DRUMMER CAFE

Recently I've been reading a lot of stuff off Tiger Bill Meligari's website and he is absoultly adament that the Gladstone technique is the one true secret to developing great chops.

I must say a lot of what he says makes perfecrt sense, less tension and effort should equate more speed and control around the kit.

However I am currently being taught the Moeller technique and my teacher assures me that this is the best way, I'm still unsure.

Is it possible to use both??

There are differences between the two techniques and there is nothing wrong with being exposed to and learning both of them. Tiger, I would bet, knows and uses both techniques.

The Gladstone technique(s) can be applied anytime while the Moeller technique is more limited in its application.

I think the confusion lies in that people think the Moeller technique is only for accents.

It's about Up, Down, Full and Tap strokes. Yes, you use it when you need to play accents ... but that's not all it is.

From the time that I've spent with Jim Chapin, I believe he says that Gladstone and Moeller are the same approaches. And if memory serves, Gladstone studied with Moeller.

Unless someone can give real specific differences, I think Gladstone vs. Moeller is just semantics and a way to divide rather than unite. Perhaps people are not narrowing the definition of the Moeller technique so they can put more lables to other aspects of playing technique. I've been using the Moeller/Gladstone technique since the early 80's ... and there was never this narrow of a definition for it. Perhaps times have changed ... but unless there's some real clarity, I don't see the point to all of the discussion.

I'm sure Moeller had a unified overall approach to teaching and playing drums, but as it has come to be understood, the Moeller technique generally describes the whipping motion as it's applied to accents.  I don't have the book in front of me, but I believe Dom Famularo clearly describes the various techniques in It's Your Move'.  To my recollection he separates the Free Stroke (or Gladstone) from Moeller.  Morello in his Video #1 also describes and demonstrates the Free Stroke approach and then describes and demonstrates the Moeller technique and it's usefullness in accenting.  Later he makes a little joke saying you wouldn't uses the Moeller technique for consecutive accents (demonstrating the flapping arms) unless you wanted to levitate.  In Danny Gottlieb's Video #1 he also demonstrates the Free Stroke concept and later plays some accented triplets stating that for THESE he is utilizing the Moeller technique.  Steve Smith also demonstrates Moeller as a separate technique.  It's pretty clear that all of these guys are making clear distinctions of where and when to apply the Moeller technique.  They are obviously thinking of Moeller in a very specific way, I.e. the whipping motion.      

I'm sure each of the 'Big Three' (Moeller, Stone,  and Gladstone) had a unified technique, but with Moeller in particular we have come to focus on the whipping motion as the defining feature.  For better or worse, I don't think anyone thinks of using  the Moeller technique on non-accented types of patterns.  I think even Chapin talks about the specicifity of the Moeller technique in his video.  

I don't see how any of this can be construed as trying to drive a wedge between various approaches and techniques.  There is nothing divisive in being aware of the mechanics and functionality of various techniques and approaches.    

BTW, to my knowledge Gladstone never studied or associated with Moeller.

You're a new member and haven't been here through the years of discussion on this topic. I have no problem learning new things; I'm an educator and build my entire life on learning and teaching.

In the past ... arguments have risen over semantics, terms, definitions, etc. Early in this thread, individuals said there were differences but made no attempt to disclose the specifics. To me, if you say there's a difference ... you should be able to back it up with some facts so we all can learn and understand these differences (which funkster has now done). I'm just not into having people post opinions without some knowledge or fact to back it up. Not trying to be a jerk about it ... I just want clarity ... and not just leave the discussion with an attitude like "there's a difference, trust me".

I've hung out with Chapin on server ocassions ... and it seems that the lines that are being drawn are merely to clarify the various aspects for educational purposes. For a long, long time Chapin just referred it all to Moeller technique ... and that is how I teach it.

Thank you for shedding some light on the subject.  

Free bounce is free bounce. Are you (or Dom) saying that "free bounce" is now called Gladstone technique? To me,  it makes no sense to give it another term when "free bounce" is perfectly descriptive ... and a term that I've used and known.

I've never considered "free bounce" to be Moeller or Gladstone; free bounce is just free bounce.

The early concept with Moeller was the use of the whipping, but also the various stroke types (ie. Up, Down, Tap, Full). This allowed for great speed and less work because you were using the natural rebound of the stick to get where you needed to go for the next stroke. It has many more uses besides the ever popular "whipping" action for accented triplets.

Actually Dom doesn't mention anywhere in his book about a "Gladstone" technique.  I only remember hearing about it at Tiger Bills website.  

Reading Tiger Bill's more in depth explanation of the Gladstone technique in his "Monster Chops" lessons, I'm not really able to find much of a distinction between it (Gladstone) and Moeller.  So I would not say that freestroke or free bounce are the same thing as the Gladstone technique.  If your interested on Tiger Bills take of the "Gladstone" method take a look at the link.
http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp-q=gladstone&sp-a=sp1001c86c&sp-f=iso-8859-1

 

If that is the case ... then like I originally said ... Gladstone and Moeller are essentially the same thing, but some individuals have narrowed the terms to mean particular aspects. Obviously, I have no problem with it if it's embraced and accepted by the drumming community. But the opening thread asked about being able to use Gladstone and Moeller at the same time, as though they were two very different techniques. If they are, I want to know/learn the differences.

