Practice, Perspective, Patience and Musical Intuition

One of the issues I've been facing as I have been developing my new live performance rig is the transition between it being mostly conceptual to being comfortable to actually use.  Never mind the fact that it's taken me more than 4 years of experimenting with what in retrospect is an absurd amount of gear, or the fact that much of the experimenting was slow due more to my lack of programming skills at the time, or the - I would like to think this is the biggest factor - fact that I could not really find anyone doing what I was trying to accomplish so there was no road map to follow.

The sense I had from the start - through all the trials and tests to finally get a working rig - was that  I was radically changing my entire approach to live performance in this process. Now, of course there is the very real possibility that the sense of epic change I felt was mostly self imposed and perhaps this is all no big deal, but for me it has been very real - self-imposed or not - and what that has meant is that I have had to delay and delay and delay doing actual shows.

This has been disappointing on a number of levels, but on the other hand there doesn't seem to be any point in presenting what could be an amazing musical moment to anyone until it's actually ready to be amazing.

As a songwriter I tend to think in the moment of the song.  Everything moves outward from there.  Get the song itself in place and the rest will come.  But translating that song to an audience requires practice.  And that practice can require a lot of patience - something I am generally not always that good at.  Plus my entire performance technique has had to change and - I'd like to think - evolve, as I have developed the new rig.

This has meant that every time I make a change for the betterment of the bigger picture concept I have had to reteach myself how to operate the rig.  Then as I go through that process if something is not doing what I need it to do, I have to stop the entire process and look for a solution before I can move on.  Many times this takes additional weeks of tinkering until I can get everything running right.  Till there is another bump in the road and then it starts over again.  To be fair I should admit that part of me enjoys the tinkering - even if it seem endless.  Anyway...

In a way all this "practicing" has been a bit disconcerting, but recently something has happened that took me out of my now "Songwriting" mentality and back to more fundamental musical experiences of my youth.  The rig now makes sense to me intuitively.   Perhaps this is an effect of my doing so much with it that my brain moves faster than it did before through the process, but whatever the reason I find that I "see" the rig differently now.  It feels more like an instrument unto itself rather than just a way to facilitate song performances.

It reminds me a lot of when I was first learning to, for example, play basic grooves on a drum kit.  At some point I did not have to consciously think any longer about the groove.  It just flowed out of me.  At that point I was able to just play.  In the moment.  Intuitively.  Musically.  It was very freeing and it set a kind of benchmark for all my future musical experiences.

Of course there is always more to learn and add to one's toolbox, but the concept of musical intuition as a part of performance (in all parts of the process: writing, recording, performing, producing) has always intrigued me.  The idea "Nothing Forced Endures" (thank you, Richard Beal!) comes to mind.

All that in mind, as you might expect, I cannot at this point say "it's done."  Funny, if not predictably, enough, as the rig has reached this point of ease-of-use, I am still awaiting the release of some new gear from a few companies to complete my current vision of how it will all work.    In fact in the photo you can kinda see a "blank" area that is reserved for this very reason.  Most significantly I am looking forward to the Keith McMillen QuNexus and the Electro Harmonix 8 Step Program.  Both are due this month.  And then let the fun begin!

I did create a very raw video on the concept a few weeks ago, for anyone interested.  It's more of a prototype here, as since filming I have swapped out the SL-20 for an Adrenalinn 3 and reworked the actual placement and wiring to be more cooperative, and numerous other changes, but the idea behind the rig should be clear regardless.

It's an exciting time.  Lots more coming! Gotta go practice now...

Where's My Album?

I hear this all the time from CMAS students (and others):  "Why should I buy a full album from an artist, when I can easily just download only the tracks I want?  Plus, it seems like most albums, even by my favorite artists are made up of a few tracks I like and the rest is all just filler."

