Gaining intermediate speed

[Mark Miller]

I know the topic of gaining speed in general gets talked to death, and for good reason, since speed is the price of entry if you want to take a break on many bluegrass songs and fiddle tunes. I have a strange problem, though, or at least it seems strange to me. I can play clean and with decent tone up to about 100 bpm (or 200 depending on the way you're counting it.) For some songs that I know really well, as long as they involve some slides and repetition of notes (that is, as long as they don't involve a complicated left hand), I can play pretty well at around 125-150 / 250-300. But in between I fall apart. It isn't for lack of trying. I have spent much more time trying to play around 100-115 than I do trying to play really fast. But in between slow and fast, two things happen: one, I find it really hard to get in a groove, my tempo wanders all over the place even with a metronome; and two, somehow at both slow and fast speeds I can keep my grip and my wrist loose, but in between, I tighten up, partly because it feels like I can't get any decent volume otherwise. This is really a right hand problem; problems coordinating the right and left hand don't get any worse in that in-between range. Has this ever happened to anyone else? Does anyone have any advice for how to address it, other than just trying to chip away at the two ends (that is, 105-ish and 120-ish) and try to compress the range that feels so awkward?

[JeffD]

I think I experience something similar, which is that it seems there are two modes of coordinated action. One slow and one fast.

The slow one is the note by note one, where I can pick each note and finger each note, up to a certain speed, and that's it.

The fast one my right hand is in a kind of tremolo mode, and my left hand is doing something familiar, going up or down a scale or some well practiced arpeggio, and I can get the two hands to work together. And there is a bottom end to this speed, below which the coordination just goes away.

If that sounds like what you mean, I have the same thing. And I don't know what to do. I know what I have been trying to do.

The slow range is note by note. I am trying to do a medium speed phrase by phrase. So I break a familiar tune into phrases, and try and make the phrases accurate in sort of bursts that are faster than note by note. I can do this on some tunes, especially hornpipes.


One thing that keeps me sane is that you never ever hear anyone play what they can't manage. In other words you will only ever hear what a person has worked on, perhaps heavily. It sounds like they can do anything fast, but in reality they can only do what they have worked on. Whew!

[Bill McCall]

One thing that keeps me sane is that you never ever hear anyone play what they can't manage. In other words you will only ever hear what a person has worked on, perhaps heavily. It sounds like they can do anything fast, but in reality they can only do what they have worked on. Whew!

I don't buy that, I think some players develop speed independent of repetoire, i.e., they can play anything fast because they've mastered each hand and the coordination of both hands. They may not know every tune ever written, but can certainly improvise at any tempo.

Evan Marshall and Emory Lester meet that standard for me and I'm sure that there are many other players who can handle that.

[Mark Wilson]

I can play pretty well at around 125-150 / 250-300.

I'd play in that range til the problem fades on it's own. That's awesome imo

[AlanN]

I don't buy that, I think some players develop speed independent of repertoire, i.e., they can play anything fast because they've mastered each hand and the coordination of both hands. They may not know every tune ever written, but can certainly improvise at any tempo.

Evan Marshall and Emory Lester meet that standard for me and I'm sure that there are many other players who can handle that.

+1

[Manfred Hacker]

So 250-300 bpm (quarter notes) is intermediate speed?

[AlanN]

Can someone list a few tunes that are commercially available, recorded by well-known artists/bands on easily obtained recordings that are 250-300 bpm? I always have trouble visualizing (aural-izing?) what these speeds sound like.

Say, Big Mon (Steffey) or Dusty Miller (McCoury) off The Young Mando Monsters (VAMP Records). I would hazard that these numbers are way faster than that, no?

[Kevin Stueve]

I just assume when someone says 250-300 bpm they are counting notes they hear and aren't actually counting the beats in a measure. So I assume they are hearing eighth notes and that the song is in 4/4 and divide by two.

