-
Hey guys,
I was wondering in what different ways you approach your arpeggio work. Let me first clarify the terminology: I think of arpeggios in terms of sets of notes to build melodies from (I like to call them „tonal structures“ too) and not necessarily as sets of notes that are meant to be played in a specific order (e.g. Bb D F Ab).
I used to work with the following approach for a couple of years now:
I’d choose a relatively simple constellation of an arpeggio/tonal structure running against a certain chord. E.g. G major triad over Gmaj7 or D major triad over Gmaj7. I’d then loop my chord or a cadenz (II-V-I, I-VI-II-V) and try to create melodies over it, limiting myself to the notes of the choosen tonal structure whenever the chord would appear. My goal would be to create lines that wouldn’t sound like they were built from a major triad. You’d have to focus on rhythm, on when to start and end phrases etc. to make them work. When I felt I’d be able to speek freely, I’d contine to add some approach notes etc. Also I’d work on that in different positions all over the neck.
Until recently I’ve refused to work on tonal structures in a more technical way - practicing patterns (E.g. 135 351 513 135…), not exactly working on melodies.. It used to feel wrong to me - a bit like cheating or working in a non-musical fashion. However I think I’ve changed my mind on it. I’ve come to the conclusion that working on patterns has the potential to open your ears in certain ways and will also help you become a more fluent speaker.
I started working on major and minor triads, checking out the following patterns (both up and down):
135 351 513 135 …
1351 3513 5135 1351 …
1 5 3 1 5 3 1 5 …
1 3 5 1 3 5 1 3 5 …
Also I thought about working on incorporating approach notes (half step below, half step above, both above and below, whole step half step below etc.)
I was basically planning to check all of these out in 7 positions (those that will fit the 7 positions of the major scale). Gee, in some cases the fingerings are far from being easy to play..
Some questions are on my mind:
- You could also work on the triad shapes that fit the 5 positions of the major scale or any other system. Of course some of the resulting positions for the tonal structure will be identical, but still it appears to be a bunch of possibilities.. Do you think it’s worth the effort to go through all of them?
- Playing in position only appears to be rather limiting. Do you guys work on switching between positions/playing vertically/playing diagonally? Is there any system to it? Cause working on all possible shifts seems to be an endless task!
- If at all, what patterns do you like to practice with arpeggios consisting of 4 notes? (maj7, min6, dom7, min7..)
- What are your general thoughts on patterns? Do you like to work on incorporating them into your playing specifically, or you do prefer to just wait for them to show up in your playing?
- Do you use any other approaches with arpeggios that you’d like to share/debate?
- Have you ever worked on creating melodies with 2 different arpeggios at the same time? E.g. D major triad and E major triad over Ab7? What’s a good starting point for that?
I’m curious about your thoughts!
-
09-11-2017 11:27 AM
-
FWIW, here's what I have found to be helpful.
I learned 7th chord patterns in 5 positions on the neck. Some of them were Chuck Wayne's fingerings I learned long ago and some are my own. It may make sense to find your own because you can accommodate your picking style in case of bottlenecks. I modify these to get other chord types.
I practice them by playing tunes using IRealPro for backing tracks. I set the tune for 13 repeats with a key change by a 4th every chorus. I will sometimes run the arps, with the notes in order, just to drill myself on them. More often, I simply try to use the chord tones to create melody. I don't restrict myself to chord tones, but I am aware of them. All keys.
The advantage of this approach is that I'm working directly on tunes and melody. I get harmonic diversity by being aware of intervals and, occasionally, by superimposing one set of chord tones over another.
The disadvantage of this approach is that it doesn't particularly build speed and it may be more harmonically limiting than other approaches.
Why this approach? Would I recommend it to others? I came upon it based largely on trying to remediate weaknesses. There's a point where you try to do more general exercises and maybe there's a point where you try to forge an individual style by constructing a program that makes sense for your own mix of goals and abilities.
-
Originally Posted by Philidor
This is one of those situations where chord scales come in handy...just write out the scale and look at which triads are part of it. Then once you figure out the "butter notes," you can look for triads that supply some tension, too...slipping between the two...
-
Re: using two different arps at the same time.
Some people see it this way: Say you're playing over Cmaj7. You could get a lydian sound by raising the 4th. That's the same as if you were playing in Gmajor (= C lydian). Or, you could play a C triad followed by a D triad. The latter approach may give your solos a more structured, less random, sound which you may like.