It's a complex issue.  On one level, there is the notion that while there is so much out there, a lot of it is junk.  It's easy to get lost in the din.  On another level, there is the notion that it was not always that way and the market has allowed this kind of disposable quality to music (perhaps to all the arts?) that fosters this frequent "not so great but good enough" approach.  Another level to consider is that the entire purpose of an album has been lost, just generally, as an art form.  And there are others.  Many others.  

But my point here is not so much those concepts but something more fundamental: are we doing a disservice to the art of creating music by even allowing the option of a single song download from a wouldbe larger scale project?

The artistic purest in me says, immediately and without a moment's hesitation, YES!  The pragmatist in me, however, is not so sure. 

Here is the dilemma:  if art is a reflection of society, and society is moving in a more, albeit artistically stifling direction, does art that works to offset or even to change that movement actually reflect society accurately?

This is not just semantics. You cannot have it both ways.  Nor can you claim everything is done as a protest.  It's certainly a conceivable possibility but it's not likely to actually happen in reality.  Frankly, it's far too easy to make a bigger name for yourself and more money if you don't protest and if you get along. 

And that does't even address the factors that revolve around the rather, I think, sad fact that the manufacturers of much of todays music production tools have found that if they make things that allow pretty much anyone to just, at the push of a button, sound "real," they can make even more money, regardless of where we wanna call the results art or just exercises in technology as a crutch.  But that is another rant for another time.  Anyway...

Sure you might get very lucky and be at the nexus of a great redefining of music, but most of us will never be there, regardless of our intentions, skills or anything else that might be a factor.  And, sure, you can go your own road all you want in the name of artistic truth, but what if no one is there to hear you?  Even if you are right?  Even if your music is legitimately brilliant; but because you are all alone no one hears it?  Really, what if no one hears?  And yet another rant...

It's a confusing and multi layered problem.  One that does not just have a silver bullet solution.  

As I begin to reexamine my own musical priorities as I prepare to start recording some of the vast multitude of songs I been writing in the past many months  I wonder where I will end up on this issue.  Or if it even matters.

Maybe that's the real point of art.  Not to be a statement of anything other than of itself.  hmmmmmm…

Serve The Song

I'm a huge techno-buff.  Particularly when it comes to music.  I find it all so fascinating.  The idea that there are these tools to help refocus my creativity and my overall creative process is just so cool a concept.

On the other hand, technology as a crutch drives me crazy.  Balancing these two used to be a considerable challenge for me.  But over time I have found that if I start with that basic idea, "serve the song," and actually follow that as a kinda of unbreakable rule - ironic in that I also firmly believe there should be no rules to creativity, *sigh* - I can pretty much move into any area that catches my creative fancy.

Let me give you a more concrete example.  I am also a big fan of Dave Grohl.  (Aren't we all?)  The guy is truly an inspiration for so many reasons.  Recently he made this incredible film called "Sound City," and I really encourage you all to see it.  Repeatedly.  It is quite astonishing, and has so much on so many levels that I found myself having to watch it a couple of times recently to ensure I felt I had gotten all that I could from the experience.  Anyway...

The film is part history lesson about a particular studio (Sound City), part recording industry rant, part technology rant...you get the idea.  On the surface there is this sense of a "technology has killed music" notion floated by a lot of the artists in the film - and there are a LOT of them in the film.  So many heroes of mine that I kinda lost count.  There are all these example stories of technology killing the musical process in favor a the quick and easy route to "success."  Dave went so far as to by the Neve console from the studio for his own studio and he's since produced several amazing LPs with it.

I've heard lots of musicians respond to this film - and similar- by saying that they are going back to analog.  No more computers.  No more artificial elements. It's all gotta be "real."  Ok, but the notion of "real" is not so clear these days.  As if the analog tape machine is any less of a technology than digital.  Different certainly, but technology all the same.  It's as though they skipped the scenes in the film with Trent Reznor.  Folks, it's not the technology.  It's you.

