M Database Inspector (cheetah)
|Not logged in. Login|
|Sat, May 12 2007||100||Stanley Jordan||
In his Master Sessions Video, Stanly Jordan talks about
how mistakes and stress correlate,
and if you make mistakes when you practice,
usually caused by stress, then the natural stress
later to occur when on stage or recording,
will make the same mistake repeat on stage.
The solution, he says,
is simply not to make mistakes when praticing.
This is easy to achieve, he continues,
all it takes is patience:
never play any faster than the speed
where you are sure you will
not make a mistake.
This system works of course really well.
I am nevertheless trying to improve upon
Stanly Jordan's thoughts and this system:
The stress-mistake correlation is rather a simple
Pavlovian response of muscle memory systems.
When you practice and make a mistake,
there is always a reason in the brain to have
caused it to direct the fingers to make this exact mistake.
Stanley Jordan noticed, that you only make mistakes
when stress comes along,
like when the phone rings, or the cat suddenly snarls,
or the music you are practicing with - just paced up a bit -, too fast for your fingers.
You are practicing, and you have already made that
particular mistake, representing a specific piece of noise
that you heard when you first made it,
which you will identify if you ever hear it again,
and you will hear it again, if you are stressed again,
all else also being the same,
so, don't make the mistakes when you practice
and you will not be able to repeat them when you are later stressed, he concludes.
But if you can hear the same mistake the second time,
not having followed Stanly Jordan's instructions to avoid it,
it means, from Stanly Jordan's accord of years of experience,
that it takes only one time, not two, for the mistake to occur,
for our muscle memory systems to record this mistake
with accuracy and be able to repeat it when conditions
And this recording,
Stanly Jordan does not suggest how to prevent in full.
Mistake will continue to occur forever,
much less thanks to Stanly Jordan,
and hopefully even a wee bit less with this.
While Stanly Jordan points out the correlation
between mistake and stress,
and despite his otherwise usual infinite attention to detail,
in this case he is missing, I beleive,
some very improtant relevant details:
The individual mistake which occurs at a particular
timepoint in the music,
occurs with stress occuring at that same point in time,
and the timing of the surrounding split seconds
are all that is relevant.
You are not generally stressed for appearing on stage
and will overall make more mistakes.
Muscle memory records this particular
exact mistake (as I claim, with a single occurance),
as a result of the stressoccuring,
which can not possibly be unrelated to the content of the music itself.
This is why the stress finds its way to occur
at that particular instant in time in the music.
It is only when you recorded the mistake more
times than the non-mistake that the the misake will occur without stress.
This will happen if you are stubborn to repeat a mistake 'until you get it right'. You never will.
To quote Stanely Jordan: slow down until you always
get it correct,
and speed back up only as fast as you can always keep it correct, until you get it right.
But Freud tell us, that when your are stressed
is when your subconcious takes over,
which is why you make mistakes only
when you are stressed.
He is not wrong of course, and none of this
contradicts any of the above.
But it tells us something new and useful:
Who says that if the subconcious takes over
bad things will happen?
Maybe with some understanding, we can harness it?
After all, this is what psychologists have been
doing since Freud anyway,
and musicians since the first time caveman shot his arrow
from inside the hollow echoy skeleton of a mamooth,
or something like that.
Stress, first and formost, causes the quick and agile
subconcious systems to act,
faster than what it would take a more controlled operation.
Freud calls this Pavlovian response, when extreme: a trauma.
Meaning to say:
you will automatically and uncontrollably forever be stressed,
without any logical reason,
by that which happened to have occured in the time vicinity
of the traumatic event.
I must add that if the traumatic event itself is very short
and can be stamped with a single timestamp,
then the potential variety of correleted surrounding events
for the systems to record is very small.
But our subconciousness is partly many millions of years
old and partly a mere two million years in early
stages of development.
It encompasses many primitive and ancient systems, and
this happens to be one of them.
The way our subconciousness knows to tell degrees of
traumatic events apart is simple: it doesn't.
it responds traumatically, or Pavlovianly,
to the event, to the dgree of its illtemper.
Much like Staley Jordan says Staccato and Legatto are
merely digital words in the language to describe
two randomly selected numbers from a scale of one to ten
in a convenient but ineffetive method -
in my view -
traume, a simple pavovian response and the stress-mistake
are dgrees of similar behaviour of similar systems
in our brain.
The new trick I am trying is based on
harnessing denial as a tool.
I am trying reverse psychology on my muscle memory
I am trying to train myself so that
whenever I make a mistake,
I immidiately stop everything, as if in panic,
and follow this rule as religiously as practical,
especially if I was recording until a second ago.
I am trying to make my subconciousness deny the mistake
ever occured, with a long thought process to match
and fight the muscle memory recording sequence,
by mimicing extra stressthe second I noticed
the mistake had occured.
From the elevated excitement from the beafed up evnt of the mistake, I expect to help eliminate, at least to a dgree,
the recording of the mistake.
It is also hard for such a mistake to be recorded in muscle
memory because there is no correlation sequence.
If there is absolutely no note in history that has ever
been recorded by muscle memory to follow the mistaken note,
then the mistake itself is at the far end of this muscle
memory sequence and its recorded strength must be very weak.
Since Stanly Jordan's system already insures
that if I combine the two systems it is statistically
improbable to make the same mistake twice,
and as the first and only recording is very weak,
it is less likely that such a mistake,
having been more lighly recorded,
will reoccur on stage
So whats the big deal,
all musician stop playing and start over when
they make mistakes almost all the time.
