Some CMAS history

We've been putting together a new web archive for CMAS and as that has been going on, it has grown into something more - a kind of repository for everything the program does.  There's a lot still to do, but the basics are up and over time it'll continue to grow.

As part of the new archive several people asked me to write a bit of the history of CMAS as part of things and so I thought I would include some of it here.   The entire story is on the new site, along with a lot of recordings and videos, and, if you get a chance, we'd love to know what you think.  So check it out at:
ex.susd.org/rmaxwell

A History of the Arcadia CMAS program
(as told by Richard Maxwell, CMAS creator/facilitator - October, 2010)

In the Fall of 1999 I came to Arcadia to be the school's new Band director. For years I had worked as a gigging musician/recording "studio rat," and at that time had been out of school, teaching, for about a year and a half, having completed my second Master's degree, at the University of Arizona in conducting.

I have a great love for classical music, and still write for symphony orchestra and clinic whenever I am able, and I recall many conversations with Greg Hanson at the University of Arizona about how all music can be viable, regardless of the genre. Greg's attitude was just one of several pivotal influences informing my own, personal, musical philosophy - but his was the most potent, because, as I would later come to realize, his was the farthest reaching. To be fair, there were others along the way (Heineman, Vroman, Kaizer and Sanders, etc. at Bradley; Gage at Youngstown; Metzger, Beeler, and Wagner at Sycamore) but I am not sure I was ready back then to really appreciate the true depth of either their expertise or experience at the time. I mention all this, not so much out of false modesty, but rather because, taken all together, they had a huge impact on how CMAS would ultimately be designed. In a very real sense, the true "Father of CMAS" is Greg, and all the others.

Anyway, it has always struck me odd that pursuing "current" musical trends is generally treated as counter to academic musical pursuits. The lack of legitimacy that it can be given is even further confusing, at least to me, when you consider the fact that all the great and lasting music throughout history was composed by musicians who were - every one of them, I would argue - very forward thinking.

By definition, "Bach, Beethoven, and the boys" were all writing "Pop" music. The goal for them was not just similar, but identical, to the goal of today's musicians working in the "current" scene. Somewhere along the line though, music education in schools, for the most part, seems to have lost sight of this. There are exceptions, certainly, but on the whole, the more "modern" classes (ie. Guitar, History of Rock 'n' Roll, etc.) are treated as throw-away classes. Frequently offered to a school's music teacher simply as a way to allow them a contract that keeps them at the same school for the entire day.

I know this to be true if only because in preparing for my second year at Arcadia, I benefitted from just such a scenario. Jim Lee, the principal of Arcadia at the time, came to me late in my first year and asked me, given my "outside" musical experience in studios and such, if I would be interesting in taking over the guitar class the following year. I accepted, and that is very much were CMAS began.

I took the guitar class very seriously. (Perhaps, to some, too seriously?) In any case, I wanted to make the experience more about music fundamentals rather than just a class kids could "hang out and sometimes jam" in. I had a lot of real-world experience, and I felt that it was important to relate that experience to the educational opportunity provided to the students. My idea was that if we used the students' interest in current musical styles as a way to get them to refine their skills legitimately through music theory and such, we might, eventually create something that was really viable both musically and educationally. To say nothing of being able to reach more students with music than I could as only the band teacher...

read the rest here: ex.susd.org/rmaxwell

CMAS and the Search for Ensmble

Tonight was the first ever CMAS stadium show, and it was just beyond wonderful.  I am so proud of the entire program, that I really do not know where to begin.  There is so much to cover that I think it likely that I will do a series of articles to get it all out over time in the, I hope, not too distant future.

That said, there is one element that stands out to me that I had been suspecting for a while now, but tonight showed me that my instincts were, in fact, very gratefully, correct: there is a true sense of large ensemble within the program.

ensemble (noun):

1. all the parts of a thing taken together, so that each part is considered only in relation to the whole.

2. in music: the united performance of an entire group

Over the years, as the CMAS program has evolved, we've pretty much been able to prove any educational or musical criticism of the program to be wrong. Very wrong.  The only one that I have ever felt might have had some validity was a comment that for all the benefits of CMAS, the one thing the students cannot get in program is a true sense of ensemble.  Specifically, large ensemble.  

To be fair, part of me had to agree.  After all, though we have a vast number of smaller groups (most of the bands are 3-5 members) that larger sense did seem a bit absent.  On the other hand, there was always this feeling in my gut that we just had not crossed the threshold yet on this subject and there was every bit a large ensemble aspect to CMAS as much as any music program of any kind anywhere.  It just had not been presented properly.

Well tonight, it turns out, among all the other accomplishments, was the very tangible proof that the CMAS paradigm evolves this aspect of traditional music programs too.  Significantly.  I have had the honor and pleasure of leading any number of large "traditional" music ensembles over the years, in a vast array of concerts and events.  What I can now tell you is that in CMAS that exact same feeling of large ensemble exists.  Very, very prominently.  At the end of the stadium show tonight the entire program clearly felt exactly the way a large band or orchestra feels after a great performance.  There was absolutely no difference.  The benefits from the experience, at heart were even identical.  The group has to find a way to take all of the best aspects of everyone's efforts and create a collective result that all involved can feel not only proud of, but that they were in fact a key and integral part of the performance's success.  That they as a part, allowed the sum total to be far greater than the individual.  

CMAS more than proved that to be the case tonight.  In fact, in some ways they eclipsed the "traditional" ensembles in this because it's not what you might expect from the CMAS experience.  It's not necessarily the obvious result or benefit of the CMAS experience.  But it is there, and significantly.  And now that we know it for certain, CMAS, I can promise, will be taking it farther than could every be expected from any other musical experience - just like they do everything else.

As you can tell I am beyond over the moon over this.  I am just so proud to be a part of this musical journey called CMAS.  It is such a thrill and an honor.

More soon, including some more picts and video from tonight.  Amazing stuff.  I am so proud of the entire program.  Just wonderful! 

Dreaming In Memories

A few years back Michele and I released a CD entitled "Fade." The songs were good - really good, in most cases - and her vocal performance was absolutely brilliant. But the truth is that the album was not well promoted, much less heard by many, and more importantly, as the producer, I really did her a terrible disservice. The material was great and the vocal performances fantastic, but the arrangements and the production were, at best, flawed; and it has bothered me for quite some time.

