More so than other instruments, guitar players tend to be self-taught. As a result, many guitarists don't know how to read sheet music, or know basic music theory. Despite this, self-taught guitarists frequently have great technique and are proficient players, performers and even songwriters. What is it about the guitar that lends itself so well to self teaching? Are the gaps in guitarist knowledge mentioned above necessarily such a bad thing?
0
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
We're probably seeing the influence of the cultural mystique of the guitar. When we look at popular culture, we see there are no "French-horn hero" video games and you don't see people performing "air violin" while blasting their favorite classical music. Thanks to rock music's cult of personality and the fact that most popular musicians play the guitar, no other instrument really has the same exciting aura of artful sexuality. This results in tremendous motivation for learning, and with the guitars relatively low barrier to entry (unlike say, the piano or drums) and the image of the rebellious, maverick guitar-slinger, self-learning can seem almost preferable to formal training. I think that if any other instrument enjoyed the same cultural role, you would see self-teaching of that instrument bearing similar fruit. I've heard that some self-taught guitar virtuosos have said that formal music training would only stifle their creativity, and there are obviously plenty who have been quite successful without such training, but I feel like music theory is just a tool that can potentially help, but not hurt one's ability. |
|||
|
|