"No, man.  You don't get it.  Dave, he went all 'old school.'  All analog.  No computers.  It's all real."  Come on.  Really?  You gotta see past that.  What Dave did is nothing short of brilliant.  But, to me at least, it has nothing to do with pro-analog or anti-computers/anti-Pro Tools.  It's about how you get musically inspired.

Think about it.  Stripping things down and removing the computer really was just a way to facilitate a different approach to music making.  Opening up previously unexplored creative paths.  But the analog versus digital element is just a superficial bit on the surface.  Go deeper and they are both irrelevant.

All that matters is the song.  That's it.  Are you letting the music make the decisions or are you forcing yourself onto it?  Your song doesn't suck because you used computers.  And it's not brilliant because you went analog.  It sucks because you got in the way.  It sucks because you let your ego get to the point of arrogance and the music took a back seat in some way.  Maybe it was 'cuz you rushed something.  Or didn't practice the line enough to make it really shine.  Or didn't let things be gloriously out of sync and/or tune.  If your song sucks, it's not the music.  It's because you did not let the music rule the decisions.  Your song sucks because you did not get out of the music's way.  

And your song is not amazing because you went analog, and threw off the "shackles of technology." It's amazing because you got out of the music's way.  Maybe going analog gave you the needed perspective to let the music take control, preventing your ego from turning to arrogance and letting the music flow.  But that is about you, not technology.  And if that's what it takes to allow you to serve the song, then do it.  Go analog.  But don't for a moment  think that it's the technology that is making the music "happen, " or not.  That's all you.  It's why all the over processed crap might at first seem really cool, but then over time all fades away.  In the same way, though, if the computer inspires you in some way to harness the magic of the music, why turn away from it?  That's just as bad as using it as a crutch.  Maybe even worse.  How can you possibly justify turning your back on the music right in front of you just because you wanna throw those shackles off I mentioned earlier?  That's not musical.  That's just, forgive me, stupid.

Serve the song.  Serve the song.  SERVE THE SONG!  How you serve it is not the point, so long as you do.

This all has absolutely NOTHING to do with technology, by the way.  It's something far more pure. Technology is only a tool.  Or a crutch.  Your choice.  Serve the song and you will always know what to do.  Ok.  End of rant.  For now...

Too Much Technology?

A couple of years ago I started a blog.  On one level it was to feed my ego that I would be able to post all my "important" observations to legions of fans all over the world who were in various states of eagerness awaiting my every word or all things musical and related topics.  Ha!  On another level it was to see if I could not create a kind of journal.  This is more the truth.  I like the idea of my kids, and grand kids, etc. having something of an insight into who I was - at least musically - years from now.  Perhaps even when I'm gone.

I guess I'm at an age where I have begun to look both forward and back in equal measure (ooooohhh....that's a good lyric...I need to use that...anyway....) and I realize that I don't have nearly as much of that kind of thing from my own parents or theirs.  Not even musical elements, as they were not particularly musically inclined - but more of a sense of who they were. Perhaps this is a topic for another rant.  In any case....

As I pursued the blog, I also got more into other social media.  Facebook.  Twitter.  etc. and it began to evolve that my "blog as a journal" idea got usurped by a Facebook/Twitter journal of sorts.

The trouble is that while these are more convenient in many ways, their potentially dramatically smaller amount of content makes them less comprehensive, and to me, in many ways, inherently less intimate (the irony of my publishing this blog publicly not withstanding - I wanna be the humble, non-attention seeking guy - really, I do  - it just never seems to work out.  yikes!) Perhaps that's more an indication of my inability to be adequately succinct, but then again, perhaps that's just an accurate reflection of me, so why fight it?

We live in an age where there are actually so many ways to communicate that it all kinda washes over us. There is so much that in many ways we get nothing. (hmmmm...another good lyric there...)

I know I am not the first to encounter this.  Or the last.  And my rant here is very much proof of that.  But for some reason I feel that if I rant here, I may get lucky enough to get to a point where I can more consistently posting into this journal for my kids.  And my legions of fans? ugh!  ;)

It's an adventure.  Like writing a song a week I suppose.  You never know quite where it's gong to lead, but that's not the point.  The point is to keep moving, and that's what I intend to do.  Wish me luck!