[Bill McCall]

Here's a list from http://www.mandolin.myzen.co.uk/speed.html
Song Source Speed bpm

Big Mon Bill Monroe and the Blue Grass Boys 150
It's Mighty Dark To Travel Bill Monroe and the Blue Grass Boys 152
Paddy On The Turnpike Bill Monroe and the Blue Grass Boys 154
Foggy Mountain Breakdown Flatt and Scruggs 160
Dixie Breakdown The Dillards 167
Roll In My Sweet Baby's Arms Flatt and Scruggs 168
Raw Hide Bill Monroe and the Blue Grass Boys 170
Train 45 Jimmy Martin and the Sunny Mountain Boys 170
Tennessee Cut-Up Breakdown Don Reno 172
Missile Ride Don Reno 173
Blue Grass Breakdown Bill Monroe and the Blue Grass Boys 173
Why Did You Wander? Jimmy Gaudreau's Bluegrass Unit (live) 181

[Mark Wilson]

Can someone list a few tunes that are commercially available, recorded by well-known artists/bands on easily obtained recordings that are 250-300 bpm?

Doesn't Big Mon on 'Tony Rice' album bump 285?

whew - never mind. I see Bill posted a few

[Mark Gunter]

I just assume when someone says 250-300 bpm they are counting notes they hear and aren't actually counting the beats in a measure. So I assume they are hearing eighth notes and that the song is in 4/4 and divide by two.

Too true, BPM = beats per minute (metronome), but you set a metronome at BPM and can play against it, for instance in 4/4 alone, as 1 metronome beat per 1/4 note, or one metronome beat only twice per measure (either on downbeat or upbeat), or one metronome beat per eighth note . . . or whatever. So when somebody talks about BPM regarding speed of playing, you have to determine how they are measuring with the metronome. People do not always use the metronome BPM to signify beats per measure in my experience. It can be confusing if you're talking to somebody who thinks differently than you do.

The way I use a metronome, BPM translates to beats per measure, so metronome clicks four times per measure in 4/4 time.

[Kevin Stueve]

Too true, BPM = beats per minute (metronome), but you set a metronome at BPM and can play against it, for instance in 4/4 alone, as 1 metronome beat per 1/4 note, or one metronome beat only twice per measure (either on downbeat or upbeat), or one metronome beat per eighth note . . . or whatever. So when somebody talks about BPM regarding speed of playing, you have to determine how they are measuring with the metronome. People do not always use the metronome BPM to signify beats per measure in my experience. It can be confusing if you're talking to somebody who thinks differently than you do.

The way I use a metronome, BPM translates to beats per measure, so metronome clicks four times per measure in 4/4 time.

For instance I just found a youtube of Tony Rice playing big mon. My count of BPM is about 140ish. Now he is either playing eighth notes in cut time (2/2) or 16th notes in 4/4 . YMMV

[AlanN]

Why Did You Wander? Jimmy Gaudreau's Bluegrass Unit (live) 181

Well, goodness me. I just listened to this and it is F-A-S-T. If that is 181, then this from post 6 above makes little sense, to me:

So 250-300 bpm (quarter notes) is intermediate speed?

[sblock]

Some folks are counting tunes as 2/4 time and some are counting as 4/4 time, and they are assigning different values to eighth noptes as if they were quarter notes. As a result, they're off by exactly a factor of 2, and they come up with tempos of around 250 BPM when they really mean tempos around 125 BPM. Bluegrass is not played at speeds of 250-300 BPM. But it can get up to 170 BPM, or even to 180 BPM. But certainly not 200 BPM, and never 300 BPM.

Note: TablEdit tabs are often written as 4/4 when they are really 2/4 (to save bars and flags), and the tempo setting in the program needs to be doubled to get it to play back at the proper speed. In such tunes, you might set the TablEdit playback speed to 240 BPM when you really need the tune played at 120 BPM. But that does not mean that the tune is at 240 BPM. It's not.

[Mark Gunter]

Some folks are counting tunes as 2/4 time and some are counting as 4/4 time, and they are assigning different values to eighth noptes as if they were quarter notes. As a result, they're off by exactly a factor of 2, and they come up with tempos of around 250 BPM when they really mean tempos around 125 BPM. Bluegrass is not played at speeds of 250-300 BPM. But it can get up to 170 BPM, or even to 180 BPM. But certainly not 200 BPM, and never 300 BPM.

Note: TablEdit tabs are often written as 4/4 when they are really 2/4 (to save bars and flags), and the tempo setting in the program needs to be doubled to get it to play back at the proper speed. In such tunes, you might set the TablEdit playback speed to 240 BPM when you really need the tune played at 120 BPM. But that does not mean that the tune is at 240 BPM. It's not.