I don't say any of that lightly. The fact is that over time, it became very tough for me to be able to listen to the disc because of what I felt were all the unnecessary flaws in the production. I always thought I should go back and rework the material - if only to satisfy the "itch," but by the time I was ready to do so, it appeared that all the original session data had been lost due to a bad hard drive. And so for a very long time I had to simply live with it as it was.

And then, in the Summer of 2010, something very unexpected happened: on a bit of a fluke - and with a lot of dumb luck - I was able to revive the hard drive long enough to transfer the data to a new drive. This meant I could now go in and do what should have been done in the first place, and make the album right.

Beyond some minimal piano and percussion, nothing has been re-tracked. And while a few of the songs from the original "Fade" simply did not make the cut, for any number of reasons, the overall end result is something wonderful, I feel. Something that is worth the time of the listener. I'm hopeful you'll agree and pass along the link to your friends so that they can hear the music as well.

The "official" explanation of CMAS...for now...maybe...

I would have thought that the Summer would be a time when I got fewer questions about what CMAS is and such.  On the other hand, all interest is good interest as far as I am concerned.  So for anyone curious about this crazy music program that I am truly blessed to run, here...ya'...go:

The CMAS (Contemporary Music and Sound) program is a 4 year high school program that allows students to work with music industry professional grade equipment while learning how to take their music from the stage to the studio and beyond. Largely funded through Federal grants, in CMAS there are no musical restrictions of any kind, nor is any prior experience or training required. CMAS I is rooted in music fundamentals, emphasizing a comprehensive understanding of instrumental technique and music theory.  CMAS I students declare and musical emphasis of guitar, bass, drum kit, piano/keyboards, or lead vocals, and begin the process of learning the fundamentals the recording studio utilizing Pro Tools - industry standard software. CMAS II takes those fundamentals and expands them into the harnessing and refining of musical instincts with the creation of original musical ideas, as well as more advanced aspects of the recording studio process as well as live music technology.  CMAS III introduces detailed studio production techniques as well the further refining writing and performance skills.  CMAS IV culminates the program with advanced studio production, writing and performance skills, as well as internships and other specialized musical experiences.

Along with frequent guest artists and clinicians, approximately every six weeks of school the CMAS program produces a full 90 minute concert of original student music.  These “Songwriter Nights” are fully CMAS student produced, utilizing a massive 20,000 watt PA and full 16 channel ProTools recording rig, all of which is designed, set-up and run by the students.  CMAS also offers numerous other performance opportunities, all fully CMAS student produced, at various locations and events both on and off campus throughout the year.  All performances are mixed and recorded by CMAS students and many are available as downloads off the program’s website.

Beginning in the 2010-2011 school year CMAS will further change the paradigm of music education by producing CMAS student artist original music performances at all home Varsity football games with productions inspired by recent Superbowl halftime performances.   Additionally, students will be eligible to receive as much as 12 credit hours of college credit for their work in the program.

CMAS has been proven to reach many students who would otherwise never be involved in music; and in many cases provides the motivation to not only keep students in school but provides a path for them to achieve at much higher levels academically than might otherwise be expected. With literally hundreds of students involved in the CMAS program, and graduates moving on to work professionally in numerous capacities within the music industry, as well as partnerships with, among others, Arizona State University, Scottsdale Community College, and the Conservatory of Recording Arts and Science, CMAS continues to evolve and break the mold of standard music education.

The CMAS program was designed and is facilitated by Richard Maxwell.

Lift: An exercise in "does/should this matter to anyone other than me?"

"Lift" will be (is?), in some ways, a departure, and in others, a kind of musical reunion. For a while I felt I needed to move away from my more Art/Prog-Rock tendencies. I was having a very difficult time aligning my sense of being a singer/songwriter and those more "artful" musical interests. That's not to say I am particularly artful - though I'd like to think so - but I certainly have a great affinity for many of the Prog-Rock genre.

I am huge fan of musicians like Asia, Genesis, Yes, Peter Gabriel and so many others. For the longest time I have always wanted to be able to create that kind of musical atmosphere, but always felt I was coming up short. Actually, I should also mention that I am a big fan of the intricate orchestrations of bands like Iron Maiden. The orchestral nature of their music has always been very inspiring to me. There are of course countless other bands and artists (The Beatles, Queen, Toto, Flecktones, The Who, etc.) that are significant to me; but it would take me pages to get through them all.

In any case, with "Lift" I have decided not to worry at all, on any level, how the material might or might not translate to a live performance. Not only has this been very liberating from a creative standpoint, but it has also allowed me to somewhat rethink my entire creative process. "Lift," like much of my work, has its share of love songs and ballads - can't get away from who I am in that regard (and don't really want to) - but there is also a fair share of other subject matter as well.

The project is still a work-in-progress, so to some extent everything I write here is really just speculation as I am still waiting to hear what the final result really will be; but what I am confident in is that "Lift" is strong on all levels. Very strong. Only time will tell if others agree or not. Either way, as long as people are listening, it's all good.

Remix, rethink, remaster... REDEUX!: How going back can help to move forward

Over the past several years since I have released any new music, several significant things have happened. Beyond the more important ones like lots of Gray-and-daddy time and Tanner arriving, I have also made some very serious changes in my entire approach to to producing music and general audio engineering. A lot of those changes have coincided with the formal adoption of the Contemporary Music And Sound (CMAS) program, and a lot have evolved out of what I feel is just a very natural progression towards such things. The other major factor has likely been my development of a very strong sense that the real beauty of being an independent musician, is just that: the independence to do what you feel is best. Certainly there are endless drawbacks, but if there is one true benefit it is the complete artist freedom I am afforded.

The fact is that I have never been truly pleased with the end result of many of my past recordings. Much of that dissatisfaction can easily be attributed to my, admittedly not always helpful, refusal to ever be satisfied that anything I do is "perfect." (I have a pretty hard time "letting go," but that is another topic) but much of if is also rooted in aural reality. Songs are good, songs are bad, but the production has tended to get in the way and not, in my view consistently, allowed the music to stand on its own - good or bad.

So as I began to finalize the writing of my next project of original material (working title is "Lift) I started to take a look at the older stuff as well to see how I wanted to apply my new production techniques to the new recordings. While doing that I found that it would not take too much effort to go back and "redo" (Redeux?) the production and get many of those old tracks into the aural shape they deserved to be in. It's kind of a going-back-in-order-to-go-forward kind of thing, but it has already proven very useful.  "Redeux" is not really about re-recording or re-tracking, it's more about re-thinking the production.  Certainly this may cause arrangements, and some other aspects, to change but I think on balance it will all be for the better.