I'd suggest using that triad pair and, against 7th chords the root triad and the b5 triad (e.g. C maj and Gb maj). Then, pick a simple tune and see if you can make music with them by going back and forth from one to the other (may help to play C then Gb, then repeat but up an octave). Frankly, I can't. My sense of melody doesn't include this device, so I abandoned it for the most part. But, others do well with it. I learned it from Jose Neto, a terrific player -- and he can make it sound great.
-
The Romans had a phrase in Latin that translates "It smells of the lamp", somewhat derogatorily referring to written documents that appeared to have been overly wordsmithed overnight by the light of an oil lamp. The modern version of this in jazz might be when someone says they can "hear the wheels turning" behind the music; for example when you hear a guitarist playing and feel like you recognize the method book they have been studying.
When guitarists get good, this may become a "meta-concern" about potential tarnishment of authenticity in their playing. To my ear, the bell-weather indicator for this is in the arpeggios.
It seems to me there is a safe zone when arpeggios are used deliberately as a means of sounding chords or clearly deliberately using arpeggios as the motif for a melodic line. The tricky part is using them "without showing" within melodic structures, because there is the risk of melody being masked or overshadowed by arpeggio... the melodic character needs to be clear; if it has the sound of a melody made of arpeggios then the phrasing, timing, accents, and flow aren't working together yet... despite being based on arpeggio series, the melodic line's aural feeling should sound natural and minimize suggesting or revealing mechanics of construction.
Anyone know I mean?
-
Originally Posted by pauln
Definitely.
To me, when I catch myself doing it, it sounds as though I'm really spelling out the changes--but I'm not creating a melody...Although when I first learn a tune, I like the idea of just running changes on it for an hour or so...you start to hear things, possibilities...I get a lot of ideas that way...but it's like making sausages--you don't want to see how it's done in public!
-
Jeff, your comments never cease to slay me.
-
If you can't play any arpeggio starting on any degree from anywhere on the neck.... you still need to practice the basics. You can't practice... or eventually have internalized, what you don't have mechanically worked out on the fretboard. The guitar is a 12 fret pattern that repeats.... 5 patterns or positions, 7 or whatever are just a process for becoming aware and internalizing the 12 step pattern that repeats. Eventually you don't need to think about it... and can basically use any pattern, fingering etc... because they are all part of that 12 fret repeating pattern.
Personally... you need to separate technical studies from performance practice. You need to get your fretboard together before you develop performance skills... or your performance skills will have holes... you end up teaching yourself to play what you know at the moment.
Get over the being musical thing... It's somewhat BS, I know we all what something positive etc... but don't just cover for what you can't play or understand.
Obviously you start performance practice along with technical practice, and even combine etc... but be aware of what your developing.
Have a beginning, middle.... and an end. Know where you want to get to with arpeggios. Obviously that goes with all aspects of musicianship.
I don't know how you look and hear music... but generally there is organization. Form, and targets. Melodic, harmonic and rhythmic Targets. You then fill the space in between with an organized use of something..... If your creating a harmonic relationship with a target... you might use arpeggios to help develop those harmonic relationships. The same with scales, rhythm, articulations etc...
I believe in two octave position practice which moves up and down the neck within that 12 fret pattern
Triads... only 3 notes so only three patterns
then 7th chords
9th
13th or complete arpeggios
At least have Maj/min, Harmonic Minor and Melodic Minor worked out... that's only 21 chords and the versions of each,
With jazz I generally use 7th chords as the basic reference and the rest, triads, 9ths etc... are variations.
After you have the basics down, you can start to play melodic relationships and develop them... use patterns of target tones and organized approach to them. This always needs to be organized within some type of Form.
I'm pretty sure I've posted all arpeggios and position studies... I think I keep it pretty simple. Standard chords with their arpeggios, again starting on each chord tone so they become one 12 fret pattern that repeats.
-
Good post, Reg. An extension of your approach that I worked on (Lage Lund suggests the same thing on a recent video) was to play two-octave positional arpeggios from any 6th string note and let that note be any degree of the arpeggio type under review.
For example, starting with the note G, a root position Gmaj7 arpeggio would then become an Ebmaj7 in 1st inversion. That would be followed by a 2nd inversion Cmaj7 and finally, a 3rd inversion Abmaj7.
-
thanks... yea Joe Henderson use to dig constant structure chords patterns with pedal notes... I would think most would have difficulty playing that exercise. Personally it's simple because I did all the mechanical BS years ago while learning how to play guitar etc... I've always used 7 position two octave position fingering with 12 fret reference. I don't really need to think about it.... all the technical organization was done years ago and is instinctive now. Obviously one of the reasons sight reading is never a problem etc...