Rebooting My Creativity - A Song A Week

Sometime in 2011 it dawned on me that I had not really produced anything of my own for a number of years. Somewhere between the arrival of Gray and Tanner and the desire to evolve CMAS, my own creativity got - unintentionally, I would like to think - lost in it all.

I suppose that characterizing the matter as "my creativity" may not be entirely accurate, as certainly I created CMAS and that was not exactly a non-creative endeavor.  Far from it.  And to be fair, I did write and record several tracks for a bit after Gray was born.  Even did a good bit of shows for a time.  But overall things had gotten, like much in life can, stagnant.

So maybe it was just timing.  Maybe some kind of preemptive midlife crisis of some sort. Whatever.  The point is that, whatever the reason, I was not writing much music for quite an extended period of time, and that began to weigh on me more dramatically the more I began to consider it a fact.

And so I began a kind of experiment with this new year of 2012.  I resolved that  I would write at least one complete song every week.   No excuses.  Every week.  No matter what else was going on.  At least one song.

As I am now approaching the midway point I can honestly say it has been quite a journey.  One I'm so glad I have embarked on.  In fact as it has progressed my only regret it that I did not start it years earlier.

For decades now I have felt that music was a kind of spiritual event for me.  It has always been,  in a very real sense, my religion.  My connection to the universe.  My direct tie to the Divine.  I was not always able to express that accurately - perhaps not even now - but none the less, it has proven true for me over and over again, and these past months have pretty much solidified what was already a very deep connection for me.  That alone has made it worth it.

And this creative reboot has provided so much more.  And not just, as I write this, 26 songs in 23 weeks - though that's pretty cool too.  It has made my writing process so much stronger.  I feel a musical confidence that I have been lacking for some time.  In fact on occasion I like to look back over the charts for these new songs and am constantly struck at how much I enjoy them.

Of course there is that matter of what to do with them all.  One of the things that became quite clear to me early on was that for it to work I could only approach the week's song as a writer.  If I got too in to the role of Performer, or Technical Engineer, or certainly Producer, I would be sunk.  In fact that has been one of the other benefits - a significant strengthening of my ability to partition certain skills as needed.  Or put better - my ability to focus on serving the song.  At the end of the day I can confidently say that is exactly what I am doing.  That is exactly what the priority is: serve the song.

It's pleasantly allowed me to move towards decimating my arrogance - something I sadly still struggle with - while reinforcing my ego.  The distinction is vital to creative pursuits in my mind.  The former is always ultimately self-destructive and terribly "unmusical," while the latter is essential to actually motivate the creative process.

Anyway, I am close to starting to record these songs.  Very close.  In fact all this creative activity has sparked another, interesting "diversion" as I am now ever closer to unlocking what I would call a great music performance mystery:  how to use technology in such a way to maintain the singer-songwriter paradigm, but far bigger in musical scope and sound, while still keeping the song as the priority, not the technology.  Again, serve the song.  More on this in another post.  Soon, I hope.  It's pretty cool though, I gotta tell you.  More soon...

Anyway, 26 songs is a lot over 23 weeks.  (Oh, for those wondering about the math, I had a week were I got 3 and other where I got 2 so that's how that all adds up to 23 in 26.)  And though I feel it quite possible am I actually writing the same song over and over again, one thing I am very pleased with is that none of them are "comical" or throw-aways.  I feel all are legitimate.  None of them have been less than significant as far as I can tell -though some weeks have been tougher than others to have the song fully complete by midnight on Sunday.  But in a very real way that has been the point.  As the weeks go on I find my writing not only improving, but it's gotten more efficient.  I can "find" song faster now.  Or perhaps it finds me faster as I am learning how ti get out of my own way.

