Should I Keep This Teacher? Advice? Thanks.

[Solodini]

i feel ya man. i just started lessons with some random guy as well. he says he graduated from berklee in two years... not sure if i believe that.

i dont mean to hi-jack or de-rail your thread just sharing a similar situation

he mentioned the tri tones. i questioned him a bit and said "well a tri tone is a flat 5th interval right?" and he said "you say that like there's only one tri-tone..." then he played a minor second, and a major seventh... "see those are tri tones too!"

when we were talking about diatonic chords in a major key, i mentioned that i knew the V chord was the dominant. he said the V isnt always the dominant... it needs a 7th to be dominant...

also along the same lines... i said i know I is major ii is minor... etc... then i said and the vii chord is diminished because it's two minor thirds stacked onto each other. he said no its a minor 7 chord with a flat 5 because in order to be fully diminished it needs a 7th, which the basic triad doesnt have...

does this guy just have a weird way of describing things/looking at things... or is he full of shit?

He's full of shit. Tell him to come and read a few threads on this site. He might learn a bit.

 

[namewithheld]

i feel ya man. i just started lessons with some random guy as well. he says he graduated from berklee in two years... not sure if i believe that.

i dont mean to hi-jack or de-rail your thread just sharing a similar situation

he mentioned the tri tones. i questioned him a bit and said "well a tri tone is a flat 5th interval right?" and he said "you say that like there's only one tri-tone..." then he played a minor second, and a major seventh... "see those are tri tones too!"

when we were talking about diatonic chords in a major key, i mentioned that i knew the V chord was the dominant. he said the V isnt always the dominant... it needs a 7th to be dominant...

also along the same lines... i said i know I is major ii is minor... etc... then i said and the vii chord is diminished because it's two minor thirds stacked onto each other. he said no its a minor 7 chord with a flat 5 because in order to be fully diminished it needs a 7th, which the basic triad doesnt have...

does this guy just have a weird way of describing things/looking at things... or is he full of shit?

Interesting. I think he mainly has a weird way of describing things. The V chord is a just a major triad unless the 7th is added. And he is right about the vii, too, but my teacher calls it half diminished, which at least distinguishes it from the other minor chords.

However, I think he's just plain wrong about the tritone. A tritone is not a semitone. It is an augmented fourth or a diminished fifth. Somebody else chime in here, please, in case I am mistaken.

 

[Solodini]

Interesting. I think he mainly has a weird way of describing things. The V chord is a just a major triad unless the 7th is added. And he is right about the vii, too, but my teacher calls it half diminished, which at least distinguishes it from the other minor chords.

However, I think he's just plain wrong about the tritone. A tritone is not a semitone. It is an augmented fourth or a diminished fifth. Somebody else chime in here, please, in case I am mistaken.

A vii chord is diminished. It is a diminished triad. With the 7th it can be described as m7b5 or half diminished. If that 7th was a diminished 7th then it would make a dim7 chord.

The 5th degree of the scale is known as the dominant (the 4th is subdominant). The V chord is, thus, the dominant chord.

You are correct about the tritone. 3 tones, 6 semitones, b5/aug4.

 

[tripguitar]

lol one says he's full of shit one says he's weird... i'll give him a few more lessons before i look for someone else. he does have quite a wide variety of genre knowledge... i was surprised when he knew who both the dear hunter and necrophagist are haha.

 

[Solodini]

Weird or full of shit: either way, theory is meant to clarify communication so if he expresses things in ways which isn't clear to others with theory knowledge then you probably don't wanna learn that stuff from him.

 

[Webmaestro]

So, I only skimmed some of the replies. As someone who used to teach guitar, here's my 2-cents...

To me, the key here is your statement(s): "I am also an old man (48), who just wants to shred because that is what I love. I am not planning to take it on the road."

That right there would set the tone for how I would tailor your lessons. You're basically saying you're primarily a bedroom jammer who just wants to shred and play for fun. So, I'd take your list, and show you exactly they types of things you want to learn. We'd still work on some fundamentals--as necessary for certain techniques, but I wouldn't force feed a regimen and basics to a player with your goals.

On the other hand, if you had aspirations to play professionally one day, or even casually with other musicians, then I probably would've done what your teacher did (but with more tact). Like any good teacher, he probably has a methodology that builds progressively upon a solid foundation (again, this is assuming he's a good teacher). So yeah, a player with loftier goals, or even career aspirations in music, will need more thorough instruction.

As long as he wasn't arrogant and came off as an asshole, I say stick it out. You really can't gauge much from just 1 lesson.

 

[wespaul]

I'd like to share my experience that happened yesterday:

I just transferred from a jazz-oriented school to one that is classical-oriented. I have private lessons as well as being a member of a guitar ensemble class. All this is means is that I basically traded my electric guitar and pick for a nylon guitar and fingers. I figured no big deal, I'm a pretty good finger-picker.

In my private lessons, my teacher has me starting from the absolute basics, which I don't mind because I feel I'm flying through them at a pretty fast rate. She had me do exercises alternating between playing examples with the index/middle of my right hand, to middle and ring finger. When I got home to do this, it felt so awkward to just playing with my middle and ring finger, while omitting my index. Nothing felt natural about it. It felt like omitting the index finger just for the sake of omitting it: I didn't see the point. At our next class (which was yesterday), we basically had a 15 minute conversation of her trying to explain to me finger isolation, but I didn't see the end goal of it. All I could focus on is why can't I just practice with all three fingers, since I use them all anyway.

She then brought up a question I had the previous lesson, which was how I could improve on my melodic lines in the guitar ensemble, and make them sound more fluid, like another player who is in his 4th year there. I felt mine, while sounding alright, didn't have that nice, beautiful fluid sound that the other guy had. She explained to me that while I was great at finger picking arpeggios, working with finger isolation exercises will help develop my melodic line playing and have it sounding more fluid.

Long story short: I also felt like I was doing stupid exercises, but I went back to my teacher and kept asking questions until I was able to wrap my head around the whole concept, which really helped when she was able to establish a clear goal, and one that I actually asked for help in! It's really hard to motivate yourself to practice something you don't see the point in, so if you ever feel like you're in the dark, ask ask ask! Even if you don't understand the answer you're given, keep on working on a clear understanding until you're given it. Like I said, we spent about 15 minutes just clearing things up for me yesterday, and she actually liked it --she said that she was excited because I showed that I cared. And I'm excited to go and practice my ass off, because I really want to nail that nice, fluid sound!