The "Redeux" project will actually be a series of releases. I am not entirely certain how "Lift" will fit into the overall time line, but it'll be along soon as well, and if nothing else, will certainly be worth the wait. I feel the material on "Lift" is the strongest I've ever written, but in truth, as I said above, I am not convinced that I was ever able to give the earlier material its proper due to allow it to stand on its own. Again, the Redeux project is now making that possible.

The first release of Redeux will be from the more recent material that appeared on "Ties" and "Pulse" and a few others. The second will be the entire "Fade" CD from back in 2004 that featured Michele on vocals. For many reason I cannot wait for you to hear those tracks "redone" (Redeuxed?) For a very long time I thought that all the "Fade" sessions were lost forever do to a failed hard drive but just recently I was able to restore the session data and so am really excited to hear what comes of it - Michele's vocals alone are gonna just blow everyone away. There is a possibility of a third release as part of "Redeux," which would be going all the way back and examine the sessions for a "bootleg" from many many years ago that actually still sells well for me called "093003." If we get lucky, as we did with "Fade," to find a way to restore the sessions from the old hard drive, then we can make that third release happen as well. I am cautiously optimistic.

As ever, things all seem to be happening at once, but it's all good. Very good. And now it's back to work...

Pandora's Box: How the greatest CMAS concert (so far) might also be its worst

Two weeks ago tonight CMAS held its final concert of the 2009-2010 season.  It was, in a word, amazing. I don't say that lightly at all.  It was a culmination of so many factors into a single, successful evening of music that I am still a bit dumbfounded over the entire thing.

The evening consisted of over 120 minutes of all original. all student produced and performed music; and the show itself (also, all student produced) was about as over the top as anything I have ever seen anywhere.  I suppose the most notable addition was a 25 foot high, 40 foot wide, video projection system behind the performer - thanks once again to Harkins Theatres for all the continued support (Dan Harkins is, as always, beyond kind - Kirk Griffin, their chief engineer, as well - more on them another time).  It was stunning.  Just stunning to see it all come together.  And it was an absolute triumph for all involved, and an certainly a  huge honor for me to be part of it.

But here's the thing - and I have been justifiably accused of destroying some professional relationships over this kind of thing - to me, as high as the bar has now been set, we can still do it far better.  I'll save the specifics of how for another time, but it's the general concept that got me writing here: the potential Pandora's box of expextaitons.

While the show on 5/20/10 was beautiful, it was also the first time we had put in so many of the elements that I know we can do all of them far better if we simply are willing to not only look objectively, but also take the needed, and in many cases, fairly simple steps to significantly build upon what we have already done.  And this is the part that has been a death-knell for some of my professional relationships: perfection is a great goal, but it is not actually attainable. Being satisfied is akin to promoting the status quo, and I simply do not believe in status quo.  Things are either getting better, or getting worse.  Those are the only two options.  No exceptions.  Staying the same is akin to getting worse as far as I am concerned.

Yes, acknowledge the accomplishments and revel in the successes as they happen; but I firmly believe that every time you take another step closer to "perfect," the bar of that perfection moves that much further up as well.  At the point at which the bar stops moving, or worse, you are satisfied, it is time to stop.  Needless to say, many of my professional acquaintances over the years have not been able to hold a similar view.  My "arrogance" on this topic makes me feel only bad for them.  To be fair though, the relationships that suffered the most over this kind of thing were with people who I would describe as very "unmusical;" very non-creative - though, and again, I freely admit the arrogance of this statement, they think they are musical and creative, but clearly are not.  That said, I am not sure I am actually a "pure" personality of music and creativity either - even though I'd like to be.  But, as usual, I digress.

Back to the Pandora's box:  The further we push these shows, the greater the expectation is from our audience.  That is not a bad thing - not at all.  But as we start the 2010-2011 season in a few short months I wonder if the audience will allow for the learning curve that is needed over the course of the total season on the part of the students. The audience, perhaps ironically, and perhaps without realizing it, is actually in line with my view of perfection.  The question is will they allow the trials and time needed to get us to take those next steps.  If they do, the truth is that despite this amazing last show, they have not seen anything yet - I can safely say that there are at least four more major evolutions to the show coming in the not too distant future - not that I will give any details away here and/or now - to saw nothing of the studio progressions that will soon eclipse the shows.

If the audience does not, well there's the Pandora's box for you.  The only way to ensure we make it happen and give the audience what they not only want, but deserve, is to consciously keep moving forward.  Can't allow ego or arrogance to get in the way.  Call it like it is and move forward.  Keep pushing.  Always.  It's not about besmirching the efforts or reputations of anyone - like I said, revel in the well deserved successes as they come along - but if you stay there too long (and I define "too long" as the moment a single element is found to be vialbe for specific improvement) then you are back to status quo.  And then, really, what's the point?

I am so proud that the bulk of the CMAS program's students resist status quo - whether they know it or not.  They resist taking the striving for improvement as arrogance.  They seem to see it for what it is: the continuing search for bettering the end result.  Maybe the lesson really is that the Pandora's box is really just that: a box.  Keep yourself "outside the box" and the box really cannot have any impact.

Dio - A Legend Passes, But A Conflict Lives On

I never got the chance to meet Ronnie James Dio, but I was still very struck by his passing earlier this week.  To some extent, my heart has reached out to the family of anyone who succumbed to cancer after my mom passed from a brain tumor in 1997.  Personally, I cannot claim to be the biggest Dio fan - I think I might have a few singles in my collection but that is about it.  What struck me most these past few days was, in retrospect, his sense of self.   In interview after interview he seemed so in tune (no pun) with the realities of his life and career.  How he was aware of his importance in the world of Metal, but never really got too caught up in it. He had this mighty voice and incredible stage presence and seemed pretty down to Earth, generally.

Now, who knows.  Maybe that was all a facade, but as I thought about his passing, I started to think about how so many musicians of more aggressive musical styles get dumped into these categorizations that portray them as bad people.  Evil.  It just seems like too easy of a target to me.

Sure, there are plenty of examples of "Metal Gods" doing very bad things; but that seems more to be a potential trapping of the industry than a result of musical genre.  Want proof?  Go check out some of John Denver's moments off stage.  Nothing against John either, but, seriously, blaming music for anything seems like taking the easy way out and not really meeting the issue head-on.

There are far too many examples to name, proving just how ridiculous the the entire thing is.  I have been lucky enough to have spent a small bit of time with Alice Cooper - the Godfather of shock rock - and I can tell you he's about as well grounded as anyone.  He, much as I suspect Dio was, is just a really good guy.

