-
Here's a video lesson (with pdf below) of Robert Conti going over his arrangement of "Amazing Grace" measure by measure. I'm working with Conti's books/ DVDs "Chord Melody Assembly Line" and "The Formula" and getting a lot out of them. What I love about Conti is that not only is he a great player; he knows how to help ME be a better player! ;O)
Download PDF of Amazing Grace Arrangement by Robert Conti
-
05-19-2013 01:19 PM
-
Thanks Mark. Robert and Mike, if you guys read this - a big THANKS to you for letting Mark put this up!
I downloaded the PDF and have watched some of the video (will get through the rest of it soon). This arrangement has a lot going on and is exactly how Conti does his Signature chord melody series of arrangements. This same presentation is used on his chord melody DVDs, and those arragements are laid out in the same manner on PDFs on each of the 5 DVDs in that series, while the video is very similar to those DVD presentations. These are learning tools, rather than something to be memorized to be recited as performances. I did a video that is almost directly Conti's arrangement of "When I Fall In Love" to show what they sound like, but even there I deviated from the original as I played it because that is just how this stuff works. It isn't about memorizing an arrangement and playing it back like putting a quarter in a jukebox, though people can do that if they want to. It is about getting the chord movements into your hands and making it your own. The Formula shows you exactly how Conti comes up with these harmonies so you never have to play it the same way twice.
If you work through The Formula, you will readily see how this arrangement of "Amazing Grace" is put together. I could do that analysis here, but that is Conti's territory and I don't feel I have the right to give that away. Conti will never claim he invented this music, but he did work out his approach and uncomplicated manner of approaching it, and that is his to do with as he sees fit. I think the fact that he makes it available to us at very reasonable cost is a win-win for all of us. What I can say is that there is a lot of interesting stuff going on in the arrangement and some very interesting applications of The Formula. Without The Formula, it probably looks like a mess on paper and you may wonder how he arrived at these chords, but sounds great and there is a very definite repeatable and well thought out process involved. With The Formula, there are clear patterns, and you don't have to memorize a litany of chord subs to see these patterns. You can do it that way, but that can realy be a frustrating process(backcycling, flat-five subs, secondary dominants, minors for dominants, dominants for minors, parallel harmonized scales, etc,etc, etc - yes, I know aboout that stuff too). As with most things, there is more than one way to achieve the same end result. With The Formula, the process of working out a tune is one of playing with the sounds according to The Formula - uncomplicated and fun, rather than an exercise in frustration. Make no mistake, this is not an easy way out or a shortcut. It takes work to get fluent with this process, but it is an enjoyable process because you are always playing tunes - learning to play tunes by playing tunes.
TonyLast edited by tbeltrans; 05-19-2013 at 09:00 PM.
-
Amen to that! It's busier than the arrangement (-of another familiar old tune) in "Chord Melody Assembly Line", really nice to hear him play and gradually work up for oneself. Day by day, more pieces fit together and more chord movements come easily (or at least easier) to my hands. I don't know of a better way to learn how to play chord melody.
Originally Posted by tbeltrans
-
That echoes my experience and assessment rather well. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
Tony
-
I wonder if I'm the only one who finds the AbMaj7 chord in measure 3 (-last measure of the first line) a challenge to voice smoothly. That one's causing me some overtime!
I'd like to hear how others are doing with this---I can tell a lot of people have viewed the lesson: is it a) too easy, b) too hard, or c) neither too easy nor too hard???
-
I'm very new to chord melody. It's not something I've though much about in the past. I've mostly either strummed chords, or played single note lines. But I've always been jealous of pianists who can play the melody and harmony at the same time. It's a lot easier to hear and understand the song when you can do both. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
I've decided to spend some time learning how to play chord melody. I only have an hour a day to devote to guitar, but I just play for my own enjoyment, so I don't feel the pressure of having to learn right away.
When it comes to playing chords, I know a lot of the common grips, but there are some chords in this arrangement that I've never played.
The arrangement seems busy to me, with a lot of changes. I probably favor more of a mix of chords and single notes, but I understand how this is a start and can be tailored to fit my taste.
I've been reading a lot on Conti's materials on this forum and others and as soon as I have the extra money I will probably buy Assembly Line and The Formula. It seems like a good start to have someone walk through in detail exactly how they create an arrangement, favorite chords, substitutions, etc. Then, once I understand their process I can make changes to create something more personal.