So back to my original question ... if "free bounce" is not Gladstone, then what is the distinct differences between Gladstone and Moeller techniques that would require one to give two different labels, if in fact Moeller and Gladstone are essentially not the same approach? If Moeller "has come to be understood" as being "the whipping motion as it's applied to accents" ... what is the Gladstone technique?

If Gladstone and Moeller are different enough that they need their own labels, then I would think there's got to be a criteria or definition for the term. I still believe the Moeller is far broader of a technique than the "whipping motion" ... but if the definition of Moeller is now narrowed to only mean this, and "free bounce" isn't Gladstone (which I never thought it was) ... then what is Gladstone technique?

If the Gladstone IS the free bounce technique, then sure, it's a different thing than Moeller. I've just never heard free bounce referred to as Gladstone. I've always heard of Gladstone and Moeller labels being used interchangeably ... so that's part of the confusion (at least on my part).

Anyone?

Probably the easiest thing to do is go to the Vic Firth website and watch the demonstrations of the Free Stroke by Dom Famularo and the Moeller Stroke by Chapin.  If you feel they are the same technique that's OK with me.  

http://www.vicfirth.com/education/drumset/domfamularo.html

BTW, Tiger Bill equates the Gladstone technique to the 'Free Stroke':



Morello and Famularo may also attribute the Free Stroke to G.L. Stone, but it also seems to be commonly attributed to Gladstone (see Tiger Bill).  

For all I know, Gladstone may have also used an accent technique similar to Moeller (most good drummers would probably stumble on it eventually), but I have no documentation of this, and the whipping motion is universally referred to as Moeller (not Gladstone).  Therefore for the purpose of discussion, I refer to the Moeller technique as the whipping motion, and the Gladstone technique as the Free Stroke.  That doesn't mean that they are two techniques in opposition to one another.   They should both be integrated into a unified technique and utilized in harmony, but for the sake of clarity they can be discussed and practiced individually.   If you choose a different terminology that's cool, but I will say that if someone talks to you about the Moeller technique they'll be talking about the whipping motion and not the Free Stroke.   For the sake of communication it's nice if everyone has a concept of common terminology and techniques.  

OK

OK.  Hopefully this will be my last post on the subject.  Although Gladstone, Stone and Moeller all had their own approaches to technique they undoubtedly shared many concepts.  Nonetheless, in today's world we've come to equate the Free Stroke with Gladstone and/or Stone, and the whipping motion with Moeller.

I'll quote Dom Famularo's book 'It's Your Move', because he has studied with BOTH Morello (I.e. Gladstone/Stone/Free Stroke)and Chapin (Moeller).  

On page 10 of his book, refering to the Free Stroke he states:

Dom then goes on for about 5-6 pages describing the Free Stroke and exercises to develop it.  If you want a complete description of the Free Stroke (aka Gladstone or Stone) read the lengthy description in Dom's book, refer to the Vic Firth website for Dom's video clips, and read Tiger Bill's explanation of the Free Stroke/Gladstone in his 3 part series 'Building Monster Chops'.

Now on page 16 of Dom's book explaining the Moeller stroke he states:

Dom gives a very clear synopsis of the Free Stroke and attributes it's formal origins to Gladstone and Stone.  He then gives a good overview of the Moeller Stroke, explaining it as the whipping motion and defining it as a separate technique from the Free Stroke, but one which builds on the concepts learned in the Free Stroke (aka Gladstone/Stone).  He clearly separates the two concepts and does NOT equate the Free Stroke (aka Gladstone/Stone) with the Moeller technique although he says Moeller builds on the Free Stroke.    

I really can't do much better than this explanation.  Dom's terminology and basic explanations are good enough for me.  They also coincide and confirm the info I've gleaned from Chapin, Tiger Bill, Morello, Gottlieb and others.  If people choose to use a different terminology that's fine with me, but I think the explanations provided here are consistent with current concepts and definitions.   If someone refers to the Gladstone technique they are most likely refering to the Free Stroke.  If someone refrers to the Moeller technique, they are most likely refering to the whipping motion.   That about sums it up.  
 

 

Funkster ... thank you for the excellent and thorough response; I've learned something new today! Can't believe I don't have Dom's book, especially since I used to sell it for him on his website!  

Wow, it is so refreshing to see a thread like this.  No ego getting in the way and the true sharing of information, without a lot of BS to get in the ay.  Thanks Bart and Funkster (among others) for all the great information shared here.

From what I have seen the 'Gladstone' technique uses the natural motion of the stick by just simply throwing it at the drum without tension in the wrist hands and fingers and letting the rebound bring the stick back up. 3 different heights for different for different volumes and that's more or less it.

Now as I have been taught Moeller the downstroke part involves stopping the stick immediately after striking the drum by squeezing the fingers and then using a wrist motion (up stroke) in preparation for the next stroke.  Tiger Bill it seems is against this principle or stopping the stick against the will of the natural motion and then to waste energy in using a separate motion to bring the stick back up.

When I play the classic 4-4 grove (only a beginner)I'm told to use up, tap and down strokes on the height hat and to me this does seem like extra work compared to just throwing the stick to the drum letting it naturally rebound.

However Moeller sounds really cool for rudiments around the kit for different dynamic levels and so I think it is a case of different tools for different jobs as Mr. Famularo would say, cest la ve.