View Single Post
Old 04-24-2007, 10:08 AM   #15 (permalink)
rowuk
Moderator
Fortissimo User
 
rowuk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Germany
Posts: 4,640
rowuk is a splendid one to beholdrowuk is a splendid one to beholdrowuk is a splendid one to beholdrowuk is a splendid one to beholdrowuk is a splendid one to beholdrowuk is a splendid one to beholdrowuk is a splendid one to behold
Re: what to people consider to be "big" hours of practise?

If we just want to define "big hours", I would say that 6 hours is the border between a full day and "big".
Clarence is right in the respect that you have to pay your dues, but his "dues" are different than Mannys'.
If I define practice as a period of time dedicated to improving a particular aspect of playing where analysis plays the largest role (the only way to get better is to work on what we have not yet mastered. This requires a plan of action and measurement to see if we have accomplished our goals. This is true regardless if I am working on range or learning jazz changes!). I am of the firm belief that more than 4 full hours of PRACTICE is not productive. When I make creativity the top priority, I do not have the analytical control and that to me is no longer "practice" - it is performance even if I have no audience.
It has always been useful for my playing to dedicate time to analysis OR creativity. They get in the way of one another quite often, so separating them helps to optimise the results!
__________________
Whenever I feel blue, I start breathing again.
rowuk is offline   Reply With Quote