Saying "No" (was Convention is focused)

[David Andersen]

>Ed wrote:
>> there should be some classes restricted to "RPT-only".
>
>Alright, I'll bite...
>
>I see the point about wanting higher level classes, but I don't think
>restricting to RPT's would solve that problem. What about less experienced
>RPT's asking beginner's questions? It could happen.
>
>I think the issue is in how the class is presented. If the instructor
>stops for every question, then the level will get brought down. I think
>THAT'S where the saying "no" should happen. Not at the door to the class.
>
>I attended Jim Coleman's "Advanced Aural Tuning", one of only seven
>courses in Chicago marked "Advanced". And it was. Much of it went by me,
>but it was wonderful to see one of the greats doing his stuff. And there
>were plenty of little details I did catch that I can use right now. The
>point is that Jim didn't need to restrict his class to RPT's to keep it on
>track. He just kept the class at a pretty high level. I'm sure other
>Associates like me were there absorbing as much as possible, and not
>bringing down the level of the class.
>
>Charles Neuman


Hiya kids, hiya, hiya..........

I just subscribed to this Chat, and what to my wondering eyes did appear 
but 200 emails (!!!)---but no reindeer.

So....I've looked at a portion of the Archives, and I have a question.  
Why is there so little discussion about tuning, which is for me, the most 
fun part of the work, and the vast majority of what I do on a daily 
basis? Tuning is such an amazingly deep craft; I'd love to get other 
high-level professionals'  feedback on their systems, stretches, unison 
secrets and protocols----all that stuff....and I'm thinking about 
offering a class called  "the Pleasure of Aural Tuning:  using the body 
as a feedback loop..."
Looking forward to chatting.......
David Andersen
Malibu, CA
(lapsed member of PTG)