I have no trouble understanding that, thanks for that. The communication problem comes in, I think, when people confuse their own personal use of "clicks per minute" on a metronome with "beats per minute" of a time signature in music. I've noticed the anomaly in programs at times, like tabledit and others, but I also encounter it in conversation - as in the posts above.

[Mark Miller]

I'm sorry if I created confusion. That's why I offered both speed counts (125,250). I've seen it referred to both ways. Clearly, the way you guys are counting it, I mean the lower numbers. So what I'm saying is that I can play something simple up to Bluegrass speeds but I struggle at a slower tempo, unless it's real slow.

Jeff, I think we experience the same thing. It is kind of like tremolo mode, which is why I can't handle anything super notey like a fiddle tune at that speed. What I can play at that speed is just really basic unadorned melody for vocal tunes with repeated notes in the gaps. I like your idea of working with short phrases and building phrase by phrase. That might work better than just trying to notch up the metronome bit by bit while playing the whole break. Thanks.

[TheGrayFox]

While i'm only just beginning my mandolin journey, I had this problem on the other instruments I play- guitar, piano, bass- and decided to start writing songs in my "problem range" of tempos. For the last two or three years about 85% of the songs I've written and play live are in those old problem tempos. It has certainly helped me find my way in those tempos, and my playing is much less fickle- I can now play with confidence from about 90 bpm to 160 bpm without a weird gap in the middle. I used to struggle from 105-120, specifically.

[banjoboy]

I've noticed that a lot of tunes/songs actually hover around 120....more so than not.

[sblock]

You may think that you have two "ranges" of speed -- and nothing in between -- but in truth, you do not! What you really mean is that you can play tunes note-for-note (namely, with eighth notes and possibly even shorter ornaments) only in your slower tempo range, but that you can also play a faster tremolo. Tunes that skip/omit eighth notes and rely on the tremolo playing can go faster. But that is not really the same as playing faster, because you are not achieving successive eighth note playing with your right hand (and fingering with your left) at the higher tempo; you are "cheating" the tempo, in a sense.

If you truly had two tempo ranges, then you would be able to play a fiddle tune -- one with lots of successive eighth notes -- at a slower speed, and also be able to play the very same tune, note-for-note, at some much faster tempo, as well. But curiously, not at any intermediate speed. I very much doubt that this is the case! You're very probably playing different styles of tunes in the two tempo ranges, and the tunes that you happen to play in the fast range are not ones being played with successive eighth notes, just with a tremolo and doublestops and the like (like some bluegrass breaks).

The only real way to develop genuine speed is through lots and lots of practice, starting at slower tempos until everything goes comfortably, with no mistakes, and then ratcheting up the speed, just a little bit at a time, without sacrificing any of the notes or losing the beat. A metronome helps a lot with this, but so can other tools, like MP3/MP4 players (like Amazing Slow Downer) that can can be set to play at any tempo. And play with other people, too. But no, you probably don't have "two speed ranges." If you can already play it fast, it's pretty easy to slow it down a little.

[Ivan Kelsall]

IMHO,Bill McCall got it pretty right. With practice 'should' come decent co-ordination between right & left hands. If you don't get that,it doesn't matter if you're playing fast OR slow =- you're out of synch. Also,continually playing a tune should give you the ability to play it without thinking (eventually). Once you can do both,speed comes almost naturally - if you practice playing at speed..

When i was first learning tunes,none of them were particularly fast,but because i liked them,i played them dozens & dozens of times over until i could play them easily without thinking. As i progressed,i did the same things with 'fast (er)' tunes. Mostly the speed wasn't a problem once i got the fingering sorted out. 'Big Mon' was & still is one of my favourites to play.

I really did find that 'speed' crept up on me,but it takes a lot of practice to get there - but we all know that !,
Ivan

[Mark Miller]

You may think that you have two "ranges" of speed -- and nothing in between -- but in truth, you do not! What you really mean is that you can play tunes note-for-note (namely, with eighth notes and possibly even shorter ornaments) only in your slower tempo range, but that you can also play a faster tremolo. Tunes that skip/omit eighth notes and rely on the tremolo playing can go faster. But that is not really the same as playing faster, because you are not achieving successive eighth note playing with your right hand (and fingering with your left) at the higher tempo; you are "cheating" the tempo, in a sense.