-
I watched a little bit of this...he's doing some cool stuff. Not sure I'd steer a beginner this way...
I say it all the time, nothing taught me more about chord melody than sitting down and working out arrangements myself. I've stolen ideas from looking at transcriptions of other players...but I never learned another person's arrangement note for note...seems very antithetical to the idea of jazz to me...I don't even learn my own arrangements note for note!
So I guess what I'm saying is, steal as much as you can from this cat, he knows what he's doing....but if there's a certain voicing you can't grab, no sweat...find your own.
-
I don't think a beginner could handle this either. You have to have some dexterity to grab all those voicings. Conti's "Chord Melody Assembly Line" is a good starting point for the most basic useful voicings for chord melody. It moves along slowly enough not to overwhelm someone yet not so simple that someone with some experience would have nothing to learn from it. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
People learn differently. My mom could always play any tune she heard and still doesn't know the names of the piano keys. (She can find middle C---she marked it to teach a granddaughter--and peck her way back to a desired key when asked, 'what key are you playing in?' She will say things like, "A, in the black keys"----'sharp' and 'flat' mean nothing to her.) She would gain nothing by SEEING someone play a piece or voice a chord; all she has to do is hear it. But many players get a lot out of seeing someone else play things. This may be even more valuable on a guitar than a piano because the same note may be played on different strings.
It's great that you learned to play chord melody well without much help but there's nothing wrong with people who want some help going to a great source for it. I learned to write songs by myself---I didn't know there were books about it, or teachers---but chord melody is something that didn't come readily to me. I'm glad Conti's material is making it possible for someone like me to play this stuff!
-
Yeah, and I certainly don't mean to say "my way or no way." But I do think the biggest benefit of the Conti stuff is just hearing him think his way through a tune...being able to play it just like him is a party trick--the real meat and potatoes is what you can synthesize from it.
-
Yea.....pretty much what he says all through "The Formula".....something to the effect...."who cares if you can play these reharmed arrangements at the end of the book, it's more important to understand the concepts at work so you can come up with stuff equally as valid and interesting"....which ironically is not very Conti-like since all he ever talks about is "getting stuff under your fingers" Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Last edited by djangoles; 05-21-2013 at 03:02 PM.
-
A party trick? We live on different planets. I think one of the main reasons to learn to play guitar is to be able to play guitar parts you really like. I remember learning the solos on Dire Straits' "Sultans of Swing" and I loved being able to do that. It's not a party trick, either, it's learning how to play a cool thing the way you like to hear it. It's the reason most of us pick up a guitar in the first place, to play guitar parts we love. And when you can play an admirable part well, you've accomplished something, be it a cool solo, a knotty bebop head, or a chord melody that makes you go, 'wow, I want to be able to play that!' Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I think you are trying to put 'things to do when you can play well' (-such as improvise first-class arrangements) ahead of 'learning how to play well.' For most guitar players, learning how to make a long series of changes like Conti does here takes time and effort. It's hard to be creative with chord melody before you can execute it fluidly. No one is AGAINST being as good at this as Conti is (--and his long list of published arrangements in Just Jazz Guitar magazine shows that many serious jazz guitarists think he is first-rate at this) but the question is, 'how to get there?' I think the old way---learn good jazz lines, play them to death, experiment with them, and develop your own style---has the best track record.
-
I think I live on a jazz only planet, Mark
I definitely spent a lot of time in my guitar playing life picking up licks and learning them note for note...I still learn classical pieces often and am consistently wowed by the technique and discipline needed to pull them off.
But when I got into jazz, I also got introduced to a whole new concept that I love the most...the fact that, in many situations--there WASN'T a "right" way to play things. There wasn't a specific "chord progression" I had to strum in a certain rhythm...the melody was open to interpretation, I could add things to chords, substitute, improvise...it was liberating...and that's the stuff that jazz is about to me.
So, from my school of thought, if one wants to become a better JAZZ player, then they have to play jazz, and spend their time working on the things that make one a better jazz player. I don't have a lot of time to practice anymore...so the idea of learning someone else's chord melody note for note is really a waste of time--for ME. I need to know a song in a different way to be able to play it the way I want...now, if I can hear a person do a chord melody and take some cool ideas from it---that's another story...I'm all for expanding my "bag of tricks." But I can't spend any time practicing something that's not practical--and because I'd never get up in front of an audience and play someone else's arrangement of a jazz tune, then it's not something I value being able to do.