But for someone to dive into more complex harmonic relationships with arpeggios... like your example, without already have the basics already together... well, generally they hit walls. From not having their technique together... right
-
I just finished writing a tune with exactly those kinds of pedals (love Joe Henderson!) so maybe that's why this was in my mind. Having studied classical piano from a young age, I'll confess that I had all this together at the keyboard way before the guitar even though I picked up that instrument around the same time. Classical and jazz piano technique is more codified than that for guitar and then there's the advantage of the keyboard's absolute pitch placement.
My guess is that many players who rely primarily upon CAGED-style patterns (or any other incomplete reference) tend to avoid knowing scales and arpeggios from all degrees with any finger. One of the most fruitful exercises that helped me in that regard was playing major, minor and dominant-based chord scales in each inversion from the lowest point on the neck to the higher octave on a particular string set. These could be drop 3 voicings from the 6th string of the keys mentioned in my last post - Gmaj7, root position, Ebmaj7, 1st inversion, Cmaj7, 2nd inversion, Abmaj7, 3rd inversion. From there, it seemed an obvious step to work on the arpeggio equivalents for each chord.Last edited by PMB; 09-12-2017 at 08:49 PM.
-
Many years ago, Carl Barry showed me a system that I believe may have originated with Chuck Wayne.
We started with G7 and played a two octave arpeggio starting on G at the 3rd fret, low E.
Then he had me learn the G7 arpeggio starting on B at the 7th fret.
And two more, starting with D and F, frets 10 and 13.
It was quite some time before I did the work to get all 12 keys under my fingers.
That's what the post above describes, and I agree that it's a great idea to work on. Comprehensive in its way, but it can be learned in a few months of work.
Eventually, I got there, but I couldn't make it work as described above. Instead, I learned the notes of each chord I use (well, not quite, but all the basics) and would practice finding them in different parts of the neck.
Lotta drill involved, but I think it has some advantages over the usual pattern based approach -- and some disadvantages. For what I'm trying to do, the advantages outweighed the disadvantages.
-
Mentally I like to put scales, chords, arpeggios, patterns in a box called "technique". Fundamentals. Develop them, maintain them. This covers a significant amount of material for a jazz player. Call that part 1.
Mentally i put improvisation and tunes in another box. Call that part 2. This covers an endless amount of material. The improv part can/should draw on anything that inspires you (including arpeggios obviously), as long as it reasonably fits the tune/style.
If you do your homework efficiently on part 1 you'll have a lot more time for part 2, which is the music. Yes you can blend the two but be careful not to leave a lot of the necessary toolbox unused/underdeveloped. In other words, this can be inefficient and ineffective. You can get lost in the fog.
Once you've mastered the guitar, music, and improvisation.... you can do whatever you like. (if that day ever comes). But many masters will tell you that they also revisit the fundamentals as needed for a tuneup.Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 09-12-2017 at 10:13 PM.
-
We blow it off. Arps sound great but they can be awkward with the fingering and picking if we use a flat pick.
Think I'll dive into arps for a couple weeks. Some inspiration here;
-
We did a study group on this forum of Intro To Jazz Guitar Soloing.
That book had us writing licks using arpeggios as a framework. Here's an example of some of the stuff I did for an assignment from the book. This is over a ii-V-I so it's two arps connected... I think this is a good idea for practicing/learning arpeggios.
-
I think of them as one thing. Symbiotic to scales and chords. All one thing. I rarely play arpeggios straight in improv. But they're always present. Bits and pieces.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
But I also practiced them HARD, for many, many years. Full triads of every variety - Maj, Min, Dim, Aug, b5, sus. Then all the varieties of the 7th and 6, 2 and then all alterations. The extension I cheated by using superimpositions.
-
Exactly what I was trying to address with my initial post! Originally Posted by pauln
Thanks for all the nice contributions!
Talking about my specific questions, I was probably not precise enough. I know all the arpeggios that are essential to me pretty well and I can see them as "one" shape and over the whole fretboard. However I put more effort into learning to "see" as well as learning to "hear" them while I neglected the athletic aspect a bit.
I therefore decided to now put the main focus on teaching my fingers how to move. I was therefore curious how far you guys take it, since there's a lot of possible combinations to organize the notes for playing them vertically, horizontally and diagonally. E.g.:
You could create major triad shapes from all the different systems that exist for the major scale (3 notes per string, 7 positions with middle finger as anchor, 4 notes per string). Also you could work on dozens of ways for shifting positions. Then you could learn and train all the patterns you like using all these different shapes.
