Regression of old songs while learning new.

What you're describing sounds to me like short term memory. It can only hold so much. New stuff will start pushing the old out.

But long term memory is more permanent. I have plenty of songs I learned as a teen that, after a few times through to brush up on, I can play them pretty much note-for-note.

Sounds to me like you just need to get the new songs you're learning committed to long term memory, before you start working on another. And use 'cheat sheets' as you're doing so.
This advice is BANG on. +1
 
what would you say the difference is, between learning a song and mastering it?
Thinking vs playing by feel.

A master makes playing a song "look easy". It could be anything but "easy". But he makes it look "effortless".

They say only a handful of people in the world have mastered "For the Love of God" by Steve Vai, note for note, but even then they look at the strings and play it sitting down.

Steve Vai makes his performance of the track look "effortless".
 
People have misinterpreted me. I didn't say it's impossible to learn Hendrix Little Wing in 6 hrs.. I was talking about mastering it.
If you want to master a song, you must first master your instrument. If you've mastered your instrument, you'll be able to master a song like Little Wing pretty quickly.
 
Last edited:
If you want to master a song, you must first master your instrument. If you've masters your instrument, you'll be able to master a sing like Little Wing pretty quickly.
Thank God no one has ever asked you to take up keyboards, Rex...
 
I was referring to November Rain as Slash plays it note for note. It’s a complex song just like Hendrix’s material. Lots of lead work.

Some people on this forum think they can learn and master new complex material in 6 hrs. They're showboating.

No way anyone’s mastering Little Wing by Hendrix in 6 hours. It would literally take years to master it as good as this old video from 1969.


100% agree. My band mates fail to understand this side of things. They don't understand the sustaining and maintenance aspect of learning songs.
I like to get most songs as close as my fingers will let me. Some bands I've worked with think you can go out on stage with the 4 chord rhythm memorized and with a "wing it" or "it's good enough for rock n roll" mindset. Yeah, some songs are easy and come together pretty quick, but if there's a notable section or solo in the song, I don't like to go on stage without most of the solo being in tact.
 
As for "mastering" a song, I get what's being said both ways.

I think having mastered a song means you truly copped the way its played- all the little nuances of his/her technique, any sloppiness in their timing, their vibrato..., all of it. And of course, the notes. And unless you've already spent a ton of time learning to play like that particular guitarist, learning one of their songs so well that if you played it through their rig, no one could tell the difference it wasn't them, I do agree it would take a lot longer than a handful of hours.

Paul Gilbert whipped out VH Spanish Fly on a request, and even though it was damn close, he could probably spend less than a couple hours more, and nail it exactly. But he'd already put in the work to be able to play at that level.

So, say for example, if you're an alt-picking shredder, and someone challenges you to learn a difficult song in a finger-picking style of Chet Adkins or Tommy Emmanuel, you ain't gonna get it in mere hours, because you'd have to first spend a lot of time learning that technique. I think. Unless perhaps you're one of those autistic savants, or just so naturally gifted that it makes people sick. :D

But if you're already fluent in a particular style, yeah I can see a person really nailing a cover song in just 6, or whatever, hours.
 
100% agree. My band mates fail to understand this side of things. They don't understand the sustaining and maintenance aspect of learning songs.
I like to get most songs as close as my fingers will let me. Some bands I've worked with think you can go out on stage with the 4 chord rhythm memorized and with a "wing it" or "it's good enough for rock n roll" mindset. Yeah, some songs are easy and come together pretty quick, but if there's a notable section or solo in the song, I don't like to go on stage without most of the solo being in tact.
100%

And when someone claims to have a 500 song repertoire, I think to myself, Yeah, I bet they're all very basic renditions, with only a select handful of solos even close.

I'm the same way as you when it comes to solos.
 
to me, songs are vessels. i try to understand the intent of the song or feel, and then i can insert my interpretation.

other than tribute bands, i personally don't see the point in "mastering" a guitar performance for gigs/performances. for yourself, sure set a goal, get close, etc.

songs can be learned in a short amount of time depending on your skill level and familiarity of the style and guitar itself. sound exactly like the original has never appealed to me. i've already heard that. by the guy. i prefer hearing interpretations and differences.
 
to me, songs are vessels. i try to understand the intent of the song or feel, and then i can insert my interpretation.

other than tribute bands, i personally don't see the point in "mastering" a guitar performance for gigs/performances. for yourself, sure set a goal, get close, etc.

songs can be learned in a short amount of time depending on your skill level and familiarity of the style and guitar itself. sound exactly like the original has never appealed to me. i've already heard that. by the guy. i prefer hearing interpretations and differences.
This. All day.

Mastering a song means making it your own, so you can convey the groove of it. It doesn't mean slavishly copying every inflection that another artist put into it. It's safe to say that Stevie Ray mastered Little Wing, even though he didn't play it the way Jimmy played it.
 
to me, songs are vessels. i try to understand the intent of the song or feel, and then i can insert my interpretation.

other than tribute bands, i personally don't see the point in "mastering" a guitar performance for gigs/performances. for yourself, sure set a goal, get close, etc.

songs can be learned in a short amount of time depending on your skill level and familiarity of the style and guitar itself. sound exactly like the original has never appealed to me. i've already heard that. by the guy. i prefer hearing interpretations and differences.
Exactly!
 
I’ve noticed as I learn new material my old built up set list takes a beating.

The more new songs I learn the more the regression of older material.

Anyone face this? I don’t think it’s just a matter of practice. Say you have 20 songs in your set list then new song 21 is complex like say November Rain, I would find learning it in a decent timeframe causes the other 20 to not be as smooth anymore.

Then you’ve got to practice all 21 until they’re smooth as butter again and then when you start with song 22 same problem all over again.

I didn’t notice this problem when my set list was 5-6 songs but as it grows this regression problem sets in.

Has anyone experienced this?

I another thread you said that you were committed only to U2 riffs, to play them as solo instrumental act at weddings, anniversaries, birthdays, etc. You were offering resistance when people was telling you that learning other material could be fruitful. It is good to know that you are finally expanding you repertoire beyond The Edge 👍
 
Last edited:
other than tribute bands, i personally don't see the point in "mastering" a guitar performance for gigs/performances. for yourself, sure set a goal, get close, etc.
Exactly this. Cover bands playing a wide range of music don't need to nail a song note for note. If they get it 90% there the audience will love it. Tribute bands yes since they’ve committed themselves to imitating a band in most cases.
 
Our Redsound & Fractal friend using an AX8 to pull off Little Wing. What do you think of his version?

 
Back
Top Bottom