Speaking of which, though perhaps imperfectly, this reboot has also allowed me to channel a lot of unfocused energy.  I find that lately ideas may slow for a time, but the suddenly there will be a flow of ideas that can happen so rapidly that I know I have lost several great ones along the way.  Even with my iPhone constantly with me, I lose them all the time.  A disappointment for sure, but on the other hand I still have been able to capture so much in it's raw state that I do not foresee a time when meeting the goal of a song a week will be unattainable.  Sure it's still somewhat daunting as I think of it, but clearly it's working.  Besides the real work is starting to take the shape of getting them all recorded.  And that looks to be like a whole other fantastic musical reboot that I'm soon to embark on.

The Nils Lofgren Project

Talk about lucky!  About a year and a half ago we were very lucky in CMAS to have Nils Lofgren (the E Street Band, Neil Young) come in and speak to CMAS about his career and his music, the industry - pretty much all the things that he has ever done professionally as a musician. He was scheduled originally to come in for, I think, about an hour and he wound up staying for just shy of three. Needless to say it was pretty amazing. Nils is an incredibly gifted musician - pretty much everyone knows that. It's evident in all the work he does. It's evident in the people he works with. But more than that, he's just a really gracious person. Nils is one of the kindest most gentlest souls I've ever met and very much willing to share anything that he can with others.

Certainly that session with CMAS was extremely successful. It was extremely inspiring - not just for the students, but also for me; as well as any number of other faculty from the school that attended. In the wake of that, I was blessed in that Nils wanted to stay in touch, and about 10 months ago, back in February of this year, kind of out of the blue, I got a phone call and he wanted to know a) if I'm still teaching at the school and had the CMAS program and b) if I would be interested in having CMAS work with him as part of his upcoming album that at the time he was still putting together.

Obviously the answer was yes. It is a rare gift when an artist of his stature and skill offers to work with your students. Something that we simply could not pass up. Basically, the project is rooted in Nils feeling that he's aware of all the new technology and is aware of the need to involve and reach out to a younger generation (more specifically people that are the age of my students) but he's not quite sure how to do it. So his idea was basically to turn my students into a kind of record labels of sorts. Not having the kids on the phones pushing the CD or anything like that, but just having them help him work through what I might or might not work. 

We started this process very recently. He's coming in frequently to CMAS and he's talked with students now quite a bit about what he has in mind.  He's played a good bit for them and has relayed some great stories to them.  He's basically giving them open access to Nils Lofgren the legendary guitarist, songwriter, singer, producer, and it's been just wonderful.

Right now we are focusing on helping him create two videos for two songs that are on his new album "Old School." The album by the way is unbelievable and if you get a chance to pick it up you absolutely should. It's on iTunes and it is also available at his website and any number of other places www.NilsLofgren.com.

Anyway, CMAS is not really a video production program. CMAS is about music. It's about writing it. It's about performing it. It's about producing it. Both live and in the studio. But we are not a video production class. However, several of the my students in CMAS are also very accomplished students in our Media Communications program at the school where they do work very specifically on video production, so we are tapping lots and lots of resources for this. 

One of the videos is basically going to be a more standardized kind of storyboarded video for the song "Miss You Ray."  The other one is going to be a kind of "making of" documentary for the song "Dream Big." We're hoping that after those we can move on into more detailed production and songwriting skills with Nils. He and I have even discussed the possibility of doing a live show  - one of our songwriter nights as it were - but featuring him. We're still not quite sure how that will work or if we can even manage to make that happen, but to even be talking about it is pretty amazing.  

Both Nils and I are hopeful that this will be a lasting partnership.  Something that the CMAS program does with him not necessarily every year, but that the students have this resource of an artist such as Nils.  It's a remarkable opportunity and it is a tremendous honor and I cannot ever fully thank or express how grateful I am to Nils for giving my students - and honestly me - the opportunity to work with him like this.

Much more coming soon...

