The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 48 of 48
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    All of these questions are answered in Leavitt's Modern Method For Guitar and Goodrick's The Advancing Guitarist.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    I have Leavitt's book. I will pull it out (after 5 years) and read his thoughts.

    Heck, I might even say to heck with it and get that "Advancing Guitarist" book that so many rave about. But then I might not have anymore questions for this forum!

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    No by "burning" I meant playing the fastest/busiest/notes-per-second passages. Generally speaking that is antithetical with shifting, or at least big shifting.
    Not really, see the four-note-per-string fingerings:


  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by docbop
    No, but you keep doing what your "professional pedagogues" tell you and I'll continue down my path of observations and investigations. Enjoy.
    Sure man. Of course you don't know what I'm doing but that's OK too. Heck you brought up Diorio and Rogers, both college teachers right?

    I think we're splitting hairs anyway. Fingerings are a means to an end, but that still doesn't negate the original advice I offered.

    I would also say - play some of Wes' solos and play them like he did (not much pinky use, and moving all around with a lot of first finger guiding) That's eye opening. But don't stop with Wes.

    10-4, over and out.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ronjazz
    All of these questions are answered in Leavitt's Modern Method For Guitar and Goodrick's The Advancing Guitarist.
    Yes, and thanks for being so succinct. The advice I was offering seems to be very consistent with pages 27-29 of The Advancing Guitarist. Great book that cuts through a lot of fog.

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    I broke down and ordered the book.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Fidelcaster
    Not really, see the four-note-per-string fingerings:


    Nooooooo.

    That's a nice video with great advice and demonstration, and as he said it was "pretty quick".

    But no "burnin" was done there...

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    Since when is a demo of various approaches supposed to be a performance? Are you saying that he can't or doesn't burn when performing? Some might disagree.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    No not really. This isn't "to the man".

    Rather, this is a very minor point that I'm making (or at least trying to make ), and I think not worthy of much debate, with all due respect.

    I'm simply saying the following:
    1. We're all human
    2. Physics is non-negotiable
    3. And so it follows that when ANY player is playing at his/her maximum speed (notes against time) that minimal movement of the fretting hand (beyond an "area" of roughly 5-7 frets) is the most facilitative of success. And further, that with every unnecessary move outside of that, the probability of mistakes being made increases dramatically.

    I believe that I can link to examples just for the sake of discussion, but I think that it's already understood...

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    I'm not sure if I understand what is meant by minimal movement of the fretting hand. Very fast playing can be completely non positional - the whole Gypsy Jazz thing comes to mind for instance. Lots of diagonal and along the neck movement.

    Of course, that stuff is carefully managed through fingerings with small position shifts, so maybe that's what you mean.

    Positional playing can slow you down for reasons of right hand physics, so to speak, depending on how you pick.

    Seeing Julian Lage play a few weeks back really cemented the fact that the neck really isn't that big spacially.. We just think it is... He has total command of the instrument....

    Also I see 4 notes a string as less a practical fingering for actual playing, and more a way of learning the neck in a different way. For instance Holdsworth's lines AFAIK were rarely straight scales and rarely as mobile positionally as the 4-notes thing.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    No not really. This isn't "to the man".

    Rather, this is a very minor point that I'm making (or at least trying to make ), and I think not worthy of much debate, with all due respect.

    I'm simply saying the following:
    1. We're all human
    2. Physics is non-negotiable
    3. And so it follows that when ANY player is playing at his/her maximum speed (notes against time) that minimal movement of the fretting hand (beyond an "area" of roughly 5-7 frets) is the most facilitative of success. And further, that with every unnecessary move outside of that, the probability of mistakes being made increases dramatically.

    I believe that I can link to examples just for the sake of discussion, but I think that it's already understood...
    I like Mick Goodrick's metaphor 'electric ice skating rink' a lot.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I'm not sure if I understand what is meant by minimal movement of the fretting hand. Very fast playing can be completely non positional - the whole Gypsy Jazz thing comes to mind for instance. Lots of diagonal and along the neck movement.

    Of course, that stuff is carefully managed through fingerings with small position shifts, so maybe that's what you mean.

    Positional playing can slow you down for reasons of right hand physics, so to speak, depending on how you pick.

    Seeing Julian Lage play a few weeks back really cemented the fact that the neck really isn't that big spacially.. We just think it is... He has total command of the instrument....

    Also I see 4 notes a string as less a practical fingering for actual playing, and more a way of learning the neck in a different way. For instance Holdsworth's lines AFAIK were rarely straight scales and rarely as mobile positionally as the 4-notes thing.
    I did a cursory google of "6 fret stretches on the guitar" and strangely enough, found NOTHING from this website, but lots from folk and classical guitar websites.