If you're gaining things by learning the arrangements note for note, I envy you. It would take me weeks to play those tunes exactly like Bob, and I just can't spend weeks learning one song...I need to learn the nuts and bolts of it in an afternoon, then spent the weeks deconstructing and reconstructing it, improvising on the form.
I think I might have a form of adult ADD, actually.
-
I don't think it's the same one Joe Pass lived on----he thought improvising was a matter of recombining lines he knew by heart. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I think I live on a jazz only planet, Mark .
-
I don't think anything I said disagrees with Joe...that's the bag of tricks.
But to be honest with you, Joe's a lousy cat to take soundbyte wisdom from...he aas a master of both guitar playing and oversimplifying things. Joe had LITERALLY hundreds of tunes memorized and could play many of them solo...now if you have a brain catalog like that, maybe you can be truly aware of the fact you've memorized every lick you recombine on the fly when improvising...but for the average player, i think improv is a combo of licks we've internalized, finger "memory", melodic fishing, and a little luck (actual "playing what i hear in real time moments)
-
Having just gotten home from work (note to self: WHEN CAN I RETIRE!!!), and having read through this thread, I see multiple viewpoints, but none of them particularly contradictory. I think there may be some misunderstanding of the purpose of Conti's chord melody arrangements, probably because unless one reads the intro to one of his Signature Chord Melody Arrangement books, we can't get Conti's perspective. He presents his arrangements the way he does for a specific reason, and I think this will address Mr. Beaumont's and possibly others' comments.
Conti is showing a number of different ways to harmonize a given segment of the melody. In the preface to his arrangement books, he encourages the reader to experiment with the arrangement and NOT play it note for note. It is a vehicle for learning to play chord melody your own way, rather than his way. However, without some understanding of the process, one may not be able to get far trying to do that. In that case, just learning the arrangement as is will at least give a person something to play that sounds good.
He talks a bit in his arrangement books about texture, maybe playing single notes or partial chords or even none of his chords if you like the sound of something else better than what he did (we all have at least slightly different tastes in what we want to hear and play). Conti is all about experimentation and finding your own voice.
However, his arrangements have real value because you get to play and hear his ideas so you get a real solid sense of what this thing is about. Creativity (or at least the learning process) happens best when in a sort of guided framework, and Conti provides that through his arrangements. He provides the "nuts and bolts" of HOW he comes up with various harmonic ideas in The Formula.
None of his materials are intended for a complete beginner. He says, at the intro section of the first DVD of The Formula that you need to have a certain amount of diatonic theory under your belt to tackle this stuff. At the beginning of the Assembly Line DVD, I believe he says something about having to be able to at least get around on the fretboard, and suggests a good 2 years of playing time as a gross measure of preparedness. You could certainly just memorize a bunch of chord forms and bang through his chord melody arrangements, but that is not what his intentions for his students are.
If anybody wants to get the most out of this arrangement that is the focus of this thread, I would suggest learning it (but not necessarily memorizing it - just be able to play it smoothly), but then playing with it and making it your own. If you understand the harmonic concepts behind how he arrived at the chords he used, then you can discard those chords (all or some) and come up with your own. In The Formula, he will take a segment of melody and harmonize it several different ways, clearly stating that there are infinite possibilities for each lesson's melodic segment while also explaining in detail how he applied The Formula to creating the particular sequence of chords. It really doesn't matter how one comes about this understanding of how the harmonies work. Some people want to approach it with a whole litany of rules about what subs for what, while others use The Formula. I really don't believe there is a "right" or "wrong" to it, and Conti himself says that on one of his DVDs. He says there are many paths to the same end - which is making music.
By the way, just make another point clear, The Formula is NOT a course on harmony. Instead, it is a practical approach to USING harmony. Conti does talk a bit about harmony, and just as with Joe Pass on his videos, it is very obvious that Conti knows his theory. However, as also with Joe Pass, Conti chooses not to get into theory in his current DVDs, though who knows if he may do something on theory in the future. Conti is all about practical application, though he delves a bit into theory to make certain points (relative minor/major, cycle of 5ths, inversions, intervals, various types of chord subs, etc.), but only in specific context to some application of it.
I hope that helps.
Tony
-
Yeah, I hope I don't come off as trying to contradict Conti, but rather, to give some insight as someone who didn't have other's materials to work from and what I found most valuable, and would find valuable in a lesson like this.