Lemons, Lemonade, and CMAS

Lets be honest, nothings ever 100% perfect 100% of the time; and as much as what CMAS students are capable of, and as much as they've accomplished in the past, sometimes mistakes are going to happen.  That's part of learning, but that's also part of the real world.  You put yourself in a big high profile gig and sometimes during that performance there may be problems.  And last week that's what happened.  

It wasn't anybody's fault.  Nobody intentionally messed up.  The truth is that even the most "simple" CMAS show is pretty complex, by any standards: three totally independent Mix desks (FOH, Monitors, Pro Tools recording), some serious PA wattage (excess of 40,000 watts for some shows) etc., etc.; but that is no excuse.  We had a problem and the show suffered.  The performers did great, the crew worked really hard, but we made some errors on the production side of things and it was a problem.  So we were thrilled when we were going get to play one more show (at least) because the varsity football team was in playoffs and we were hosting last night which meant another Super Bowl style halftime show for us.

It might have been a bit nerve-racking as the students were feeling, all week, a good bit of pressure and where a bit worried could they pull it off?  Could they redeem themselves from last week and do it in such a way so that they would still feel good about everything that they've done in the past as well?

The answer turned out to be yes.  The students went back last week and completely reevaluated their process - voluntarily I might add.  They came to me after the problems from last week's show and said, "We don't want to do it like that again.  Ever."  It was a important learning lesson for the entire CMAS program.   A somewhat brutal one in front of a couple thousand people - not exactly my first choice - but an important one none the less.  Details matter.  Plain and simple.  Your best show in the past only matters if your next one is at least as good, ideally better, and certainly not worse.  More importantly, the audience simply does not care.  For them the equation is very simple: it's good or it's bad.  The reasons why, on either end of the spectrum, simply do not matter to the audience. Some tough lessons at any age, but certainly for a group of high-schoolers.

But they were flawless last night. It was amazing, and what's more, they were calm about it.  I was nervous a bit on their behalf.  Not that they cannot handle the job, far from it; but I wondered, leading into last night's performance, if they would be overly anxious.  Would they not have a good work ethic or attitude towards each other?

But this was the calmest most well-prepared easy-going show they've ever produced.  And it was certainly the highest pressure they've ever had because they know that if they make a mistake once they may be forgiven for it, but if they go out the next week in front the same crowd - huge crowds, by the way, we're talking several thousand people now at these games - and they make a mistake again, even if the crowd loves the CMAS program as a concept, the crowd may start to wonder can they really pull this off?

But CMAS did pull it off.  They did an amazing job last night.  Even managed to avoid the rain. It started to come down just as we were getting all the gear back in. Fortunately that's why they make road cases.

We also had the pleasure of recording the Peoria High School marching band up in CMAS Studio B. What a great group. They were so kind and receptive and appreciative of the opportunity to be recorded by our students.  To get a professional level recording in our studio.  They were just thrilled.  They were really gracious and it really showed the benefits of this kind of musical camaraderie across genres, and more than anything that was really nice to see and it's something that I would like to foster more of and bring in even more schools to do the same.

In the end it was really an exciting night for CMAS and I could not have been more proud.  Last week was tough for the students, and they really were upset; but it turned out they might've done themselves a favor.  They redid their process and that is now going to make every event they do even better.  And if you've ever been to some of their previous events it's hard to imagine how they could improve them.  It was just incredible and I'm so proud of all of them and I just can't wait to get back to it on Monday and see how much further we can push this thing we call music education: CMAS.

Fine. I'll write the (insert expletive) book!

It's been a good while since I have posted anything here.  Trust me, the irony has not been lost on me.  Given my proclivity (oooh, that's a good word) to ramble on generally, I have clearly been, it would seem, holding back.

In truth lots has been going on and I really cannot account for why I have not taken the time to write more here.  So for some odd reason, late at night, tonight, when I should well be asleep, I have decided that it's time to remedy that.

The family is great and I am as ever the luckiest man in the world.