    One guy was dumbfounded how to be play a three note Tarrega piece which goes from the Open E on the 1st string to the G to the B on the 7th fret. He thought it was a 7 fret stretch.

    His problem, of course, was that he was thinking strictly positionally from the nut. The correct answer is that it's a 4 fret stretch from 3rd position.

    Anytime I see chords with long stretches, I invoke the Joe Pass Rule (Joe declared, "if it's too hard, I ain't playing it").

    Like a Melodic minor *shell voicing*. the R-b3-M7 is doable, even though it's 5 frets coverage. the b3-M7-R is also doable even though it's a 5 fret stretch. the M7-R-b3? Nope nope nope.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by NSJ
    I did a cursory google of "6 fret stretches on the guitar" and strangely enough, found NOTHING from this website, but lots from folk and classical guitar websites.

    One guy was dumbfounded how to be play a three note Tarrega piece which goes from the Open E on the 1st string to the G to the B on the 7th fret. He thought it was a 7 fret stretch.

    His problem, of course, was that he was thinking strictly positionally from the nut. The correct answer is that it's a 4 fret stretch from 3rd position.

    Anytime I see chords with long stretches, I invoke the Joe Pass Rule (Joe declared, "if it's too hard, I ain't playing it").

    Like a Melodic minor *shell voicing*. the R-b3-M7 is doable, even though it's 5 frets coverage. the b3-M7-R is also doable even though it's a 5 fret stretch. the M7-R-b3? Nope nope nope.
    Well I agree. It's perfectly possible to play ripping arpeggios with minimal stretches. As a teenage rock guitar nerd I remember being dumbfounded how then Megadeth guitar player Marty Friedman was able to handle such crazy stretches and execute all those dazzling arpeggio lines (Marty is such a linear jazz-ish player unlike many of the shred guys, not super speedy like some of them, it's true, but very agile).

    The answer was by and large, he didn't - he primarily shifts to execute these lines, rather like our friends Django, Joe and Wes (in fact pick grip aside, his right hand is very similar mechanically as well to those players.)

    Anyway here are my thoughts on arps, FWIW. I did this a while back:



    Anyway, we were talking about scales to be fair.

    In terms of scales I often employ 4-notes a string fingerings but these are often added note scales and chromatic runs. In this case I will often shift positions over the course of a line.
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-26-2017 at 10:58 AM.

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by AlsoRan
    A person new to the forum recently asked about Harmonic Minor fingerings. He got me thinking about the subject of fingerings. I have seen several fingerings for various scales, including those from Jimmy Bruno, the CAGED Musician Institute, Richie Zellon's course, and Reg's fingerings (which several have raved about).

    How do you know which one to choose for a given scale and how do you know when a certain position is truly mastered/internalized.

    I was kind of thinking that you choose a fingering pattern for a scale, get it under your fingers, and then later on you will have them internalized and will make natural changes to fit your style.

    What do you think about this subject. It is many-faceted and I understand that fingerings can actually drive a person's note choices or even discourage.
    \

    I'm still struggling, in a way, with this issue. Here are some thoughts.

    I don't see much value in running scales in order, e.g. C D E F etc. That won't sound great when you're soloing. But, that said, you do need to know the notes that apply to a given chord/progression to avoid clams. So, the usual way of getting there is practicing scales.

    For me, it was a mixed blessing. I ended up knowing some patterns very well. I tend to use them thoughtlessly because they're so easy, but it isn't great music.

    So, my thought is that a scale pattern is only useful if you can make music with it -- meaning you can start on any note in the scale and find your way to any other to make melody. And, it also seems to me that it would be good to be able to start on any finger, since you have to make a smooth transition from whatever came before -- which can be almost anything.

    I couldn't achieve that using the usual practice of scale patterns. So, I abandoned the approach and started drilling myself on knowing the notes in all the scales I use in all keys. That's a lot of work, but it seemed more reachable than trying to do it by patterns.

    Of course, I'm aware that there are truly great players who didn't do it the way I'm trying to do it.

    Then, speaking out of the other side of my mouth, I have found that arpeggio patterns are helpful. I guess that's because I'd rather play a G7 arp from a pattern, in order, than a G mixolydian. I just prefer the way it sounds. So, I practiced seventh arps in 4 positions and I use all of them, including being able to alter 9ths on the fly (and I continue to work on 5ths).

    I also try to know the notes in the chords I use and find them that way.

    My approach works nicely if the tempo isn't too fast. At fast tempos, where other players can run practiced lines, I don't have that sort of thing worked out (well, I have a few) so it's harder. But, I'm willing to make the compromise because, for the most part, I don't like a lot of notes. But, there are times when I get frustrated by the limitation.

