The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Posts 26 to 43 of 43
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    I'm not following. What are the other two we're talking about?
    The OP suggestion of a one position approach like the Goodrick and my suggestion of using the CAGED scale forms and playing the modes from them. (My understanding of Reg's approach is similar but based on different basic patterns)

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding what I saw on the first video, but you seemed to be basing the explanation on the harmonized G major scale. Moved up one fret and played a pattern that resulted in a dorian, moved up one and played a pattern that resulted in a phrygian, up again the lydian and so on.

    This is a bit different than the OP example of taking a digital pattern through the cycle and where to place it on the fingerboard and what system to use, but does present a different approach...

    Or did I entirely miss what you were describing?
    Last edited by guido5; 10-26-2017 at 12:15 PM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    I understand what you're saying, but I also think that a great many guitarists run into walls when trying to do simple exercises like the one in the OP. Basically have to work everything out as you go. Figure it out in each position one bit at a time. that was certainly me, when I started looking at playing some Jazz.

    Horn players just aren't doing that at a basic level. Not figuring out the basics of where notes are ..... or simply how to finger things.

    I think the point about having basics together is a valid one.
    Basics - what is "basics" really? One approach would be yes, the patterns, fingerings. But there is another way to think about basics. That would be - take scale 1 pattern,position. Learn it well. Intervals, sequences etc. When almost done with exercises on this (meaning, this is not a quest with ending), start playing music on that scale. Tunes. By memory, by ear. Play them in harmonic intervals also. Use some background track or create some yourself for giving a solid harmonic context and make it sound pretty and musical.

    This was what bit me years later after schools were finished - I practiced music and tech/theory separately most of the time. Because... who knows. Dry exercises can help and hurt the same time.

    The guy playing random steps on the vid made me cringe. Use real musical ideas instead something random when you want to get intimate with each note on your scale. Or maybe only parts of the tunes. Make a list of the tunes you've used. Mark the mode that the tune is in, mark the scale degree of the 1st note of those tunes. Use them over and over. It's not so easy as it seems.

    The reasoning behind this is - we have filled our heads with thousands of tunes and it's an abundant source to get to know our scales well. Better to get to know what each note does in the scale than to just blast through them each way as fast as possible. A known tune on the scale helps so much in this matter. Something random... pff.

  4. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by guido5
    The OP suggestion of a one position approach like the Goodrick and my suggestion of using the CAGED scale forms and playing the modes from them. (My understanding of Rog's approach is similar but based on different basic patterns)

    Maybe I'm misunderstanding what I saw on the first video, but you seemed to be basing the explanation on the harmonized G major scale. Moved up one fret and played a pattern that resulted in a dorian, moved up one and played a pattern that resulted in a phrygian, up again the lydian and so on.

    This is a bit different than the OP example of taking a digital pattern through the cycle and where to place it on the fingerboard and what system to use, but does present a different approach...

    Or did I entirely miss what you were describing?
    Oh. Ok, but a "single position approach" is merely a multi position approach applied in a single position. The fingerings are derivative of a multi position , or may as well be .

  5. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by emanresu
    Basics - what is "basics" really? One approach would be yes, the patterns, fingerings. But there is another way to think about basics. That would be - take scale 1 pattern,position. Learn it well. Intervals, sequences etc. When almost done with exercises on this (meaning, this is not a quest with ending), start playing music on that scale. Tunes. By memory, by ear. Play them in harmonic intervals also. Use some background track or create some yourself for giving a solid harmonic context and make it sound pretty and musical.

    This was what bit me years later after schools were finished - I practiced music and tech/theory separately most of the time. Because... who knows. Dry exercises can help and hurt the same time.

    The guy playing random steps on the vid made me cringe. Use real musical ideas instead something random when you want to get intimate with each note on your scale. Or maybe only parts of the tunes. Make a list of the tunes you've used. Mark the mode that the tune is in, mark the scale degree of the 1st note of those tunes. Use them over and over. It's not so easy as it seems.

    The reasoning behind this is - we have filled our heads with thousands of tunes and it's an abundant source to get to know our scales well. Better to get to know what each note does in the scale than to just blast through them each way as fast as possible. A known tune on the scale helps so much in this matter. Something random... pff.
    Yeah. I just don't understand these kind of posts. I mean, if the guy were saying to ONLY practice this way, to NOT practice tunes as well, okay. But that's not really the point.