And for those who would claim that aggressive music creates more opportunities for Sex, Drugs, and Rock 'n' Roll abuses than other occupations, simply has not been paying attention to the news.  Nothing against The Church specifically, but, uh, there's a real concern.  Sorry, but a musical genre just is not going to be worse than that.

Yes, there are bad people, who deserve the negative reputation they get; but they wouldbe bad people if they were accountants too.  Don't make music the scape goat.  I have yet to see a musical playback devise of any kind that did not include an "off" button of some kind.  If you don't like it, turn it off.  if you don't wan your kids to hear it, turn it off. But that's it.  That's all you get.

Look, I'm hardly the biggest Metal fan.  I pretty much don't get into too much of the real hardcore stuff - I need more melody.  That does not mean it's bad. Actually, I can really appreciate the energy - it's just not my thing.  But if it makes you feel good to listen, who am I to tell you not too because of some stupid story that the guys in the band once made a pact with the devil, rooted in a promise to only eat butter and never margarine (stupid butter1)  Come on!  People who buy into that crap also likely fall for every marketing trick in the book and buy tons of stuff they don't need but see in ads on TV.  They likely also thought John Lennon was blasphemous when he pointed out the obvious that the Beatles had become more popular with the youth of the day than Jesus (he did not say that was a good thing, by the way, he was more commenting on the industry's control of culture).  At the very least they have a serious cholesterol problem from all the margarine they are consuming to avoid their own devil-butter pact.

So God bless Ronnie James Dio.  Rest in peace.  You brought a lot of joy to a lot of people.  The rest of us should be so lucky to be able to make such a claim.

...you know all this talk of classic Metal reminds me that Iron Maiden is coming to town soon.  I wonder if I can score some tickets...

Pure Musical Joy: Why Nils Lofgren is one of the greatest musicans around and I am not

Thursday was an amazing day.  Nils (http://www.nilslofgren.com) came by and spent several hours playing and talking to CMAS.  It was beyond incredible.  Aside from his obvious talent, he is also one of the most grounded, kind, and generous people I have ever met.

I found myself way too star struck with him.  You'd think being so close to "Uncle George" as Gray calls him that I would act like less of a boob around someone like Nils; but no, I was kinda "Captain Wonderputz."  I hope he doesn't think me too dim after all is said and done.  I don't even wanna think about it.

Ok, now past all that, there were several things that really struck me in the time he was with CMAS.  The most significant was his humility.  Not just the obvious and almost cliche kind of thing that you'd expect from someone who has "made it" and done so much - in truth, he's probably best known for playing in the E Street Band with Springsteen; but even if you take that all away, his resume is staggering - but more about how he kept emphasizing his love of the song as his driving motivation.

With Nils you get the real sense that he loves playing with Bruce and all the work he's also done with Neil Young and so many others; and he's clearly grateful and appreciative for all he's been able to do in music; but he talks of smaller gigs in small clubs with the same kind of affection.  He has a kind of musical Joy about him that I don't see very often. It reminded me of Robert Billups (see an earlier blog about that true genius).  Even in the CMAS main hall, which is pretty cool for a school facility but not really a big deal in the pantheon of places Nils has played, he was just clearly in love with the music.

And I don't mean in an arrogant sort of way 'cuz it was his songs.  I mean he just loves music.  You can see it, palpably, in his face.  The Joy of it seems to take on his entire body and informs all the energy about him - he literally radiates it.  I learned more from Nils in those few hours yesterday than I could possible recount here, but his joyous playing and sense of self within the musical lines was just indescribable.

Full disclosure, I feel I did him a disservice in the sound I provided him - not that he complained.  I'm hoping passing along George's contact info to him, as well as  the mixes I'll create of his performances for the show that was being taped, will at least make up a bit for that and all the rest of my gaffs.

Ok, time to go and find some of my own musical joy.  So this is Captain Wonderputz, signing off...for now...

Back inside the sound: why I sometimes almost miss my old teaching gig and why "traditional" ensembles matter

This past week I was asked once again to be a clinician for the Arizona Band and Orchestra folks. In short, it was beyond terrific; and to work, even if just briefly, with these amazing young orchestras, was great fun for me.

With all the studio work and training I do; and the songwriting, etc, etc. that makes up the CMAS program, I sometimes forget how much I still love being "inside" that kind of sound.  It is a very different world, and in some ways I miss it.  Not enough to go back, but...that sound...no matter what else I ever do, I still love it.  Frankly, it's been creeping back into my own music in some ways lately, so maybe it's a kind of musical synergy coming to fruition. Who knows.  Anyway...

Lately when I am lucky enough to be a part of these kind of things, inevitably the conversation comes around to CMAS.  Many times I cannot tell for certain at first if I am being investigated or envied.  The truth is liekly somewhere in between.

While it's my job to promote the paradigm shift that CMAS represents to music education, people usually seem so surprised to learn that I have a very real and strong affinity for traditional ensembles.  It just seems odd to me.  Music is about something more than the specifics of the ensemble.  More than a tale of who is playing what instrument.  It's about getting inside yourself and life and the world and God and whatever else you wanna connect it to.  The organic, pure nature of music is not limited to any specific parameters.  I find it odd that this strikes so many as a "new" concept.  Many will feign agreement only to privately scorn the music CMAS now fosters in people who would otherwise have no interest in its exploration.

It seems very simple to me and was really reinforced for me while at this recent festival with all these grand orchestras: either all music is viable or none of it is.  Sure, you cannot do it all, and everyone will have their strengths and weaknesses in execution; but at it's heart music - of all genres - reaches beyond.

Does it really matter which path you take to get there?  Traditional ensembles are hugely important.  Truly.  But, in the end, it's music that is the important entity.  Get it however you can and encourage others to do the same, no?  Band, Choir, Orchestra, Jazz, Rock, Country, Rap - that's all just superfluous details.  Music is what matters.  All music.  Sometime I really wonder if CMAS is really that big of a change.  I swear, fundamentally, I am only able to approach music one way - I know of no other - regardless of the specific ensembles or genres.

I may not be a "traditionalist" but I am certainly a "purist."  And I am very, very lucky to have a life that is 100% family and music.  It's just that simple.  Really.

It's all in the numbers: my recent epifany about class size in schools

So lately I've been having lots of conversations with people about the CMAS program - how it started,where it's going, why I structured the curriculum the way I did, etc.  Inevitably, one of the questions is about how the current "traditional" program at the school is dealing with the success of CMAS.