I know I'm no jazz master, but I can do a three hour solo gig, so this particular slice of the music is something I've spent a lot of time on. That's why I share my experience, because I'm very familiar with the roadblocks someone going this route will encounter.
-
Yeah, Joe was not the best teacher. I think Carol Kaye---who knew Joe and played with him---is better than he was at conveying the basics, though she too can get maddeningly elliptical about the transition from 'this and that' to what they actually do. Herb Eliis went at it the other way: learn these lines perfectly, play them over and over, play around with them, and your own style will develop. That approach can be frustrating for younger players who feel it is their birthright to have everything explained to them Right Now but in the long run, I think it works well. (Imitate until you cobble together your own style.) Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
I think Conti does a better job in his "Jazz Lines," showing how to relate several basic lines to certain shapes (-not the Charlie Christian / Herb Ellis shapes but the principle is similar). And I think his emphasis is right: play, play, play, play, and the more you play, the more clear The Theory You Need To Know becomes. We seem to understand this in other practical fields, such as developing a golf swing, learning to tell a joke, acting: you do it all you can, imitating your idol, and gradually develop a style that works for you. When you have trouble, you ask someone who knows more than you do, and try out what he suggests. If it works, work it to death; if it doesn't, ask someone else. But in the meantime, keep swinging that club!
I said this on another thread the other day: we all know that Charlie Parker spent several years playing 8 hours a day. We know he was a genius. We never ask, "If he was a genius, why did he have to practice so much?" But it's only because he practiced so much that he could unleash the music in him. (And, surprisingly, that music he unleashed was built up from the things he spent years practicing 8 hours a day!)
-
This is really an interesting conversation we have going here. I have mentioned in another thread that it was in the late 70s that I played in the road band - full time for about two years - no "day job", just musician. I taught myself to play, though what that really means is stealing licks off records, the Mickey Baker book, and watching/imitating other people. That is really what we are doing with Conti's materials - watching/imitating other people. So when I was first learning, there really wasn't much around either. When I encountered Conti's materials, I was really excited because I have always felt that there was something about this guitar playing that I just wasn't getting. I have certainly done my share of arranging tunes prior to using his materials, but it really was a sort of "hit or miss" proposition in that I was never satisfied with the results even though other people seemed to be. I have played a lot of solo stuff too. I have not sat on a three hour gig, so I am not claiming that, but I have continued to play for audiences on and off over the years since leaving the band.
I think I mentioned in another thread what the "real" story of my band experience was. Most of us who were on the Holiday Inn circuit were passable players, but certainly not the caliber of Conti. I could read charts and full notation and get around on the fretboard. That kept me working as long as I cared for that lifestyle. There are people like Conti around - people who have played jazz festivals with "name brand" musicians as one of the video links I posted shows Conti doing with Jimmy McGriff on organ. He has played with a number of people -including Carol Kaye, and has made a living as a professional musician for quite some time. When I was on the road, most (if not all) of the agents were musicians who found they could make a living off the backs of other working musicians so they essentially retire from the road. Personally, I think that Conti's choice of building up a teaching business giving honest and quality instruction is a far better (morally and otherwise) way to begin to build another income than being a booking agent. Conti is still a working musician, playing gigs in and around Las Vegas. He also plays the NAMM show, but I am not sure if he is doing jazz festivals anymore. The road really tears you up after a while, and most real working musicians dream of being able to get out and still survive financially. Again, those who have that road experience will appreciate what I am saying. It is a completely different experience for those with day jobs who dabble in this in their spare time, like me these days.
Here is a short wikipedia entry on Conti: Robert Conti - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The thing is, I am always looking to learn, and when I found Conti's materials, despite having experience of my own already behind me, I felt that I could learn a lot from him. I have talked about his materials in groups and been shot down for doing so, being called a "shill" for Conti. I am not saying that anybody here is doing that, but there have been some really odd experiences in other forums in the past. I am not getting paid to post about his materials. What I am trying to do is point those who feel they still have more to learn, to a person who is more than qualified through his accomplishments, and who has developed a method that produces real results.
There is a lot of "stuff" on the internet where people are claiming to have this or that method. Anybody can be whatever they want on the internet, so it can be quite difficult to recognize when the real thing comes along. Go to Conti's site and watch what his students are doing in their videos. There is quite a range of skill levels displayed there. But they are all enjoying playing music. In particular, look for videos by a guy named Mike irish, who heads up a music department at a college in Michigan as he talks about his experiences with Conti's materials.
