[Sweet Dreamer]

hi all
how many leeson would say you need to take to get to a reasonable player:welldone
i know it is like asking how long is a piece of string ,but just wondered a sort of average person.
it is just for guide.

Before this question could even be approached I would need to know what your definition of a 'Reasonable Player" means.

Do you mean, "reasonable" in a professional sense? Meaning that they can be expected to play almost anything new with little or no practice? Or potentially just right off sheet music for the very first time, even without having heard the piece played?

I personally think that would take quite a long time to get to that point.

On the other hand, if what you mean by a "reasonable" player is to simply learn a few select pieces and play them impressively, then you'd be talking about far less time.

Now the real trick, IMHO, is to select your pieces very wisely. Select pieces based on scales and keys. As you learn those pieces pay close attention to also learning the scales that go with those pieces and also practice some improvisations on those same pieces using those scales.

Approaching it in this way you not only learn a few select pieces quickly, but you have simultaneously learned how to improvise in those same scales and keys and can therefore learn other pieces in those same scales and keys rather quickly as well.

Just my thoughts.

And of course, this would apply to all instruments, not just the sax.

 

[Andante cantabile]

It really depends on your aims, but the more, the better. In any case, the nature of your lessons would change over the years. In time you will no longer need any suggestions on which Bb fingering to use or comment on whether you are playing all the accidentals correctly, but you will want to know how the piece is played to best advantage, i.e. dynamics and expression will become more and more important. And later, if you stick it out, the lessons could even be in the form of participation in master classes. The question doesn't turn simply on quantity. Half an hour of high-quality advice is better than two hours of messing around with the instrument. Remember also that teaching well has to be learned like everything else. That's why you see the comment "a pass at this level does not necessarily imply teaching ability" in some music syllabuses.

Someone mentioned the proposition that 10,000 hours are needed for the attainment of expertise. That of course is 10,000 hours of playing, and it would include lessons (a relatively small share), practice (by far the largest share) and playing in ensembles, etc. Also, this target would bring you to the level where you could expect to make full-time (or at least good part-time) living from your music. In other words, you would be an expert and not just an enthusiastic or talented dabbler.

Hope this helps.