The truth is, not well.  While CMAS is certainly going through some pretty massive growing pains, overall the general path is forward.  Fast.  So much so that I have been wondering if I need to reign it in just a bit to ensure that we maintain the level of quality I feel is essential -bit that is another topic.

The point is, I was recently talking with some folks from the Conservatory of Recording Arts and Sciences (my buddy Brock, and the school's Administrator Kirt Hamm - also a great guy) about how CRAS could do more to reach out to other music teachers in the community - to say nothing of their support of CMAS, generally - and we got to talking about my transition from the traditional program to full implementation of CMAS.  The context was more about helping other, interested teachers do something similar, even if on a smaller scale; but in the course of that discussion something so unbelievably obvious struck me that I am kinda ashamed I have not talked about before whenever the topic of the current traditional program at the school comes up:

(I wanna preface this by stating clearly that this is definitively not a commentary on any other teacher - just a statement of some facts.)

In the years just prior to the full transition to CMAS I was simultaneously running what would become the bulk of CMAS as well as the complete band and orchestra at the school. There was also another teacher facilitating several other classes that would eventually evolve into part of CMAS as well while also running the choir program at the school.  Full disclosure: for many years this other person was my wife Michele, who to be frank, is a far better teacher than I in all areas, but I digress.

The point is that during this time there were big numbers of students in the CMAS -like classes as well as strong numbers in the band, orchestra and choir.  All working together somehow.  All viable educationally - despite the compelling argument that I was at best a mediocre band/orchestra teacher.  So if the numbers have diminished since in the traditional classes, I just don't buy it that it was CMAS's fault.

Look, the job of the traditional music teacher at the school - at any school -  is very tough; and having done it for years, I can vouch for the fact that it stretches the traditional teacher far too thin to possibly succeed at their best level all the time in all aspects.  But blaming CMAS for the drop in numbers is not only unfair, it's untrue.

OK.  I just wanted to get that out.  My personal goal, if I am very lucky, once the CMAS curriculum is fully implemented and running (likely within the next 18 months or so) is to help revitalize the traditional program.  Who knows, maybe reinvent it a bit...if they'll let me.

Music Education Irony: Or how I try to justify a very strange set of circumstances and call them totally logical and obvious

Truth: I was never any good at being the "Band guy."  Though I was always thrilled to be able to guide students toward a common musical goal (marching band shows, festivals, and such) I never felt like it was really me; and I am not certain I was very good at it either.   As I completed the transition to the full CMAS program, despite all the seemingly endless variables with creating a new type of music program, at least I could be assured that, at its core, CMAS was more a true reflection of myself than all my previous work in education.

I suppose I need to admit that in some ways I live with a continual urge to offer a kind of apology to all my former band and orchestra students.   I wonder if the experience I provided them was really as viable as it could have been.  This is not false modesty - my experience with CMAS has shown me that the right environment (musical, educational) makes so much possible.  Makes it simpler, more direct, and frankly far easier for the students to achieve.  But, as usual, I digress...

Here's the thing.  When I left the "Band guy" behind for CMAS  I assumed that I was also leaving behind all the trappings of that moniker.  In particular, the football game halftime shows.  Oops!

A while back, as we were discussing all the aspects of implementing the CMAS program at the school, I had a conversation with my Principal (Dr. Anne-Marie Woolsey - as an aside, if CMAS is at all successful, it is in no small way do to her support.  More on her and Dr. Mitch Simmons, our other key supporter, later) about how, in theory, CMAS could produce some pretty cool halftime shows, similar to the Superbowl, given the right circumstances.  Over time, whenever we would meet to talk CMAS, the topic would return, and eventually it moved from a theoretical future possibility to a reality that begins this fall.

Certainly this marks a serious change in the community dynamic at the school - the band program has been on the decline for a long time - nationally the trend is similar, if not as pronounced, for what it's worth - and CMAS's success is likely not helping the situation (a discussion on why CMAS is only a small part of the equation, not the root cause, at another time) and there is simply an historical connection, and expectation, that there will be a marching band at the game; but it also marks an opportunity to further extend the paradigm shift that CMAS has precipitated, generally, in music education.

We're still very much in the planning stages, but the premise is basically a full on, albeit short, rock concert in the middle of the football field, with complete lighting and sound.  Yikes!  Is there a stronger word for this than "crazy?"  I'll write more on the details as we work them out, but for now the point is that a) it really is happening, b) we are lucky to be able to tap in to some serious grant money to make it happen (ironically, CMAS is far less expensive, even with this new aspect, to operate than a traditional music program) and c) I am back to football games.  Hmmm....careful what you wish for...

College comes faster now

We're still finalizing all the last details, but it appears that my songwriting and recording studio production students will, starting this fall, be able to receive as much as 12 college credits for their work with me, through SCC.

This is obviously a pretty serious step forward on my quest to further legitimize the CMAS program as the new paradigm for music education, and in truth without the support of Ron Marschall, and the efforts of Paul Langworthy, both from SCC, none of this would coming to fruition.  On a personal note, it has been very gratifying knowing that not a single element of the curriculum I created needed to be altered.  In fact, CMAS seems to have more than exceeded all parties' expectations, which is certainly no small matter.

So what does this really mean?  Well, aside from the legitimizing I mentioned already, it is also a potentially big motivating factor for the students.  It not only is going to be a huge selling point to parents and students to take part in the program, but it also means we can enforce an even higher standard of work ethic from the students.  I suppose it also puts a bit more pressure on us to produce even more significant results, as this will further increase the attention the CMAS program gets, but I, for one, feel that to be a good thing.

In the end, CMAS is still about giving students an opportunity to pursue their musical instincts, and frankly that will not change.  Nor will the notion of self-reliance be diminished - probably increase in truth.  For me the most interesting part of all this is how, at each evolution of CMAS (original curriculum adoption, ASU Music Ed collaboration,  now the credit from SCC, etc) the general experience has been pretty easy on our end.  We just keep doing what we do, and others jump on board.  That might be the most legitimizing aspect of all.

Another great guest artist

Earlier this week we hosted another great artist: Becca.  She came in and did a great acoustic set and was really great with all the students.  She's signed to Sony Japan and had a lot of great stories and advise for the classes.  A very talented musician, she related especially well to them as she is close to their age herself.