    "Is it important to practice scales?" Answer that question for yourself. If so, is it helpful to practice in the same exact way every time? Again, ymmv. it honestly doesn't matter what your answers to each of these questions are. This video is specifically for those who would answer yes to the first and no to the second. It doesn't address the question of whether one should practice scale patterns INSTEAD of playing actual music. No one is talking about that. It's not a choice of either or.

    I'd imagine that anyone would say of course you have to work on tunes as well. Seems like every conversation always gets bogged down in this kind of thing.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    I see. I was thinking about the word "basic" and whats that for scales. This is not common approach as far as I know - to instantly start gathering all what makes up our musical "self" (the favorite bits of what we have heard) under one safe system. As far as I know, most people go the exercise route when it comes to learning scales. It becomes the main thing and the solos for the longest time can sound like exercises not stories. I've seen it with fellow students and seen this happen with me. I had to quit doing exercises days before performing, that much I learned

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    So Basic scales and fretboard fingerings is the same thing. I believe we're talking about guitarist, so I'll keep that as my basic reference.

    You need a fingering system... how you navigate the neck with some type of organization. The guitar is a 12 fret repeating organization.

    Pick one system and use it as your basic reference to getting the neck together. You can add and change fingerings later... once you have a basic organized system to realize music etc... I play all types of fingering depending on what type of music I'm playing... whatever I feel like because I have an organized system of fingerings for the complete ftetboard. I don't need to stare or guess where I'm at or where I need to go... the fretboard is one big fingering... I can play anything anywhere anytime. The only problems are my other skills.

    This should also be part of your practice for scales... I thinks of scales arpeggios, chords... everything as basically One thing.

    When I think or hear...Gmaj7 as my Reference, I automatically have access to all scales, arpeggios, chords... anything I choose to play or whatever I'm sight reading anywhere on the fretboard. This also includes any type of relationship I want to create with that Gmaj7.

    That Gmaj7 can be a Imaj7, a IVmaj7, any type of function. Tonic, subdominant or Dominant... anything I choose or am told from chart to see and hear. What most call the modes... A-7 dorian, B- phrygian etc.... are all just possible fingerings of that basic reference Gmaj7.

    And when I'm playing melodic cycles or patterns... I already have a fingering system organized that used Gmaj7 as my reference... if I choose etc... The fingerings become a method of realizing whatever I'm playing with organization.... the complete fretboard.

    As compared to the fingerings played becoming the organization of what I'm playing.... the guitar playing me. This can still happen, but I'm choosing to have that result, styles etc...

    I'm always busy but I'll try and post something.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Modes are fingered the same as the parent scale though. So modes are the same five "fingerings" you already know from the parent scale etc. The distinction is musical, not physical fingering.
    Right. If you can play Gmaj through a couple of octaves, then you can play A Dorian, B Phrygian etc.

    But, what is the thought process? Is the player thinking, I want C Lydian, oh, that's Gmaj, so I'll use the Gmaj patterns that I practiced? And, presumably, eventually C Lydian becomes its own thing?

    I'm just trying to understand the potential advantage to learning it like that. Why bother with learning modes as a separate entity if you're actually going to find them on the fingerboard based on the related Ionian every time?

    The usual reason given, as I understand it, is that thinking "mode" gets you to emphasize the right notes, so, for example, you aren't going to accidentally outline a Cmaj triad when the chord is Dm7 (not that it would necessarily sound bad if you did). But, if you have to relate it back to the major scale fingering, where is the advantage?

    My approach is basically based on tonal center and chord tones. So, in the Dm7 situation in C, I'm thinking D F A C as a kind of first-cut and then the rest of the notes of Cmaj as background. Well, that's how I started, anyway. On the other hand, if I want C Lydian, I just think C major and sharp the 4th. C mixo -- flat the 7th. But, for C phrygian, I'll think Abmaj and watch the chord tones because there are too many notes to change from Cmaj. Well, maybe I answered my own question. What I actually do is kind of haphazard.

    But, with the other approach, when you hit C phrygian, you may have to think Ab anyway. Or you memorize phrygian (in 5 places on the neck) as its own thing.