Yes and no. You're absolutely right, the style of playing is different. At the faster tempos it's more like, say, Monroe's break on I'm Going Back to Old Kentucky, which except for one crazy-ass beautiful run involves slides, repetition of notes, etc. to keep the left hand relatively simple. Ditto for a lot of Bill's early stuff with Charlie, or, say, David Grisman's opening break on Nine Pound Hammer from Home is Where the Heart is. But there is a speed gap in which I can't even play the simpler stuff. I can play those breaks slow, and I spend time every day with the metronome at 60, 70, 80, etc. playing a few tunes/breaks and trying to get intonation, l/r coordination, relaxation, etc. as good as possible. But, oddly, if I try to play those very same breaks in that in-between range, they fall apart.

I've noticed this for a while, but it has become an issue now because I've started attending a jam, and for the most part tunes are not played at a fast bluegrass clip. When I called Katie Cline last week (which I can play pretty fast) I tried to settle it in to a nice moderate tempo and it just wasn't sharp at all. Also, if I set the metronome at a slow speed and work on a tune and gradually creep up the speed, the breaking point is at about the same tempo--somewhere around 100 bpm--whether it's a fiddle tune or one of those more old-timey melodic breaks. It takes longer to get a fiddle tune worked up to that speed, since they are more complicated, but the ones I have sunk some real time into I can play up to about 100. There is no higher range on the fiddle tunes like there is on simpler stuff, so your point is taken there, but my point is that there is no in-between no matter what style I'm playing. I recognize that this is a defect in my playing, and one that impacts how I participate in jams, and it surprised me to encounter it, which is why I brought it up here. But it is real, and is something like what Jeff describes in his reply above.

[JeffD]

I don't buy that, I think some players develop speed independent of repetoire, i.e., they can play anything fast because they've mastered each hand and the coordination of both hands. They may not know every tune ever written, but can certainly improvise at any tempo..

There is no way we can prove it or disprove it, (which perhaps is why its fun to talk about it), but I firmly believe that nobody plays in public what they are not yet good at, and nobody is good at everything.

Chris Thile or Evan Marshall or Jacob Reuven may be able to get a piece up to speed a lot faster and with less work than most of us, but even they don't play what they can't play, or what they are working on but isn't ready yet. They likely know many many more tunes than I do, but they don't know everything.

I clearly remember when I was a beginner, feeling guilty being called a mandolin player, when the truth was I knew seven tunes I could play on the mandolin, and I had just played them. I realized suddenly the audience could not tell the difference between the two, and so I did not illuminate them.

And I don't think that changes with experience or proficiency, for anyone.

they've mastered each hand and the coordination of both hands.

I think that is very true, and I think many folks do not have that gap I experience in the middle ground of speed.

I am talking generally. Yes, even our heroes are very aware of the benign misleading essential to musicianship, where the audience is not disabused of its belief that they can play anything.

[Mark Gunter]

Jeff, I've come to enjoy your posts (including blog) a great deal, because they're generally just so insightful, intelligent or humorous or a combination of all that. Now, in all good humor, I'll take you to task on this point:

nobody plays in public what they are not yet good at

That statement is demonstrably dis-proven in coffee houses all over the country on any given evening. Hell, I'm a prime example, click my YouTube channel

I am talking generally. Yes, even our heroes are very aware of the benign misleading essential to musicianship, where the audience is not disabused of its belief that they can play anything.

Well put! And you make good points. Then again, while nobody knows everything, I've been amazed by a few people in my lifetime (including a few "unknowns") who are just so talented, gifted, connected to the music and to their instruments, that they can play practically anything they hear with little thought of it.

[Drew Egerton]

At AlanN's suggestion, I'm working on learning Dawg's tune Cedar Hill. The Tabledit file has it at 235 I think. I started around 125 and bumped it up 10 or 15 at a time as I got more familiar with the melody.

I don't usually pay as much attention to the speeds as I should I guess. If I can play it fast enough to make the banjo player work hard, that's usually plenty.

[Bill McCall]

I think to learn to play fast generally, not fast specifically on one piece, its more efficient to practice the 3 basic strokes, du on one string, down/up on lower adjacent string, and du on upper adjacent string. In addition there are many fiddle exercises designed to improve dexterity on the left hand, which focus on short note combinations on one string utilizing all fingers.

This exercise is distinctly different than learning one repertoire piece to play fast, which may not be easily transferable to any other piece.

Of course this is more tedious than learning to play something melodic at speed, but YMMV.