Best way to see major scale around triads?

[geezer]

I spent a good part of last year learning the major scale in 7 positions, like so:

Diagram is from Jens Larsen but I learnt it from another teacher. It was from the perspective of different modes so first shape would be F-lydian, followed by G-mixo, A-aeolian etc. I got to a point where I could play each mode/shape up and down, play the scale as 4-note chords and also play 4-note arpeggios up and down all within the same "box".

However, I was quite disappointed when this didnt improve my solo playing much, it only made me sound "scaly".

I since spent some time learning simple triads, major/minor/dim, and Im now very happy to be able to voice lead simple chord tone solos. It´s not much but the sound is sweet, I can play around with rhythm and melodic ideas/motifs and Im not just running scales up and down. Win!

However, once I started to get the triads down I felt like I want to be able to play some scale notes to connect the chord tones and make melodies more interesting.

My question is what is the best way to visualize the major(and other) scale?

I feel a strong aversion to the 7 positions as I felt they got me very little in terms of musicality. Triads are hard to spot, as they dont follow common chord shapes. Also, I find the positions very awkward to play, all those stretches dont sit well with my hand, I dont feel relaxed and thus play worse.

Now this 5 positions system(caged) seems very tempting to get into:


No stretches! Oh, joy!

I appreciate that 7 pos makes sense in terms of seeing the modes, is caged more difficult when it comes to modes?

Should I switch to caged or would that be a waste of time? Or do they complement each other? I could really use some guidance before commiting more time/energy to learning another system.

Or is there another way to go? Keep building on the triads? Tom Quayle has a system of intervals that also seems interesting. And there´s the approach where you learn scales in one octave shapes, seem good to keep away form just running long scales. Smaller chunks good, big chunks bad.

So many questions! Any input would be appreciated.

[pamosmusic]

Highly recommend (forum contributor) Jordan Klemons’s stuff.

Basically exactly what you’re describing and he knows his stuff and has put years into organizing it into a pedagogy.

[rpjazzguitar]

My short answer is "I don't know".

My longer answer is that maybe the following would be helpful.

In standards with old fashioned harmony (I believe called functional harmony) there's a chord or sequence of chords overlaying what has been called a tonal center. In simple tunes the tonal center may be the key of the tune. Sometimes it moves around. I don't think I can define it very well in this post.

But, I can give an example. The tune All of Me. Say it's in Cmajor. First two bars are Cmaj7. So, you have the chord tones C E G B. And, as a kind of harmonic background you have the Cmajor scale. So, you might come up with an idea using the chord tones and then enhance it with other notes from the Cmajor scale. Of course, you can use any note you want, but that's for later.

Next chord is E7. I think the tonal center hasn't changed. It's an E7, sure, but the background is still C tonal center, at least so it seems to me. The chord tones are now E G# B D. G# isn't in the tonal center. So, you can raise the G to G# and leave the rest of the tonal center as it was. Next chord is A7. It has a C#, so you can adjust the C in the tonal center to be a C#.

So, to summarize, you think chord tones and tonal center. If you experiment with this approach I imagine you'd find that the chord tones sound strong and consonant and the other tones may sound less so, but still useful. Scat sing - when you sing a line you like, put it on the guitar.

Someone may point out that raising the G to a G# yields A harmonic minor. Raising the C to a C# gives Dmelodic minor. If you want to think about that stuff, you certainly can and others apparently have found that sort of thing helpful. I see it also as a potential abyss.

Chords have chord tones, songs have tonal centers and you can get a long way with just that.

This presumes you can find the notes. If not, that's worth working on. I did it by learning to read, which worked very well. I'm not sure what to recommend to a non-reader.

[jazznylon]

I worked through caged intervals, triads and seventh note arpeggios in 12 keys (on other scales too). It was fine for the most part but the one weird arpeggio shape I recall playing is the major seventh on the bottom 4 strings (from position 2 in your graph). It is not a deal breaker for me personally as I think it is helpful to cultivate more flexibility in the mind and fingers. I'm in a somewhat similar boat as you and wondering where to go from here

[Rob MacKillop]

Jazz is a multifaceted thing, seeing many changes over the decades. The ideas outlined above are not the way the greats from the 1920s to 1960s at least learned jazz. If you want play jazz styles from that era, I don’t think you have a chance of learning it with this approach. But maybe you prefer the modal and Rock-influenced eras. The modern era is different again.

if your practice time is shorter, I would zone in on how players learned in the era that draws you in. What do you think?