    Sorry -- I'm still struggling to understand how most players handle this issue..

  9. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Right. If you can play Gmaj through a couple of octaves, then you can play A Dorian, B Phrygian etc.

    But, what is the thought process? Is the player thinking, I want C Lydian, oh, that's Gmaj, so I'll use the Gmaj patterns that I practiced? And, presumably, eventually C Lydian becomes its own thing?

    I'm just trying to understand the potential advantage to learning it like that. Why bother with learning modes as a separate entity if you're actually going to find them on the fingerboard based on the related Ionian every time?

    The usual reason given, as I understand it, is that thinking "mode" gets you to emphasize the right notes, so, for example, you aren't going to accidentally outline a Cmaj triad when the chord is Dm7 (not that it would necessarily sound bad if you did). But, if you have to relate it back to the major scale fingering, where is the advantage?

    My approach is basically based on tonal center and chord tones. So, in the Dm7 situation in C, I'm thinking D F A C as a kind of first-cut and then the rest of the notes of Cmaj as background. Well, that's how I started, anyway. On the other hand, if I want C Lydian, I just think C major and sharp the 4th. C mixo -- flat the 7th. But, for C phrygian, I'll think Abmaj and watch the chord tones because there are too many notes to change from Cmaj. Well, maybe I answered my own question. What I actually do is kind of haphazard.

    But, with the other approach, when you hit C phrygian, you may have to think Ab anyway. Or you memorize phrygian (in 5 places on the neck) as its own thing.

    Sorry -- I'm still struggling to understand how most players handle this issue..
    Yeah. I think you're right about answering your own. Either way it's derivative of something. I'd imagine the process for most is you have to think derivative initially "in the woodshed" until it's automatic?

    I've definitely done more work with Dorian, mixo, and Ionian personally. From my own point of view, that kind of modal shedding is more about giving me a jumping off point to getting into a larger parent scale anyway. Usually I hear other people talk about it the other way around, and I guess I would've imagined it being more the other way around originally. I just don't really experience it that way as much now. Eventually, it's all one homogenous thing I guess.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Sorry -- I'm still struggling to understand how most players handle this issue..
    Can't speak for most players, haven't done the research......

    Studying scales harmonically (aka modes) for me is all about surveying various combinations of intervals
    in relation to all the common major, minor and dominant chordal and progressional scenarios.
    This has a mechanical component (fingerings), a descriptive component (analysis) and a sonic component (ear training).

    I make choices about whether to emphasize the commonality or differential of the evolving chord sequence.
    Decisions re; brighter or darker sounds, levels of consonance and dissonance.
    If I have enough free attention, I think about approach and passing chords, reharmonization, alternate pathways,
    dynamic curve, poetry, philosophy, etc.

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    OK... so everything can be anything without a reference.

    If you don't develop the ability to have references and then create relationship.... your not going to be able to understand what's actually going on with the music.

    C lydian is same collection of notes as G ionian... but if your tonal reference or tonal target is A-7 Dorian, the note collections develop tonal organization, they develop functional relationships. Where the notes want to go and which notes are going to control the movement.

    Not just melodic or contrapuntal movement.... Harmonic movement. This organization is just implied, you can still do whatever you choose or hear... but organization is implied, whether your aware or not. Voice leading etc... is not the organization, it's just a choice one makes of how to realize the notes. It's not the organization... just one of many relationships.

    The whole fretboard and fingering thing... is a different subject... again just a means of realizing the notes. Generally the better one is able to keep the fingerings from becoming a controlling factor... the better off you'll be. The guitar playing you thing.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    If I understand this correctly, it's what I think too.

    If the chart shows me a ii V I, I know the tonal center and I know the chord tones. That gives me everything I need, whether I think about dorian, mixi, Ionian or just key of C and chord tones. Exactly the same pool of notes to choose from. I know where all the white keys are on the guitar and I don't need a pattern to find them.

    To take a trickier example:

    If the chart says Cphrygian as the chord (which happens occasionally - not as often as lydian, but I do see it now and then), I have to think. What is the sound the composer wants? The notes of Abmaj or the notes of Bb melmin? In my limited experience with seeing this, thinking Csusb9 often works, so I know I've got C Db F at a minimum. G will work because it's in my favorite susb9 voicing. Eb probably works, because the #9 often goes with the b9 -- and because it's in both Abmaj and Bbmelmin. I can use Ab or A, or both, and I'm going to have to do that by ear. Bb should be good because it's in both scales and that chord is maybe C7susb9, although I don't usually include the Bb in my comping. I don't need any patterns because I know the notes I want and I know where they are on the neck.