Here is a page on Mike Irish: Michael Irish | Michigan Tech Visual & Performing Arts
It seems to me that there are many ways to learn to play and to continue to learn to play. Sharing our respective experiences is a good thing, and we can all benefit from that. But I suppose what I am talking about here is credentials. I think that is what seems to get ignored a lot when people are considering who to listen to on the net.
Tony
-
I'm assuming that's directed at me.
im definitely not questioning Conti's methods. Actually, it sounds like I support what he's saying about not worrying about playing his arrangements note for note.
Im just adding the perspective of the guy who's actually here, has a family, limited practice time, and who's out there playing solo gigs. I'm no guitar god...but I think sometimes hearing from regular people who play out and don't have eight hours a day to practice is important too, since that's the typical member here. Those are my "credentials." And I mean that not to be snippy, but to mean "I don't have credentials but I do have experience on this topic."Last edited by mr. beaumont; 05-21-2013 at 10:10 PM.
-
No, my comments were not directed at anybody, other than probably the first sentence where I said that I started before there were any books or materials as there are today. My overall point is that we (collectively, not just you or any other single person) talk about the "greats", such as Joe Pass, as we are in this thread. We bring up guys like that because they have credentials that we all recognize. Conti likewise has those credentials. As Mark commented, Joe Pass "wasn't the greatest teacher". It is not uncommon that a great player may not be the best teacher. But Conti has credentials AND has develped a series of materials that really do teach very well. There are a lot of people around the internet advertising various materials to teach guitar (I don't see you doing that - you said you teach guitar, but I don't see you making claims abut some book or method that will turn a guy into a great player), but often these lead to nothing for the student. I think that is part of the reason so many end up collecting tons of books and DVDs, looking for something that will "work".
I see you putting up videos such as your SOTW series that I personally have enjoyed seeing. I think I only commented on one or two of them though. The only thing you commented on that I responded to possibly negatively was a comment abut Conti's "No Modes, No Scales - no money down" and something about "soundbytes", though I am getting a sense that this is a phrase you use to describe something other than what it initially sounded like to me. Instead of arguing, I merely explained what that ws about with regard to his manner of teaching adn we all moved on. I do think it would be difficult to form an opinion about Conti's method without seeing it or at least going to his site and digging in a bit. Also, I think that calling another's efforts to learn somebody else's arrangement a "party trick" is a bit much. Imitation is a valid way to learn a craft, and is als how some people enjoy playing guitar.
By the way, I also play out as apart of a jazz-oriented group with an excellent vocalist. I seem to remain in and out of bands since I left the road. Funny how that works.
TonyLast edited by tbeltrans; 05-21-2013 at 10:26 PM.
-
I gotcha...I wasn't sure, since I hunk I was the only one providing a different perspective in this thread.
FWIW, I think Conti's stuff is pretty darn good, although the "hard sell" of it turns me off a little bit...but he definitely knows what he's talking about and relates it in a way that people can learn from.
ive been on a kick with the "sound byte wisdom" thing lately, because I see so much of it and I think it's everything that's wrong with education on the Internet...it's not cats like Conti who perpetuate it--but it is some of his fans...or rather, people who watch five minutes of a free video and think hey have it figured out...Conti does give them the ammo, unfortunately, with lines like the "no scales, no modes" business...next thing you know, there's fifty cats online going " modes are useless! Chord scale theory has no place in learning jazz" and they have no idea what they're talking about, they're just regurgitating a nugget of info they never understood in the first place.
thats the stuff that irritates me.
as for this thread, I really do hope I didn't come off as posed to Conti's material...all I'm saying is, if you want to play jazz and specifically solo jazz guitars, there's a lot of stuff to work on, and taking weeks to play someone else's arrangement isn't going to give you that much in e end...now, analyzing someone else's arrangement and applying what they do to other songs and other keys...that's priceless.