It was particularly interesting to learn of her rise to fame at such a young age - signed to Meredeth  Brook's production company, lots  and lots of showcases, endless working, till a friend of a friend got Sony JP to take a listen- and the rest is history.

By her own admission, she still has a long way tp go, but it was clear that Becca works very hard, and I suspect that she will go quite far.  So if you can, check her music out. (www.beccaofficial.com) Some really good stuff.

In Your Back Yard

This past week, while on a break from teaching (ha!) I had three very cool musical experiences.  Well, actually, there were five, but I will leave for later the discussions about the awesome new preamps in the studio and the massive progress on some very exciting new songs for the CD.  So back to the three I started with...

The first, is actually thanks, yet again, to Michele's Mom's club.  Through her connection to that group I have become friends with another dad in the group, Brock.  Brock is one of the lead teachers at the Conservatory of Recording Arts and Sciences here in Phoenix.  Needless to say, he is musically on a level I cannot even explain, much less equate myself to - simply, Brock, is a master, in the truest sense of the word.  He's also a very cool person, just generally. Though I had heard of CRAS many times, Brock's tour was the first time I had actually spent time in the facilities.  I have been in many studios, but this was really incredible - especially for an "educational" institution.  The level of skill of the people who attend this school, much less the instructors, is pretty staggering.  This is not your 4th or 5th tier audio specialist getting $20 per hour.  There are so many gold and platinum albums on the walls, earned by CRAS students that they have to rotate them out into storage every few months.  Same goes for the movie posters from all the post production work they have been responsible for.  It was simply mind-numbing to walk through.  The rooms were just full of so many cool audio "toys" I felt like a kid in a candy shop.  This place turns out 48 students, only about 10% or less from Phoenix, every 6 weeks.  It's an intense year for them.  The most telling thing is that there are only something like three places in town that CRAS feels are acceptable for the required internship each student must complete.  Three.  That's a pretty high standard.  Every know and again I meet someone who is clearly so many steps beyond my skill set that I cannot believe I get to call them friend. Brock is definitely in that category.  He's also being kind enough to come speak to my more advanced students about the Conservatory and what the "real" music production world is like.  Very cool.

The second was guest speaking at ASU for some Music Ed. classes (one undergrad, and one grad) about the CMAS program I created, for a prof. friend of mind, Dr. Evan Tobias.  Evan is a brilliant guy, vastly more forward thinking than most people,  and a big fan of what we're doing with CMAS.  The opportunity to talk to some of his students about the program was really quite fun.  It also forced me to really consider how the program's details are presented just generally.  Clearly, I need to address this issue, but I am glad I was at least partially effective as after both classes I found myself talking for quite some time to numerous students about ways to push the music educational envelope.  I'm eager to see what the future holds with ASU.  Evan already sends me several interns/observers each semester, and I am hopeful that we can create a scenario whereby ASU students might be able to work with me directly as CMAS teaching assistants or something similar.

The third was a brief stroll through a local Zia Records store.  It has been a terribly long time since I have been in a record store of any kind.  I get almost all my music, as most people these days. on-line.  The experience of walking amongst all those rows and rows of actual, tangible CDs (no it's still not the same as the days when I could walk through shelves of vinyl LPs, but still) was really cathartic. It was very freeing to just brows, something that you really cannot do with the same kind of feeling to it online.  I plan to do it more often.

It was quite a week.

McCartney got it right

The story goes that after being repeatedly criticized by many music critics, and John Lennon for that matter as well, for writing too many "light weight" songs, Paul McCartney wrote "Silly Love Songs" as kind of not so subtle response.  As much as I am a huge fan of John's - really, all the Beatles (yes, even Ringo- Ringo is a true visionary as far as I am concerned) - I have always found this particular story very informing as a writer.

On many levels the message to me is, "stick to your guns," to say nothing of the notion of what's wrong with writing about love, anyway?  In point of fact Lennon wrote countless classic love songs himself, and the reality is that there are far more hit love songs than anything else.  Love works.  On so many levels, it just works.

There is even a compelling argument to be made that all music is about love - and I genuinely believe that to be the case. Even protest songs can easily be viewed, without losing even the slightest bit of their potency, as love songs: in simplest terms, love of humanity.  In point of fact, my strong feeling is that there is a very real and direct connection through music - all music - to a, forgive the cliche, higher power.  At the risk of being too melodramatic, that really is the heart of all of it for me, and I suppose it manifests itself in all I do. Everything.  Or at least I hope it does. Music is love.  It's Godly.  Pure.  I make this point seriously, despite its obvious self-righteous tone.  But in the end, what else could possibly be the point of music?

As I have been writing more and more, for what seems to be a never to be completed CD at this rate, I keep coming back to this notion of music, and love songs and all of it.  In fact, it reminds me of a former associate of mine who used to take what seemed to be great joy in endlessly mocking me over the fact I write so many love songs.  He liked to present himself as very erudite - regarding music and pretty much everything else - I lost track of the number of times he would lecture me about how I should be living my life and such - likely a strong reason why that association eventually unraveled; but I digress.

The point is that in the end, I felt only sorry for him.  Imagine someone so very smart but so very myopic as to be unable to appreciate something as simple as the sentiment of a love song.  I don't just mean my songs - one could certainly claim they are at best mediocre.  I mean the concept itself seemed less than worthy to him.  And as I look back at his behavior with other people, even his own family, everything seemed so trivialized all the time.  So impure.

Now I realize the hypocrisy of judging him in one breath while complaining of his judging of me in the other, but the difference to me is intent.  To not see the point in love songs.  To not feel they had anything new or viable to say, as he would tell me, seems, well, sad.  I am grateful to know what real love is.  I hope my former associate finds it within himself to someday seek it out and reciprocate it.

As I said at the start, McCartney got it right, and I, for one, intend to follow his lead.  So in the interest of full disclosure I thought I would include one of my favorite photos - one that I find inspiring beyond words:

 

If you cannot see the true essence of love and why it matters in that image, well, I don't even know what to say.  And OK, while that photo of my parents is truly inspiring to me, so is this one, even if it is more predicable that I would post it in this context (yes, I am ridiculously lucky):

Harmony

I must confirm a certain amount of embarrassment regarding the fact that last night was the first time in a while I had attended a professional symphony concert.  Michele and I, through the generosity of the "Mom's Club" she is part of, were in the audience for a spectacular evening of music, made possible by the Phoenix Symphony.  It was really an enjoyable evening on many levels, and as we sat in the hall taking in the music I was struck by just how much I still enjoy being inside that kind of sound - even if only passively as an audience member.