    Well, by the time I've finished thinking this through, the band is playing the next tune in the set. But it does get faster. Also, I can simply think mel minor a whole step down and play that. Again, by knowing which notes are in the scale and finding them without patterns.

    So, my fretboard organization is simply knowing the notes in the chord or scale I'm playing and knowing where they are, which I learned by reading.

    My question is (and I apologize, because I'm struggling with this) what am I missing? Is there any reason for doing it differently?

    I'm also now in a position where I'm teaching a group of High School aspiring jazzers and I don't want to give them something so idiosyncratic that future teachers scratch their heads.

    What I'm doing now, is starting to teach them to read. It will take a few months, but, at the end, they'll know the entire fingerboard and will be able to read all over it.

    Since they're in jazz band, we'll still have to work on the tunes they're playing -- including some ear based approaches to soloing.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Yea... it's not really about the notes in the chords... the chord tones. Of course that and the melody would be the 1st level of understanding. It's the rest of the notes... and then the rest of the notes when creating relationships... when one chord becomes a chord pattern. When you begin to apply modal concepts, modal interchange, harmonic use of blue notes etc... basically when all of what most think of as embellishments become harmonically organized. These concepts also have basic tonal implications, just like that II V I.

    And even with that basic II V I.... each of those chords have their own harmonic organization. When they become the basic tonal reference.
    That pattern of white notes can have a few levels of organization. The white notes can change. The basic vanilla 1st level of understanding is just the beginning.

    Get past the thought process of thinking of patterns. patterns, fingering are all just tools to having the fretboard and understandings become instinctive. Default settings... your basic reference. The better organized system you create for your default or instinctive realization skills on the guitar... the easier it becomes to play and have time to think or not think... whatever works for you.

    Yea the Csusb9 would generally imply a Dom function and C Phrygian or C- with reference to Ab... generally tonic or subdominant

    The notes can be what their are... but the functional implications can be different, which creates extended levels of relationships. Again it's whats not spelled out...

    All these are pretty standard and don't require much thought when your aware, and put the time in to analysis and composition organization.

    I agree totally with the sight reading approach, I sight read as well as most horn players.... and we as guitarist can comp and imply harmonic development. Part of sight reading is being aware of what's implied as well as what's actually notated. Al least with Jazz and similar music.

    It's not just about not playing anything wrong or wrong notes etc... it's about the possibilities of what and where you can help the music go.

    Anyway... when I play, all these possibilities, all the different references, all the possible relationships are going on all the time... I don't need to think about where the notes are or what their name is, or what their relationships can be... I choose to think about what I want to try and develop... I'm always aware of what other players are playing and how I can compliment or interact with etc... Because I don't need to think about what or where the notes are, I generally think of tonal targets and how I want to functionally create relationship... not just one note, tonal note collections. Every note can imply a chord.

    Although most of the time I play pretty simple and as audience friendly as I can...

    Long ways from how to practice scales... but that was my basic point.... guitarist need to have the physical organization together or it usually just doesn't happen.

  14. #38

    User Info Menu

    Reg, Thanks for the response. I think I have an idea of what you're saying, although I doubt that I really understand it.

    For me, there are two basic types of tunes. The first is where I can feel the harmony. If I can feel it, I can play entirely by ear and create the sounds I can hear in my mind, and occasionally will surprise myself with a new one.

    The other type is a tune where I can't feel it. That happens when I've never heard the tune and the harmony goes in unfamiliar directions. It can also happen when I know the tune, but the changes just don't speak to me. Not a bad tune -- sometimes I love the original, but I just don't feel it when I try to solo. In this case I have to think a lot about chord tones, tonal centers, scales/modes and whatever else will help me navigate the changes without clams.

    There could be another case -- in the practice room using math to find new sounds. I've done my share of trying but I don't learn well that way.

    I'm intrigued by the notion of reharmonizing the tune and then soloing on the reharm against the original changes. That's usually what I hear when I transcribe something.