-
Jeff: Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
This is directed to (not at) you - since I am quoting your post. Here is another perspective on the "hard sell" thing, since that seems to be what many who, if they criticize anything about Conti at all, will cite this. Conti is running an internet-based business. I have been looking into the possibility of doing something online too so maybe I can retire a year or two early. I have been reading a lot about what it takes to be successful, and it isn't a pretty picture. There is a lot of "noise" out there and it is quite difficult to get noticed. Also, as I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of people with no credentials making a lot of noise about this or that guitar method. I think it is a lot of empty competition in that there is no real substance of worth in much of it. Unfortunately, Conti has to compete with all of that. So, unfortunately, he has to advertise as he does to attract customers. Clearly, he is doing something right because his business seems to be doing rather well and he obviously has a lot of satisfied customers. So this seems to be a nasty business from one perspective and what we see isn't the half of it, so to speak.
When there wasn't the internet and people had to pay dearly to advertise in the back of magazines, there was a sifting out process so that only the most determined and financially feasible businesses could get their word out. Now, anybody with a keyboard and ISP can make a lot of noise about their product. Conti has a strong business background in his history and he is clearly not squeamish about going for the market. Many musicians would not be able to do that. It is certainly to our benefit that he can and does, because otherwise, we would not know about his teaching products and that really would be a great loss for many of us.
"No modes, no scales" is a means of Conti differentiating himself from other approaches to jazz guitar. It is something that people will remember. He really is talking about his focus on learning to play by playing. His perspective is to play it first and then seek to understand it. If he can get you to play, you will be motivated to want to understand why what you are playing works as it does. He gives you the "how", and there are plenty of resources that give you the "why", probably too many focus on just that. So his use of that phrase means something qute different than people who are looking for an easy way out might interpret it as. Too many people will form an uninformed opinion of what Conti is about without ever bothering to really find out. I think that is what you are encountering when you hear people making claims about that phrase, as you indicated in your response.
As for memorizing vs analyzing arrangements, I tend to think that whatever a person wants to do to enjoy music is fair game. I can tell you that when I started into The Formula, though I intellectually understood what Conti was doing, it did not become practical for me until I went through a number of his arrangements. I found that working at memorizing them seemed to really get those chord phrases into my hands. It is never my intention to perform a memorized arrangement, but the process of memorizing seems to really get me to dig into the tune in a way that sort of skimming along it doesn't. What I mean by "sort of skimming along it" is that I will open a fakebook and quickly skim through a tune, slapping together an arrangement on the spot. That is a skill that I will be working on the rest of my life, slowing improving. That seems to use a different part of the brain somehow than does ingraining chordal phrases into my hands as is the practice of memorizing. To Conti, those arrangements he does are an important part of the learning process because that is where you experience the "finished product" that his Assembly Line and The Formula book/DVD sets teach the nuts and bolts of. It is difficult to really see the whole process in perspective until you are quite familiar with the end result. I can vouch for the accuracy of Conti's approach.
I think we are fundamentally in agreement on most points. However, I do believe that players that came up the way that Conti, Joe Pass, and others of his time and place did, really did not spend time on modes and that sort of thing. I don't mean that to sound like they learned out of thin air, but in conversation with Conti, it is clear that he came up "from the streets" learning from other guys in his neighborhood, off of records, and then on the bandstand. Conti says this on several of his DVDs. It isn't that these guys didn't pay their dues, but not necessarily in the same way that people do today. He says that the way he teaches is really the way he learned, though instead of copying recordings, we are copying from his books. I have certainly done my share of lifting from recordings, as obviously have you, so we are not strangers to that process. Conti definitely knows his theory, but he says he dug in after having played the stuff for years and learned it on his own, and then pretty much focusing on what related to what he was playing rather than as a separate subject from practical music making. He feels that most players will be similarly motivated once they get the music into their hands. What he says on his DVDs and what he says in conversation are the same thing, so he is quite consistent in this. I had an opportunity to talk to Conti at length when I called recently to purchase a Conti guitar. It was quite an interesting conversation and he was quite open to discussing music and guitars. He does seem to feel that there is way too much emphasis on learning things that don't necessarily contribute directly to one's ability to play music. He isn't opposed to learning some of these things, but one should focus on playing tunes and learn the rest in the context of that. When people go off into deep discussion of modes and related theory, his reaction is that they are focusing on the wrong things - the action is on the fretboard and in the tunes. That is how he grew up and it is a very different view than that held by many people today (at least in forum discussions), it seems.