    Anyway, I offer this as another approach. In this approach, you know a scale when you know where all the notes are in it and you can get from one to another, starting anywhere and on any finger. If you know the neck, you can probably already do this on C Ionian (all white keys). The task is to do it on all the scales you use.

    And, of course, even when you completely master this approach, you still have to forget about it when you're soloing over a tune you know. But, if you have to solo while reading a chart you've never seen before with weird harmony, this approach can help you avoid clams.

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by AlsoRan
    How do you know which one to choose for a given scale and how do you know when a certain position is truly mastered/internalized.
    The first question -- I choose locations based on a) how I want it to sound and b) facility of playing. It's great when the two mesh, and it's also great when they don't. It's great when both location and internalisation mesh because it's much easier for me to fit the scalar run into a song melodically, and it's great when they don't because then I've found a place where I need to devote practice.

    The second -- when do you know it's internalized? When you use it as it sounds right over the changes underneath without thinking "I'm using the xylophone minor in G". You'll gravitate to this or that fingering because what you hear in your mind's ear is understood by your fingers without you having to impose conscious thought upon the process.

    Quote Originally Posted by AlsoRan
    I was kind of thinking that you choose a fingering pattern for a scale, get it under your fingers, and then later on you will have them internalized and will make natural changes to fit your style.

    What do you think about this subject. It is many-faceted and I understand that fingerings can actually drive a person's note choices or even discourage.
    As an also-ran shredder, I certainly beat the hell out of scales in practice time, but over the years, I've found it more useful to listen to my mind's ear and identify specific intervals I'd like to accentuate. Harmonic minor is one which is easy for me to identify mentally, and because I spent enough time playing metal in my earlier years, I know it enough up and down the 'board. And I suppose that speaks to your point about internalization. As I left metal behind and took up blues on flattop acoustic, I found that HM was useful there too for minor blues -- think "St James's Infirmary" -- and obviously that sort of slow minor blues is not going to accept fast scalar runs, but using what I knew already, it was easier to slow things down and use the scale's built-in voice leading to advantage.

    And yes, I think mixing chromaticism in there, particularly for voice-leading, is very useful. Let the chords tell you what they want to hear.
    Last edited by Thumpalumpacus; 07-26-2017 at 11:37 PM.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    I don't know the answer to your questions--it's something I am trying to work out as well--but I feel like one could spend a ton of time just shedding tunes in one position, learning how to access all the chord tones for all the usual harmonic suspects: the ii, the iii and vi, the V, etc.

    I've been organizing things in large part how Richie Zellon starts out: fingerings named for their relationship to the tonic. So you have your pattern 1 starting on sixth string root of the major key, pattern 2 starts on the second interval with the middle finger, etc. It's not the only way of course.

    I also have applied what I've learned to organizing things around the dominant per Barry Harris: learning the "important" triads and arpeggios of the 1, 3, 5, 7 *relative to the dominant*. This approach is nice because it sort of leads you to a lot of sounds that you'll actually hear in bebop.

    Over time, my hope is that the sounds start to matter more than the positions and I'll eventually be able to think a whole lot less and rely on my ear alone.
    Last edited by wzpgsr; 07-27-2017 at 11:54 PM.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    It's a paradox innit? To truly play freely and by ear, you spend a lot of time working through scales

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    It's a paradox innit? To truly play freely and by ear, you spend a lot of time working through scales
    Another paradox: if you spend all your time working through scales you'll never make music. If I could go back in time I'd be a little less smug about my prowess over two position minor pentatonics!

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wzpgsr
    Another paradox: if you spend all your time working through scales you'll never make music. If I could go back in time I'd be a little less smug about my prowess over two position minor pentatonics!
    Solution to that - do some gigs. Only people who don't play gigs have this problem.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Solution to that - do some gigs. Only people who don't play gigs have this problem.

    Or recitals. (A developing player's version of a gig).

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
    Or recitals. (A developing player's version of a gig).
    Recitals as in assessed college recitals?

    If so these are an entirely separate animal to gigs in the wider world... They will certainly develop your playing, but not in the same way....
    Last edited by christianm77; 07-29-2017 at 05:28 AM.

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    Recitals as in assessed college recitals?

    If so these are an entirely separate animal to gigs in the wider world... They will certainly develop your playing, but not in the same way....

    Recitals for soloists and concerts for ensembles are performed at all levels. In other words before you play paid gigs there is another way to gain stage performance experience.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    You can also practice like this:


    Here's a topic about it:
    Exercise that saved my life