It had been a while since I had felt the kind of pure acoustic musical connection that an ensemble of that nature creates.  It was very enlightening for me.  The realities of life are such that my schedule simply doesn't permit as much of that kind of thing as it used to, and I am glad that I will be a guest clinician for some of the upcoming All-State music festivals, which will, if only temporarily, place me back in front of symphonic ensembles.

These days it seems like every musical experience I have informs either my teaching or my writing or both.  In this case, in terms of teaching, it makes me feel I should be doing more to emphasize the notion that all music is viable with my students.  I do this a lot with the more advanced classes already, but I'm thinking I need to implement more of this kind of thought with the lower levels as well.  In terms of writing, it's made me glad I am following my instincts on a lot of my newer material to use larger, more orchestrated parts - even if in a "rock" context.

Whatever it turns into,  one thing is for certain, there is something to be said for purity of sound, and last night was a great example.

The real deal

Earlier this week, we were lucky enough to host Ryan Star (www.rstar.net). What an amazing talent this guy is. Among other things, if you know the show "Lie to Me," he wrote and performs the theme song. I cannot say enough good things about him. He was incredibly gracious to both me and my students and it was just a wonderful afternoon.

As an educator I was really glad to have someone of his caliber talk with my students about his experiences in the music industry. It was also very cool to see many of my students step up and ask some really great questions - not only of Ryan, but also of Ken Lane (Senior VP with Atlantic) who was also there.

Ryan was very good about pulling no punches with the students. After performing for a bit, he took lots of questions and was very open about how hard he has had to work and about how much focus his journey has required. It was very inspiring, but also very good for the students to hear about the realities of the industry. Neither Ryan or Ken were overtly negative, they were just very honest and it made for a great educational afternoon. Plus the music was awesome.

On a personal level, I learned a ton. It was very cool to hang for a bit and make a new musical friend - someone in my own age demographic. In fact, Ryan, was really kind in his comments about the program and me. He kept telling me how much he wished he'd had program like this when he was in school. Funny thing is, as I told him, that was the very point of creating it - I had had the same thought years ago.

Ryan is clearly very grounded and, like I said, I cannot say enough good things about his music. More than that though, he struck me a very decent person. The kind of guy you'd wanna be friends with regardless of his occupation or success.  I'm really glad to be able to call him a friend.

The freedom that comes from cutting ties

About a week or so ago, I stopped using a Blackberry and went back to a more, shall we say "modest" phone. The various specific reasons for the change aside, I can honestly say, I wish I had made the transition back sooner.

Certainly there are some obvious economic advantages, but those seem rather trivial on the whole, certainly when compared to the real advantage of not having the "smart" phone (I am beginning to seriously question the use of that term in this context). For all the months I had the Blackberry I grew increasingly tied to it. Somewhat unwittingly - Michele does correctly point out that she repeatedly tried to call my attention to this - I became rather obsessive with it. Any message from anyone had to be read and returned immediately. There is a compelling argument that my personality simply doesn't allow for moderation of usage of such things; but true or not, I am certainly glad to be rid of the thing. I'm glad I had the opportunity to make use of the Blackberry for a while, but I am so much satisfied without it.

Case in point: Friday evening Michele and I attended a concert of a band a friend of ours plays in. Great group called The Union Band (formed in '67 and still going strong) you should check them out. Anyway, it was very funny to watch some of the people there and their way of taking in the show. Glued to iPhones and Blackberries, messaging away, seemingly unable to actually enjoy the music and the people around them - unable to just be there. It was actually really sad in a way - to be all alone yet in a crowd of supposed friends - how unfulfilling that would be. Like I said, sad. Watching this, I realized just how much happier I was to be able to simply dance and hold my wife's hand, kiss her and just enjoy the night - I felt very lucky to be there with her and our friends - together, in the moment for real. I think there is a lyric for a new song emerging out of this (mybe even will make it in the new CD, who knows) Something like:

"Your PDA is your best friend,
Mine - the world sees me kiss my wife
These are very different messages we send
Mine is by far the better life"

Needs some work, but I like the concept. I guess this all kinda relates to my post about "The perfect piece of gear," and I am curious to see how this will inform my writing and producing. Life is always a journey - what a fun ride.

The perfect piece of gear

So as things have started to calm down just a bit from the arrival of Tanner into our family, I find myself drifting back into my musical mindset. I suppose I am the type who never really leaves it, for better of worse, but in any case, Tanner's birth (he and the whole family are doing quite well, by the way) has gotten me thinking about the idea of "new beginnings."

This has carried over even into my teaching as I have been reworking the student recording labs these past days to make them more functional and efficient for their use. Kind of a lab reset or new beginning of its own.

In any case, as we've been setting up gear and such, students have been asking me questions about the individual pieces and such and how I designed the labs and all manner of related questions. One of the topics has been "what do we still need?" It's an interesting area to me, and one that I have decided to broach more directly with them over the coming weeks.

The truth is, the technology of audio is always evolving and changing. No sooner does a piece of gear get released does it seem like another one comes along that is an "improvement." The fact is that there is always more gear to buy. Always a new tool that can improve the end result.

I am not saying that is a bad thing. But over time I have started to wonder where the line really is between the gear we need and the gear we want. Case-in point: preamps.

For the last many years I have been, like so many others, on a quest for the perfect preamp for my studio. The ultimate absurdity of the notion is not lost on me, but I still find myself wondering what might work best for my varied needs. I have been lucky enough to have a lot of friends who have great expertise in such things-certainly more than me-and have been even luckier to be able to borrow any number of pieces to work with and get a sense of their sound in application.

I have no doubt that my assessment may change or evolve over time, but as I write this I have, as of late, had a recurring thought that has grown ever more persistent over time: there is no perfect preamp. This idea of the best combination of mic/preamp/converter is actually becoming funny to me. I think it must have something to do with the fact that, atthe end of the day, I seem always drawn to the song over the production.

I know, I know, seems a bit off given all the time I spend either in production for myself or others, or the fact that I teach so many students about the skills required for excellent production; but none-the-less, there it is. Even if I stipulate that I am not very good at it, I always view myself first as a writer. I tend to want the music to inform the production, not the other way around. I suspect that is one of the principle reasons that my music tends to be so acoustic based. For all the technology I like to use, I tend to want it transparent to a large extent.

To be fair, I am still trying to get my head fully around the implications of this as it relates to the current CD I am attempting to complete, but my gut tells my that the heart of this is accurate, so I feel compelled to go with it.