Tony
-
I almost forgot about this one. I have no trouble with that chord and use it lot because I liike the voicing. Do you play a short scale guitar? That may be the difference. My Johnny Smith has a 25" scale and my Conti has (I think) 24.6" scale. Try the same form farther up the fretboard where the frets are closer together, even going from the chord form before to that form and then the one after. Do it slow until it is smooth, then speed it up. Then move that three chord sequence down the fretboard toward the original position. It is worth getting that form into your hands. There are alternative voicings for that chord we can discuss if you wish. One is the Ab maj 7 at the 8th fret, with the melody as the G on the second string, 8th fret and the pinky on the 11th fret 5th string (the Ab root). There are others near the original form so you don't have to jump around. I can voice one or two for you tomorrow if you want. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
Tony
-
I'll be honest, it almost seems like you're trying to sell me on Conti now.. I really never dissed his methods. Originally Posted by tbeltrans
Jeff:
This is directed to (not at) you - since I am quoting your post. Here is another perspective on the "hard sell" thing, since that seems to be what many who, if they criticize anything about Conti at all, will cite this. Conti is running an internet-based business. I have been looking into the possibility of doing something online too so maybe I can retire a year or two early. I have been reading a lot about what it takes to be successful, and it isn't a pretty picture. There is a lot of "noise" out there and it is quite difficult to get noticed. Also, as I mentioned earlier, there are a lot of people with no credentials making a lot of noise about this or that guitar method. I think it is a lot of empty competition in that there is no real substance of worth in much of it. Unfortunately, Conti has to compete with all of that. So, unfortunately, he has to advertise as he does to attract customers. Clearly, he is doing something right because his business seems to be doing rather well and he obviously has a lot of satisfied customers. So this seems to be a nasty business from one perspective and what we see isn't the half of it, so to speak.
When there wasn't the internet and people had to pay dearly to advertise in the back of magazines, there was a sifting out process so that only the most determined and financially feasible businesses could get their word out. Now, anybody with a keyboard and ISP can make a lot of noise about their product. Conti has a strong business background in his history and he is clearly not squeamish about going for the market. Many musicians would not be able to do that. It is certainly to our benefit that he can and does, because otherwise, we would not know about his teaching products and that really would be a great loss for many of us.
"No modes, no scales" is a means of Conti differentiating himself from other approaches to jazz guitar. It is something that people will remember. He really is talking about his focus on learning to play by playing. His perspective is to play it first and then seek to understand it. If he can get you to play, you will be motivated to want to understand why what you are playing works as it does. He gives you the "how", and there are plenty of resources that give you the "why", probably too many focus on just that. So his use of that phrase means something qute different than people who are looking for an easy way out might interpret it as. Too many people will form an uninformed opinion of what Conti is about without ever bothering to really find out. I think that is what you are encountering when you hear people making claims about that phrase, as you indicated in your response.
As for memorizing vs analyzing arrangements, I tend to think that whatever a person wants to do to enjoy music is fair game. I can tell you that when I started into The Formula, though I intellectually understood what Conti was doing, it did not become practical for me until I went through a number of his arrangements. I found that working at memorizing them seemed to really get those chord phrases into my hands. It is never my intention to perform a memorized arrangement, but the process of memorizing seems to really get me to dig into the tune in a way that sort of skimming along it doesn't. What I mean by "sort of skimming along it" is that I will open a fakebook and quickly skim through a tune, slapping together an arrangement on the spot. That is a skill that I will be working on the rest of my life, slowing improving. That seems to use a different part of the brain somehow than does ingraining chordal phrases into my hands as is the practice of memorizing. To Conti, those arrangements he does are an important part of the learning process because that is where you experience the "finished product" that his Assembly Line and The Formula book/DVD sets teach the nuts and bolts of. It is difficult to really see the whole process in perspective until you are quite familiar with the end result. I can vouch for the accuracy of Conti's approach.