Also: Do you like to work on all the permutations, or do you stick with just a bunch? Which ones do you like (especially with arpeggios consisting of 4 notes)?
-
Brief Summary of some enclosures, approach tones and chromatics
- Approach tones (between two chord tones like a P4 or M6)
- Neighbor tones (e.g. 5-6-5, 3-lower chromatic -3)
- Unprepared approaches (e.g. 3-6-5, lower chromatic -3)
- Two Note approaches (3-4-6-5, 6-ch-5)
- Double chromatic approaches (3-6-b6-5, 2-b3-3-1)
- Three note enclosures (3-6-b6-b5-5, 2-b3-4-3)
- Four note enclosures (6-b6-4-b5-5, 2-b3-b5-4-3)
- Diatomic from above-diatonic from below- chromatic from above chromatic from below (P5,).
- Variation is diatonic from below chromatic from above, chromatic from below, diatomic from above (M3)
- Variation: of 8--diatonic from below, diatonic from above, chromatic from below, chromatic from above (P5)
- Variation of 9--chromatic from above, diatonic from below, diatonic from above, chromatic from below (M3)
-
Chromatic targeting of important reduce melody notes or important guide tones-chord tones , from trombone player and Jazz educator Ed Byrne ( my notes from taking some lessons from him a few years ago )
10 major chromatic target Groups
1a. Chromatic from below.
1b. Chromatic from above.
2a. Chromatic from below and above.
2b. Chromatic from above and below. '
3a. Semitone below, whole step above, chromatic passing tone down, semitone below (B-D-Db-B-C)
3b. Semitone above, whole step below, chromatic passing tone up, semitone above. (D-A#-B-Db-C)
4a. A whole step above, chromatic passing tone down, a whole step below, chromatic passing tone up (D-C#-A#-B-C)
4b. A whole step below, chromatic passing tone up, a whole step above, chromatic passing tone down (A#-B-D-C#-C)
5a. A minor third below, two ascending chromatic passing tones up, a semi tone above (A-A#-B-Db-C)
5b. A minor third above, two descendent chromatic passing tones down, a semitone below (Eb-D-C#-B-C)
-
I keep wondering about this ...
The word arpeggio is defined to mean chord tones played in succession, ascending or descending.
Why do we talk about "arpeggio" rather than "chord tones"? Is the issue of playing notes in succession important?
Why not just memorize the notes in the chords you use and, separately, learn the fingerboard?
Then, when it's time to solo, you can find every chord tone in every chord, anywhere on the neck, without ever thinking about the order of the notes.
I don't think it's more work this way. There's a lot of learning involved, but not more, I think, than learning arpeggios for every chord in 5 positions -- and then learning to play them starting on any note or in any order.
-
Exactly! When I wrote my bachelor-thesis I therefore introduced the term "tonal structure" (actually "tonale Struktur" in german, if that makes more sense) to avoid misunderstanding. Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
I'd define them as "n-element sets of notes". So a 3-element tonal structure would be a triad, wether it be a conventional one like Ab C Eb, or an unconventional one like Bb B G. Working with sets has the advantage of not suggesting any order of the elements they're containing. This comes closest to the way I like to think of "material" that I use to create music. If you're trying to refer to sets of notes in a specific orders, you can always work with series. This way there's no need for the confusing term "arpeggio" that everyone seems to use differently.
Learning the note-names of tonal structures and go from there has had a major impact on my thinking and fretboard-visualization. However I feel it can be stifling if that's all you can relate on while playing. I felt I had to teach my fingers how to move on the fretboard to strengthen the intuitiv component of playing as opposed to thinking everything. Eventually, if I studied enough combinations, they'd be able to follow most impulses and melodies I can come up with in an improvisation. As guitarists we can't escape moving within shapes and playing in positions, even if we're not aware of them. I think we might just as well train our fingers to take advantage of that.
-
The problem, as I see it, in just thinking chords and chord tones rather than arpeggios is fingering and direct access to the notes as distinguished from chords. Plus chords are movable shapes. Well so are arpeggios. But I think it would be harder to grok them if you're just grabbing grips. Plus the notes aren't necessarily in a logical sequence. I'm all for arpeggios.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Also - chords come from scales. Arpeggios come from scales. They're all one big same thing. It's harder to get there, maybe, but it's one system.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
Grant Green, What is This Thing
Yesterday, 01:59 PM in Ear Training, Transcribing & Reading