The difference is in the detail.
Almost is simply not nearly good enough.
If you practice casually without paying much
attention to these details, and set some other standards,
you might make, according to your set standards,
say 10 mistakes an hour on average,
and for nine of them you will stop and start over,
just like I am describing here.
You are not doing a 90% job at all.
You are merly recording about a mistake an hour
in your muscle memoey systems,
and having recorded this information over years,
by now your entire musical arrangment is woven
with recorded mistakes hoping for the stressful
event to appear in their lucky recorded moment in time,
or otherwise a competitor mistake will sprout and win instead.
I can't really say this is a discovry.
My habbits of how to react to mistakes
are a subject I have been toying with for some time now,
and every time I put on Stanly Jordan's master video
again I make sure I am by the computer when the part
where he talks about the stress-mistake correltion comes
on, trying to dig yet another minute detail from his elaborate description of vast experience.
This is also why it is hard for me to measure or report
how well this theory at all works.
This is how I try my best to practice most of the time,
with a very strong conviction it betters my learning speed.
I believe by now I have enough experiemnts to support this conviction.
|Sat, Feb 03 2007||100||Why, whatever for||
Setting survival as our goal is primary in our psycological makeup.
Everything alive, plants included, has achieved this goal,
despite enourmouse hardships and extreme death rates.
The reason it survived is because its genes happen to fit
the goal it was trying to achieve, which is to be slightly
better than the rest of his own kind in close proximity
where these minute differences are what counts.
From the perspective of evolution, spanning over many
generations of perfection accomplished via high death rates,
there is no differencebetween cause and effect,
nor between the reason for which something has happened,
as juxtaposed with a goal, for which, it should happen.
If it was raining yesterday, for example, then
from the perspective of the plant that came to life,
the rain was planned for him,
because billions of years it took to develop these
genes of his so that when this rain comes,
from the seed, there will be life.
But if the rain did not come,
then it was also planned by evolution for billions of years, because in the desert land that will be left dry,
there will be a cactus saying the same thing.
|Sun, Jun 04 2006||200||Humor Me||
Humor is just a descendant concept of a train of thought saying:
Look at reality your own way.
Some of its co-decedents are the metaphor, the fable and success.
If you can take a train of thought and look at it a different way,
and can put the train back on the tracks of thought, you get fiction.
|Wed, May 24 2006||100||Video Processing - codecs||
ok, (after our conversation on the phone)
time for a quick lecture,
mostly for a shopping list, not to shop, but
for sequence of operations.
By now you know that are are codecs, emphasis on the the s,
as in plural. over time many compression systems were
invented and codecs are in fact small (relativly) libratries
of code (as in source code, libraries, everything you know of software)
and programs like winamp, media player and virtualdub must have the software (the codecs)
installed on the computer in order to display videos, and as each movie
might have a different codec, a diffrent codec might need to be there.
This is why you can watch downloaded movies and do everything for a while, and suddnely
discover that a certain movie doesn't work, all you see is black, or
you see it perfectly, only without sound, as sound codecs are separate.
Mp3 if you remember my verbiage, is a name of a codec, its short for Mpeg Layer three
in your travels you will see the word mpeg appearing many different
ways and may even discover its a video descendant of jpeg, an older compression
scheme for pictures, and mpeg4 which like divx handles video.
Just to make things complicated, bill gates wanted, at some point in ancient past of a few
years ago to control this market and possessing code to a codec he will make the world use
he can charge for software using this codec, and so if a movie on the Internet has
this codec, you can only view it in media player and everybody thinks "oh, must be a better program" it plays what everybody else doesn't" hence the control on the marketing side.
neat trick, but the Internet crowd has a collective brain of their own, and it didn't quite work,
the download community is mostly on a coo with codecs that don't work everywhere, and needless
to say with codecs that are not distributed for free.
as with all history of computer software, the better one survives, the rest become extict (Darwin)
and by now divx is dominant while most others are on their way to extinction, except,
that history of free software is long enough by now to know that some basics of evolution
normally unnoticed by the biologists,
are very dominant in how programs spread in the community.
Once something is made good enough and has established fitness to survive reaching dominance, such as dinosaurs and humans (Darwin would laugh at me and say,
comparing 65,000,000 years with 100,000 is simply not scientific to a point of childishness)
Divx is made a standard by habit of use,
and will not move or change to the better,
so better things might
not be able to wipe standards easily from the past,
this is the case with Philips and the digital recording, the silly cda audio files on a cd,
the http protocol, countless other examples in the history of standards in computer software,
and countless examples in Nature, like the tale bone you are still carrying
because you are too hung up on your mother, who in ancient times was a fish,
and the tail was the standard means of transportation at the time.
All in all its like this, divx is a standard still in the process of making all the others extinct,
and there are now countless codecs going around still,
and while ogg theora is probably
much better, it is still in development, and is not likely to survive mostly because
divx is a standard by now.
there are countless devices such as your LG that tomorrow
will read theora, maybe, but now they don't, and that is what really counts.
ok, to practice:
goal is divx in video and mp3 in audio, these are the de-facto stadards
for which it is easy to find content, i.e. movies, which in the end of day is what we really care about.
when you do the search, in emule you want to be concious of this goal.
you don't really want to start searching for codecs after a movie arrived after 2 months downloading.
this doesn't mean you can control it, stastistics do, we just go with the flow,
but the naming conventions of files on emule often have the codec written in (parenth..)
as part of the name of the file.