I think we are fundamentally in agreement on most points. However, I do believe that players that came up the way that Conti, Joe Pass, and others of his time and place did, really did not spend time on modes and that sort of thing. I don't mean that to sound like they learned out of thin air, but in conversation with Conti, it is clear that he came up "from the streets" learning from other guys in his neighborhood, off of records, and then on the bandstand. Conti says this on several of his DVDs. It isn't that these guys didn't pay their dues, but not necessarily in the same way that people do today. He says that the way he teaches is really the way he learned, though instead of copying recordings, we are copying from his books. I have certainly done my share of lifting from recordings, as obviously have you, so we are not strangers to that process. Conti definitely knows his theory, but he says he dug in after having played the stuff for years and learned it on his own, and then pretty much focusing on what related to what he was playing rather than as a separate subject from practical music making. He feels that most players will be similarly motivated once they get the music into their hands. What he says on his DVDs and what he says in conversation are the same thing, so he is quite consistent in this. I had an opportunity to talk to Conti at length when I called recently to purchase a Conti guitar. It was quite an interesting conversation and he was quite open to discussing music and guitars. He does seem to feel that there is way too much emphasis on learning things that don't necessarily contribute directly to one's ability to play music. He isn't opposed to learning some of these things, but one should focus on playing tunes and learn the rest in the context of that. When people go off into deep discussion of modes and related theory, his reaction is that they are focusing on the wrong things - the action is on the fretboard and in the tunes. That is how he grew up and it is a very different view than that held by many people today (at least in forum discussions), it seems.
Tony
-
Just to throw my two cents in this discussion. First, I met Robert Conti by chance in a restaurant on Mother's Day in the mid-Eighties. He was playing mostly ballads that afternoon, dressed to the nines in a nice suit, and focused on his music. I had to tear myself away after three songs or so to rejoin my family. He played superbly. And that was the last I heard of him until I discovered YouTube. Second, I have never purchased any of his DVDs or CDs, though I have seen parts of his DVD teaching videos. I note that he used to have longer demonstration segments on his web site for things like "the lineman" or other products than are up today. I did watch this latest thing up here on Amazing Grace. I think he is sincere in trying to offer a teaching method that reflects his experience learning music in a practical manner - by playing tunes.
I am curious - without writing lengthy expositions, can anyone who uses his Formula and other basic teaching videos explain what the "formula" consists of in terms of how he suggests you approach a song? Although I am pretty well versed in music theory over the past fifty years of playing experience, I also don't care to immerse myself for years in studying scales and modes, other than the major and minor diatonic scales I learned as a kid studying classical guitar. I grind my teeth when I hear lengthy discussions of modes and scales and which ones to play over what chord in a progression. Not to over simplify, but I always suggest that, given that there are twelve tones in Western music, "play the ones that sound good to you and not the others". That is my way of saying that I tend to agree with Joe Pass' dictum - learn as many songs as you can. Because in learning songs you develop your ear and your technique.
I did buy two guitar DVDs, one by Jeff Linsky performing several of his own compositions with a percussionist and a Martin Taylor DVD playing six solo Jimmy Van Heusen tunes and offering his insights into arranging. Both are monster players, though Linsky was not really trying to teach. Martin Taylor is a superb teacher whose practical suggestions are simple yet on the mark. But while I appreciated both videos, including the sheet music notation of the songs, in the end I think you have to ultimately develop your own conceptions of a song and style. For example, much as I like Martin's playing, I find his technique to be more idiosyncratic, and when I play "Here's that rainy day", I voice the music differently. Which is fine and natural.
I have never been a "lick player", though I'm surely influenced by all the musicians I have listened to over the many years. And I do create my own library of transcriptions of jazz standards to complement my one Hal Leonard Real Little Ultimate Jazz Fake Book, which is essentially a melody staff with lyrics and chords (eg, Fm7b5). My transcriptions are similar, though I do a second staff line with block chord voicings intended to function as "shorthand" for me to improvise over. Apart from classical music I memorized up through my twenties and thirties, I never play any music the same way twice, which to me is liberating, especially since I find it much harder to memorize lengthy music these days. I essentially play what I hear in my head and heart.
My advice to anyone approaching arranging and developing a style of solo chord melody playing is to start with the melody and the bass line. And then simply harmonize the melody with notes that imply the chords and colors you want to hear (extensions and the like). If there is a "formula" beyond that, I'd like to hear it. I do appreciate musical analysis, but my mind and eyes just glaze over after a very short while, even discussions of substitutions and such. That is not to denigrate the study of theory, but theory to me is the explanation of why something sounds good, not a substitute. Certainly you can learn from other players, but in the end you play what you hear. My way - to coin a phrase. ;-)
To get back to Robert Conti's Amazing Grace video. Nice reharmonizations. He does say he likes thick chordal harmonies, though I think I like a more contrapuntal approach and implying harmonies in places. I think his approach is quite valid for putting players on the right road to developing their own style. I do prefer Martin Taylor's commentaries from a 'teaching' perspective.
Reply With Quote
Playing live and getting the best sound from the...
Yesterday, 02:08 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos