-
Irez87..yeah..been "writing" for a while..(that means before gray hair..when there was hair) thanks for the comment..
when I studied with Ted Greene..the most challenging aspect was not playing what he showed me..but how to "think and hear" what he showed me..In your post you mention a 13b9 chord..now without twisting my fingers out of shape I can think of and hear 3 four note voicings for that chord..out of context..I can also think and hear several ways of using it..as a diatonic altered dominant and as part of a symmetrical min 3rd run acting as a passing chord into several points of resolution..where I still struggle is hearing chords with just the melodic line.. not a complete chord melody..but chords that have harmonic relation to the melody note or a melodic use-soprano note of chord ..if the melody note is Bb for example A13b9 with the Bb on top would work..but that is out of context..what is the melody note doing..is it ending a phrase-it may require some type of ii7-V7 consideration or part of a 5 note passage in the middle of the melody..many possibilities here or the beginning of a phrase..a tonic chord variation perhaps in this case may work..
Greene stressed "experimentation" - many of the chord structures and progressions he discovered were through "lets see what happens when I press this button" thus some of his "11 finger chords"
to the other end of the scale..so to speak..players like jeff beck create "sounds" from the guitar that could be and are inferred chords and even entire chord passages without actually plying the form..our ears interpret sounds and can mold them to fit "in the picture" without losing context of the entirety of the musical piece..this is the magic of music..where rules are suspended and imagination is unlimited
-
09-15-2015 11:07 PM
-
I just would like to stress another perspective too...
Guitar is a complex instrument concerning orientation... maybe one of the most complex. You can pick the same notes in different ways, the organization of the fretboard seems to be irrational and chaotic in comparison to piano.
This makes fingering and shapes very important tool in studying and playing quitar.
And this has both positive and negative effects... depends on how and where it is applied.
Classical players usually do not learn shapes, they study fretboard as if it is some absolute set of notes, the way they the fretboard is strongly connected with notation, they learn to sight read simultaneously so they play written notes first of all, not chord shapes - even when they have exactly the same fingering.
So it all works lvice versa too - they look at the fretboard and see the staff with notes...
Regarding scales fingering there's the same thing - classical fingerings are there to render the most efficient ergonomic technique to control the sound and nuances while playing learnt pieces or sight-reading traditional notation.
These fingering correspond again only with imaginative or virtual staff that you 'sight-read'- they do not reflect harmonic concepts
That makes musical thinking much more free from - call it - instrumental restriction. Much more but not completely!
That's really positive.
What is negative that imho being involved for las 100-150 years so much into development of sight reading skills and performance of what is written
(Bach and Mozart were great composers and improvizors but prqactically any student can play their music tecnically, after Chopin indiviual vituosity came forward, teachers forget that Liszt and Rakhmaninov were exceptional players and academic education made this exceptional level a normal standard repertoire). Sorry for going off-top a bit..
But these factors together turned academic education into techical marathon in a great deal...
they spent years in trying to perform every little sign written by composer and achieve oustanding results in that skill but they often have no understanding why these signs were written there and how they realate to general character of musical piece.
(There was a scandal when young Glenn Gould made Beethoven records that in most parts ignored composer's signs and indication - critics thought it was a provocation. But to me it was obviously music decision, he heard the music and he saw that this hearing was more important than written signs - by the way it's not the first time that the musicologists noticed that many signs in Beethoven's chamber music scores seem to be occasional.. as if he just did not care much, it seems paradoxal because his orchestra scores are on the contrary usually very playable, good orchestra could play them decently even without conductor if they will follow all the indications).
After all I met calssical guitarists who could not strum simple country song comping - they just did not know shapes)
They could pick the harmony of course but they could not play it in a prober style.
The other way...
Guitar is extremly popular instument so they start much more often from playing songs and learn chord shapes first (show me Am chord, man... and they know it's just Am (no idea there's a-minor behind it)...
Sometimes they grow into developing - and learn scales but again often without actual understanding what the scale really is.. they feel they get more knowledge, became more sophisticated.. and finally it forms kind of special 'guitaristic' theory... (Once a guy came up to me and asked - ok play penatatonics here... I know what pentatonics is from classical and ethnic music studies but I still could not get what he meant (now I know)... but he said it very naturally like something any guitar player should know... at the same time very quickly I got that he did not see the harmony and notes on the fretboard)
But still there's positive point in it... some styles just require these knowledge. Besides struming chord shapes should develop good functional hearing, good feel of harmonic colour and chord connections as function (moving harmony is not necessarily mivin voices)
And finally there's also another obssession. Since voicing is also a technical issue for guitar, many guitarists are getting interested in this process as it is... and often it turns in a kind of guitar 'how we can play it on guitar' show... not on purpose, I can understand it may be fun...
But just imagine that any pianista would have played 'this highly admired performance' easily and nobody would have noticed it because there's nothing special in it musically...
Sorry for a long post and thamk for having read it
-
I did the "how can I play this on guitar show" at the last Barry Harris workshop. I did it because I felt like the pianists there didn't respect the guitar. When I started copying the piano, they looked over. One was like, "whoa, that's pretty good". So I get that last point. All great points all around, I just feel like my points are often slighted (not saying in this thread in particular). I will do my best to hear you all out if you can do the same for me (this was hard to type with one hand
)
-
It's a free forum, Irez87... we cannot make people like and appreciate us by asking them to like and appreciate us...
And I think the only way to keep conversation is to really keep the subject and to develope your point - even if you feel ignored of misunderstood...
We can hardly develope a thread by calling people out 'let's keep talking!'
If you have something to share and to develope publicly just keep it- I am sure there are people who read it and sooner or later some feedback will get.. you know good resonator can bring you real feedback)
-
I cannot recall precisely (without digging out my earliest classical guitar method books), but one in the introduction quoted Beethoven as saying that in the hands of the right musician the guitar is like a miniature orchestra. Classical guitar instruction is wedded to reading notation from day one, perhaps apart from Suzuki classes. "Shapes" do emerge as note clusters in various positions, but harmonizing the Segovia scales for me helped develop true fret board "awareness". Voicing becomes something you learn as you hear better.
I was researching "block chords" to deepen my understanding, as I always just thought of them as note clusters in terms of notation. I reinforce my reading skills virtually daily working with Sibelius arrangements. The 'close voicing' aspect of block chords does seem to characterize them. In my own arrangements I use block chords for simplicity as a map for improvisation. As opposed to a static fully developed "classical" style arrangement, which I try to avoid. I try to play the guitar in a "pianistic" fashion in terms of note choices. Clearly a guitarist cannot play quite as polyphonically as a pianist, but the portability, expressivity, and intimacy of the instrument are compelling.
Just to underline the beauty potential in the guitar, I will link something I heard and played along as best I could last night. An Italian guitarist playing Jobim's Chega de Saudade in Dm. The richness of his performance harmonically is enhanced by the beauty of his instrument, a nylon archtop to die for.
-
In my experience, classical guitarists are among the worst sight readers I meet.
Their general modus operandi is to study and perfect repertoire over time.
The editions are often heavily fingered. Unlike string and wind players,
they don't play in orchestras or even very many ensembles.
Piano has a large body of chamber music and they are first call to accompany singers.
There are of course exceptions but generally because an effort to do so was made or
they stumbled into the necessity for the skill.
On the other hand, classical guitar compositions are not obsessed with block chords.
-
I take an ideal version of course...In my experience, classical guitarists are among the worst sight readers I meet.
Probably depends on educational system and level... I suppose they do not play in orchestras so they have possibility 'to avoid' it.
But though we played repertoire learnt by heart at school, sight-reading was obligatory subject...
I can't say I was perfect at it but I could take out music and play it sight-reading just for pleasure.. it was common skills (I mean standard repertoire - not extrrmely virtuoso or non-conventional modern music where you have to take time to prepare it - but Sor's Sonatas for example or even Bach' pieces).
Another problem is that classical guitar seems still to be outsider - and that leads to very poor education in some cases...
I know conservatory graduates who can hardly pick and miss the frets and they keep playing recitals and teaching - and people pay for it...
There's a guy on youtube who teaches guitar at some University - Nelson Amos - but he can hardly play... I do not think somethig like this could be ever possible in piano or violine education...
Besides they're lazy))) Painists and violines have to know dozens of concerts and sonats by heart - to be ready to substitute on first call as you mentioned - guitarists often have problems to prepare one or two set of pieces...
-
Why in the world would classical guitarists be bad readers of notation? Generally they learn notation from day one and spend endless hours looking at sheet music. My impression of jazz guitarists, on the other hand, is that they can handle single notes but not chords without a cheat sheet. Wonder why?
-
some may disagree with you on this point..being that chords are primary source of the solo material jazz players use..I know your not referring to top jazz players with that statement(pass, hall, burrell, benson etc) ..many of todays young players are fairly well rounded in all aspects of jazz..including the technical aspects of recording and marketing..I don't know of any players today who do not have a working knowledge of chords and most have studied theory and know how to communicate using the common language of theory..
Originally Posted by targuit
-
Hey, Wolf! I was just pointing out that many jazz players speak about using clarinet or other wind instruments for their reading practice which I find rather ludicrous in some ways, as wind players play one note at a time rather than play polyphonically. And in truth I have no bone to pick. I consider myself a good reader with fifty plus years of experience.
Classical guitarists seem to take a lot of knocks as to their jazz improvisation as well as reading skills. I'd like to see even good jazz players tackle a Benjamin Britten piece like Nocturnal - separates the men from the boys, so to speak.
Then again, none of us likely can keep up with a good pianist.
-
Why in the world would classical guitarists be bad readers of notation? Generally they learn notation from day one and spend endless hours looking at sheet music.
I suppose it was meant - not just reading, but sight-reading... the last means is to read relatively unknow piece of music on the concert level of performance...
(Though mostly classical soloists play by heart anyway)
Reading and sight-reading are strictly practical skills - in other words people read what they need...My impression of jazz guitarists, on the other hand, is that they can handle single notes but not chords without a cheat sheet. Wonder why?
as I posted somewhere already.. it is stupid to expect that even brilliant actor would read completely unknown part with all necessary details of character directly from the book... probably - due to his experience - he can more or less fake it..
but to really act he needs to know it in advance, to work with it... same thing with music...
-
targuit...point taken..reading: material and ability for jazz guitarists (most guitarist of any style) is a "nightmare" .. I still find myself puzzled at some passages.. E-flat!-is that the fourth fret or the eighth fret?? (stories of Howard Roberts missing reading ques should make up for every sightreaders prayers of wishing to read like Howard)..
your correct..no guitarist of any style can keep up with a good pianist..especially if he is named bill evans..
-
Adam Levy (great player) takes a similar approach. He studied with Ted Greene. I like both approaches and want to be able to do both. One possible pitfall of the second approach is players losing sight of the rhythm dimension which is one of the guitar's strong suits. The guitar can do rhythm better than the piano IMO. I've heard a lot of chord melody that sounds pretty but just doesn't swing, if it is even played in time. Also, often I wish the player would sing a verse or two, then solo, rather than playing the melody the whole song.
-
Originally Posted by Irez87
In my humble opinion, its important to really memorize shapes - particularly 4 note shapes - at least for me, its hard to think about voiceleading unless I know multiple shapes over the fingerboard. Then each shape to me then has many variations and you can weave together chords. You can spend alot of time just doing this. The 4 notes shapes can also be economized to 3 for faster tempos or a different texture.
My main problem is that I don't really follow any voiceleading principles other a few obvious ones. Does anyone have a voiceleading concept that they use when dealing with four part harmony?
-
One of the primary voice leading concepts is to follow the melodic path in the particular voice - bass, tenor, soprano - that is most seamless. When analyzed individually, the bass line is one voice, the melody another, and the 'inner voices' and colorations happen as well.
-
Does anyone have a voiceleading concept that they use when dealing with four part harmony?
Yes, EDS, I do... but I'd probably get banned for the amount of times I've said it.
Whatever, I love this forum. But what happens, happens:
The concept is you train your ear to hear random dyads and triads against a tonal center. You can train your ear to hear an Ab and Eb, think "C" (or whatever your reference is) and hear that as a major triad or the upper structure of an Fm7 chord. Is this quick and easy? No. But I think you all hate snake oil techniques here anyway.
The part about rhythm I agree with. I have lost the groove trying to voice lead harmony. That's why most of my harmony is now 3 and 2 note voicings with some octaves thrown in for good measure. Why? Cause piano players do it, and it doesn't clutter up the sound of the band (especially as the guitar can be, not always, be can be muddy)
But... I have heard jazz guitarists play block chords in all their glory, but they put the stabs all in the wrong places. Dizzy's "he beeped when he shoulda bopped" should be taken as the Rosetta Stone of all jazz playing and improvisation. The one thing that REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY helped my comping, and I started a thread on this way back, is hearing time in phrases instead of quarter notes. Then you can work on rhythmically cadencing your harmonies within those phrase frameworks.
Intrigued? Check out my Ear Training Journal. Yeah, I'll plug it shamelessly. But the journal also details my struggles with the material as well. I post links to all the materials I've studied as well.
Death of a Salesman? Nah, more like Birth of a Musician who also happens to teach Special Education and is very knowledgeable about the learning process. But everyone learns a little different. Check it out, non-the-less, you might find something that tickles your fancy.
-
Well for one, there is "harmonic continuity", as Berklee calls it. Are you familiar with it? Originally Posted by EDS
-
Is that the shortest distance to the next harmonic sweet spot? Please define.
Apart from the issue of voice leading, which is critical, what is very important for me is rhythmic patterns. Especially those that arise from the lyrical rhythmic nature of human speech which can be the song lyric.
-
Thanks for the reply - what does that mean "rhythmically cadencing your harmonies " Originally Posted by Irez87
-
I just looked it up "Harmonic Continuity: Moving the notes of one chord as smoothly as possible to the notes of the next chord (root motion is independent)." Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Isn't this what most guitarists would do anyway?
-
EDS,
look at my Ear Training Journal. I'll post some examples of rhythmic cadencing tonight. It's all about thinking of comping as an extension of soloing, it's all about phrasing. But I wanna limit my comments on ear training to the journal to avoid frustration.
-
That's a non-specific tag line, but is generally true. There are specifics however. If you can't find the specifics and really want to know more, send me a PM and I'll be happy to help. Originally Posted by EDS
And no, guitarists break the concept all the time. Or perhaps I should say, some make the conscious effort to do this, and some don't. It's difficult to do consistently when you aren't aware of the concept in the first place.
Last edited by fumblefingers; 10-05-2015 at 09:19 AM.
Reply With Quote
Pitfalls of Patterns
Today, 06:06 PM in Improvisation