The gear does matter. There is some truth in notion of "garbage in garbage out" but in the end I feel that rather than search for the perfect piece of gear, it's far better to be searching for the perfect song.

Tanner and Gray videos (the important things in life)

(hint: turn off music player above before playing these videos)

Tanner at 20 minutes...





Gray meets Tanner part 1 (1/25/10)...


Gray meets Tanner part 2...


Gray meets Tanner part 3...


Gray meets Tanner part 4...


Gray the day before Tanner...

Student Focus Threshold

As established deadlines approach and  the pressure to complete projects mounts, some students start to suddenly realize that their use of time did not necessarily go as planned.  For some, it's due to things beyond their control: got sick and had to miss class, needed gear was unavailable for one reason or another, etc. (I'm not gonna go into the ways it is within their control, but you can assume what you like - it's not that much of a stretch.  Anyway...) 

When this happens, invariably I will get asked if there is an option for an extension of some kind.  In many cases, I grant one - I am certainly not going to penalize a student for things they cannot control - but, that is not always best for them in the long run.  Sure, in the controlled environment of a classroom, moving a date is easy and does not usually. in truth, create a lasting, direct, negative impact on anyone or anything.  Certainly, I am not going to suffer any consequences over any thing of that nature as the instructor - frankly, I am still not sure anyone really understands what I teach any way to be able to draw any sort of erudite conclusions (myself included.)

But, indirectly, the result could be really devastating.  I do not mean to be overly dramatic, but think about it for a moment.  A student learns that deadlines are generally flux.  They learn to not be quite so specific with them.  They, in a very real sense, lessen their chances for continued employment.  Truly.  If you keep missing deadlines, no matter what the reason, your clients, at some point, start to go somewhere else.

So recently I have chosen a different take on this sometimes seemingly pervasive issue.  "What's your threshold for focus?"  The answer to this question for any student (to be fair, in any pursuit, not just music) is the key.  At what point of compensation are you willing to get the job done regardless of the time limits or gear issues or whatever other parameter is impeding completion? The details are not really relevant, oddly enough.  It's actually simple economics.  At some point, in their mind, there is a threshold where their full focus will kick in regardless of the details to complete the work.  At some point they will do whatever it takes because the compensation is worth the hassle.

Maybe it's $10; or $100; or $1000; or $10,000; or whatever.  Again, the details, in this case, are not the issue.  The only issue is simply that the threshold does exist; and once identified we can establish work ethic, work quality, and any number of other relevant base-lines.  And if a student can identify their specific threshold and then treat every project like that point has been met, well, they can accomplish literally anything they set their skills to.

Of course, I cannot pay them in anything but a grade, but it is clear to me that the students who take their work seriously are already exploring where their focus threshold is.  My hope is that they all someday are in situations where they can dictate the terms of a deal with a client and eclipse that threshold.  And maybe send me some small percentage as a token for having set them on the path in the first place...ha!

Student Technology Gap

Every now and again, I will have a conversation with other educators about the use of technology in the classroom.  I always find it very enlightening to discuss this topic as it servers to help me refine my own methodologies in the area.  Once in a while though I get comments like, "You know, the kids know far more about his stuff than we do." 

When I was first developing the concept for the Contemporary Music and Sound program, having not even begun to create the curriculum, I was presented with this theory by two, highly respected arts educators. To be honest, my initial reaction was to be a bit shocked.  It seemed so odd to me that educators of any level would infer that students had nothing more to learn; or worse that there was some sort of generational gap that prevented anyone of a certain age being a viable instructor.  Odd.  Truth be told, I later came to learn the comment was more a reaction to the CMAS concept as a whole and a sort of veiled effort to block its creation in the first place. Obviously, the success of the program rendered this mute, but I digress (as usual)...anyway...

What I have become more fascinated with over the years is the realities of student understanding of technology.  Here is my current sense of this subject:  In some ways my earlier mentioned colleagues are correct-students today do seem more inclined to use technology than say my parents were.  But where they seemed to have missed the point is in the details.  For example, the willingness to use technology does not necessarily correspond to a real understanding of the technology.

Here's an example:  Year two students get to a point where they are ready to take their recording sessions they have created in Pro Tools and transfer them to a more consumer friendly medium - an .mp3, for example.  Now the task of learning to record to in Pro Tools is not simple. It takes a considerable amount of work, concentration and self-discipline and effort on the pat of the student.  There is a massive technological understanding required of the student be successful, even with the most basic of recording sessions. Frankly, it is one of the most enjoyable educational moments to witness as a student successfully crosses that ability threshold. 

To that end, if we go with the theory posed by my colleagues, and even forgiving them to somewhat myopic view that the use of a DAW such as Pro Tools as something a student could easily gain on their own, their logic falls tragically short in the creation of the final .mp3.  Ironically, I even fell a bit prey to this kind of thinking at first.  The file format conversion to the .mp3 format is, I had thought, a fairly simple process in, for example, iTunes.  Without intending to follow my colleagues lead, I assumed that all my students had a rudimentary understanding of programs like iTunes. After all, they all seem to have iPods or mp3 players of some kind, so it seemed like a fairly obvious conclusion that they understood the format conversion process - certainly to get he data onto their players they must have done the convertion, otherwise they would have nothing to listen to.

It turns out however that their understanding was limited to a very specific set of circumstances.  Change even one of the variables and they could not be successful. It's kind of like when I drive a car.  If there is gas in it and it is operating"normally" I can pretty much drive as needed to whatever destination is required.  However, if there is some issue with the engine, I have absolutely no idea what to do to make the car function normally again.  Not a clue.

And so I now see the implementation of technology in education as a function of process more than anything else.  It's not so much teaching the student which buttons to press when, it's more about teaching them how the button works.  Not so much the mechanics of it, but how it "talks" to all the other buttons - how they are interrelated - how their proper use accomplishes a specific task more efficiently.  Even better is when the student learns to make self-imposed critical evaluations of new, in some cases, as yet to be covered in the curriculum, topics.  "I took the ideas of this thing and wanted to see how they would work in application on this other thing."  Even if the result is less than perfect, the exploration of the process is being cultivated and in the long run that kind of inclination or instinct is invaluable.

Closing on a cynical note, one of the colleagues I mentioned has retired and the other, I think, is soon to follow.  Makes me wonder if in retirement, they'll be calling their grandkids to get instructions on how to use the TV or if they'll be brave enough to open the manual and learn it for themselves.