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Hey rp... so when you feel something, what is that? I'm not trying to be funny, this is one of the biggest difficulties musician run into.

    I'll keep it short... most feel something because they memorize. Memorize tunes etc...They feel the memory, the very physical music etc... The next level of feeling is to become aware of the organization, it is also very physical... anyway you can also learn to feel organization. I can feel notation on a page of music... I feel the organization.... I may not know the music etc... but I can recognize the organization... it's just notes. And I can feel the musical organization of space. I make mistakes... but generally I'm close enough for jazz...

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    For anyone interested... I posted some basic info. in the Improv section on a thread called what scales to learn.... anyway I posted how I believe guitarist should approach practice organization... everything becomes connected and how the material should be worked on with reference to having the fretboard together. Matt asked me to start pulling up some of my older material and start posting... so I have boxes of material, and I'll try and organize to post. There were no computers back in the stone age

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Hey rp... so when you feel something, what is that? I'm not trying to be funny, this is one of the biggest difficulties musician run into.

    I'll keep it short... most feel something because they memorize. Memorize tunes etc...They feel the memory, the very physical music etc... The next level of feeling is to become aware of the organization, it is also very physical... anyway you can also learn to feel organization. I can feel notation on a page of music... I feel the organization.... I may not know the music etc... but I can recognize the organization... it's just notes. And I can feel the musical organization of space. I make mistakes... but generally I'm close enough for jazz...
    It's often hard to put musical concepts into language. I'll try to explain it. I suspect that most of us don't need to read a chart or count measures to play a 12 bar blues. Somehow, we can feel when the IV chord is coming and we can feel that it's a IV.

    And, for many of us, I presume that we can do something similar with Rhythm changes and some number of jazz standards, depending on interest, level of development and so forth.

    When I see an unfamiliar chart, I'll be able to "feel" it if it's E7, A7, D7 G7 C. But if it's a Wayne Shorter tune with complex harmony I may have very little feeling or instinct to guide me the first time I read through it. That may take a while -- and there are some tunes I don't see to get, at least not yet.

    So, in the latter case, I can't turn off my logical mind and just play. If I try to do that, I'm probably going to play some clams. Instead, I rely on some theory. But, I've picked up theory haphazardly, which was why I posted on this -- trying to understand if there's something useful I have missed.

    I focus first on chord tones and, secondarily, on scales. If I know the chord tones and I can figure out the voice leading, I'll be able to play something. Not necessarily art, but not clams either. Typically, the chord symbol will tell you the root, third, which fifth, which seventh and which ninth. If I have those together, I can find some others by ear. I also use scales -- because my mental map of all of this stuff is clearer in some areas and blurrier in others. For example, if I see 7b9, I generally play chord tones, including the #9 and fill in the other notes by ear. When I see m7b5, I often think "melodic minor a m3 up") - because I learned it that way. For minor chords, I pick the 6 and 7 by ear, so I don't worry about which minor scale it is.

    I digress. For solos where I have to think about all that stuff, I am impeded in trying to make melody and communicate emotion. To do that, the changes have to be internalized -- felt -- and that is what I was alluding to.

    I'm just trying to understand how other players approach the issue.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    So the point was... one can internalize theory , just as one internalizes, or memorizes a tune. There is a big difference. That might be what your missing... Theory isn't chord tones, melody or scales arpeggios, voice leading etc... The theory part is the relationships between all the parts... how you organize all the notes to work together.

    When you memorize a tune.... internalize the changes and melody.... that is just one level of understanding, or being able to feel the tune. Your becoming aware of the parts...You can embellish any aspect of what's memorized... mechanically. Being aware of different theory concepts helps get past the memorization approach to playing jazz. You become aware of why and how chords and notes relate and react within form.

    When one reharmonizes a tune, it can also be mechanical, but generally there is theory behind the relationships, the choices made of what to play or compose.

  19. #43
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Matt asked me to start pulling up some of my older material and start posting... so I have boxes of material, and I'll try and organize to post.
    Hey Reg. I love "organized", but I also enjoy some random bits randomness thrown out across inter-webs as well. Ha ha. :-) Feel free to organize later, in a separate thread. Sorry. Itching for something new. Hope all is well. Have a great weekend.