As for projects, that has been quite a ride lately.  For a good bit now the main thrust of my "free time" has been to deal with the perfecting the EARS™ concept and the unreal amount of work that goes along with the related intellectual property issues.  On the whole it is going very well, but wow, lots of work.  EARS™ has taken on a level of legitimacy that I cannot fully express.  It is a unique feeling to know, with 100% certainty that something works as it should.  Wonderful, but unique.  At least for me.

 I have also, after what seems like far too long, really gotten a sense of my next musical project. It's called "With One Voice" and it will very much feature my lovely Michele.  I don't wanna give too much away just yet, but I have been quite captivated by a band from my past called Jellyfish - you should check them out - and when combined with my love of the Beatles, Queen and a few others, it got me thinking...and then my friends George and Nils (seriously, how lucky am I?) both gave me, without likely realizing it, some great ideas for how to go about creating the music.  Very very VERY excited.  Anyway, more on that later....

Right now my other push is a book about CMAS.  Or maybe more accurately, my sense of what I have learned from creating and facilitating CMAS.  I am not kidding. A book feels like a good idea right now. Even if only as a kind of cathartic exercise, it might prove useful.

I already have some of the chapters/major topics worked out:
(in no particular order at this time)
1.  The Music Eduction World is NOT Changing.  It's Already Changed.
2.  Seriously?  You're saying I should do my job less effectively to keep you from having to do yours as well?
3. Money isn't everything, but you cannot expect to run most music programs on very much these days
4. There are only two kinds of music: good and bad.
5. Arrogance is the enemy.
6. Education decisions should always be made based on what;s best for kids, not adults.
7. Yeah.  You heard me right.  It's not just a music program, it's a legitimate record label.  Get over it.

There are surely to be more, but that's what I have so far.  My real issue is the book's title.  I suppose I will eventually stumble upon it but for some reason I feel like until I have it I cannot truly write. As of now, I am leaning towards:

"I've Come to Kill Your Music Program"

but I am open to other ideas if you have any.

Follow this blog

A Self-Evaluation CMAS Style

So I am required to do a year end self evaluation for my "day job" with CMAS, and for some reason, despite it being a bit unconventional to do so, I felt like posting it.  I figure some day I may look back at it and be glad I have the record of it.  Or at least have a good laugh.  Which is fine too.

Note: If you read this and wonder how in the world I can possibly stay employed, rest assured I often have the same question.  On the other hand, while teaching doesn't pay that well I have the best "day job" there is.  regardless of compensation.  Period.  I am very, VERY lucky.  Ok.  Here ya' go...

Year End Self Evaluation:

I am, generally, very pleased with this past year.  I find it very difficult to discuss my own work objectively, but I do feel that things went well this year and I was grateful to learn that I am considered “above and beyond” in several of the evaluation rubric’s categories. 

The truth is that I am always looking at how I can improve the CMAS experience for my students.  On some levels it’s because I am not convinced that we are doing everything as well as we can, so I like to think that the program can continue to evolve as I look to further improve the implementation of the curriculum. However, if I am to be totally honest, a great deal of my interest in evolving the program is because I believe that there is no such thing as “status quo.”  It’s either getting better or worse – there are no other options.  To that end, staying the same is, to me at least, just a variation on getting worse.  Plus, I get bored easily.  Which I figure means my students do too so that has to be accounted for.  I also believe very strongly that education is always evolving.  It must, I would say, by definition.  In fact, for all we have changed by creating CMAS I fully predict that some day there will be something that will come along and make CMAS seem as outmoded as many traditional programs do now.  This is a completely different issue than what I am to be covering here, but it is important, I feel, in order to put my comments below in to full perspective.  So…

As proud as I am of this past year, I am not at all convinced that I have found the correct balance between guiding the students  in pursuit of their goals and allowing them the space to explore the possibilities of their musical instincts free from my influence.  It is very easy to talk about “guided independent study,” but it is not so easy to implement with a content area that is as creative and subjective as it is technically and academically demanding.

To be fair, this year I feel I greatly improved the execution of the workshops we do at the end of each project cycle.  I felt that this year was far more productive in allowing the students more effective feedback from both myself and their peers than in the past.  But at some point this year, I began to notice that my original concerns, that date back many years, to the start of what would eventually become CMAS, that if I was too “hands on” in their process the students would simply create material that sounded less like themselves and too much like an extension of me.  Something, I assure you, I would loath as I find that notion very, if I can be so cliché, unmusical.

But something new has come to light in the wake of the evolution of the way the curriculum is being implemented: In numerous, unsolicited conversations, with students across the entire spectrum of the CMAS program, they are apparently looking to me as more of a producer rather than just a teacher.  I have always been hesitant to get too involved in their creative side, beyond giving them the necessary tools, but it appears that they are looking to me to guide them more directly.  Not so much in the idea stage, but once they have the foundation of the material.  It’s a huge complement that I am not certain they themselves fully appreciate, but it none-the-less creates an interesting opportunity to yet again change the paradigm a bit.

I have to admit that the notion of approaching CMAS more as a producer is very appealing – certainly to my ego – but I want to be very careful that it does not lead to a nonproductive (nonmusical – there’s that cliché again. Sorry.) arrogance.  There is a sign when you first walk in to CMAS that says, “Arrogance is the enemy.”  I put it there to remind myself as much as to remind the students.  I have to take some time this summer to completely work out how to fully become an effective producer in the context of CMAS, and likely, like all things CMAS, it will be an evolutionary process; but it seems logical at this point to move forward and see what’s viable.  If it turns out I am wrong (it would not be the first time) in this, then we can take another look at a later date.

I’ll close by stating that as I reread what I have written here, I am not entirely certain this is what was asked for as a year end self reflection, but as I think back on the last year, and all we accomplished in CMAS, this is the one thing that keeps coming to my mind as needing to be addressed for next year more than anything else in terms of my role in it all.  Happy Sumer break!

CMAS and the Apple Distinguished Educator program

I was recently asked to apply to become an Apple Distinguished Educator. Basically the program, which is facilitated by Apple, is a way to connect nationally, and internationally, with like minded educators each of whom are changing the old educational paradigms for the better.  I have no idea if I will be accepted or not, but I very much love the idea behind the ADE program.  My preference for Macs and related products aside, I think the notion of getting teachers like this together - even just helping to put them into contact with each other - is very cool.

On the other hand, funny as this may sound, while I am incredibly proud of what we've created with CMAS, on so many levels getting selected for the ADE program (should that happen) feels a bit like giving credit to the guy who sold you some paper to write your novel on.  Despite all that can be said, and again, I am very proud of all we've done with CMAS - to say nothing of what I feel we can do with it in the future, at the end of the day - and please forgive the ridiculous cliche that this sounds like - it really is the students making it happen.

I've been teaching a long time.  Far longer than I probably want to admit, but in that time I really have learned many things and one of them is that all I can really do is show them that there are opportunities for them to take advantage of.  I cannot make them take advantage, I can only show them what is possible.  They have to actually do the work.  I don't say any of that lightly.  It's just a reality of the gig.    

All that in mind, I put together the required 2 minute video that Apple asks for as part of the selection process.  The end result feels a bit, as I've said in other forums, self-indulgent for my taste, but I think I covered the main points that Apple wants.  Here's a link to the final two minute submission: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nxAL_79aDc

In the end, the really cool thing (beyond some really wonderful comments by some incredible supporters of the program - there were so many more than I could include in this version) is that I found I have the foundation for what I think could be a great, and I think insightful, look into CMAS. I'm hoping to get this longer and, less "me centered" version complete shortly and be able to use it when I do presentations about CMAS and as a way for future/interested students to learn more about what it is we do.

I am also really hopeful to be selected as an ADE so that  I can further my own understanding of what sort of possibilities there are to continue to expand all that CMAS has to offer.  Wish me luck!

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! 

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...

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.

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.