[geezer]

@Peter Thanks, sounds like what I'm after and great to have him on the forum. I'll check it out!

@rpjazzguitar Thank you for the long answer! That is an interesting approach. If I understand you correctly I think I've done something similar while exploring Autumn Leaves. In A section, bar 6, D7, I played G natural minor but shifted F to F# to accomodate for the major 3rd of D7. Sounded great! I guess I discovered the harmonic minor

[starjasmine]

The Jens positions and the CAGED positions complement each other. There are many other fingerings as well. You don't have to pick one and adhere to it slavishly. The Jazz Police will not show up to bust you. In fact, the more ways you know how to do something, the better you'll understand it. As the saying goes, if the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.

The next thing to learn is arpeggios for maj, mi, dim and aug in all positions. Start with triads. Once you can play a triad arpeggio on any note, extend those to 7ths and then 9ths.

Arpeggios are chord tones; that is, every note in an arpeggio is a note in the chord, so there are no "wrong" notes. Learn to see the arpeggios that are in the scale fingerings that you already know. Then, when you solo, you can choose to emphasize chord tones and connect them with scalar runs. For example, find every C chord note in the C position of CAGED fingering. Find every A chord note in the A position of CAGED fingering. And so on.

I haven't watched a lot of their videos, but I'm sure that both Jens and Jordan have plenty of material on these topics.

Also, find a simple solo that catches your ear and start to steal licks from it. Try to map the licks back to the scale positions and arpeggios that you are learning. This will help you to make your solos more musical and less formulaic.

[geezer]

Jazz is a multifaceted thing, seeing many changes over the decades. The ideas outlined above are not the way the greats from the 1920s to 1960s at least learned jazz. If you want play jazz styles from that era, I don’t think you have a chance of learning it with this approach. But maybe you prefer the modal and Rock-influenced eras. The modern era is different again.

if your practice time is shorter, I would zone in on how players learned in the era that draws you in. What do you think?

Thank you Rob, I was just about to write that I like the styles from early jazz up until 1960s! I found my way into jazz from taking Lindy-hop classes for a couple years, so really digging those big band grooves. I'm liking some modern stuff as too, Chick Corea for example, but yeah, the earlier stuff is what I really want to learn.

What approach was used by the greats? How can I learn it? I'd love to hear more about it!

[Mick-7]

I got to a point where I could play each mode/shape up and down, play the scale as 4-note chords and also play 4-note arpeggios up and down all within the same "box"

Sounds like you're practicing the scales and chord arpeggios vertically in each position, but not horizontally, from position to position up and down the fingerboard. You have to practice playing your scales and chords through various positions up and down the neck, which will require some alteration of the fingerings.

Try dividing the fingerboard in half: 1st to 6th frets, and 6th to 12th frets. Your hand would cover all the notes within a 6th fret radius (by shifting up or down one fret), which will give you only 2-3 positions.

[Tal_175]

I feel a strong aversion to the 7 positions as I felt they got me very little in terms of musicality. Triads are hard to spot, as they dont follow common chord shapes. Also, I find the positions very awkward to play, all those stretches dont sit well with my hand, I dont feel relaxed and thus play worse.

I agree with this observation. The CAGED approach is more suitable for visualizing harmony on the fretboard as many of the common jazz grips live inside the CAGED positions intuitively. The CAGED based arpeggio fingerings also fit more naturally with these grips. But to get the most out of any system, you should get beyond seeing positions just as black dots. It's really helpful to see how these notes relate to the chords intervallically rather than just being dots. The 3notes per string systems optimize for playing scales with facility using the legato technique. So, I think it makes sense to start with the CAGED system if you want to learn the harmonic approach to guitar. Later on, if you feel the need, you can use both systems.

[starjasmine]

Now this 5 positions system(caged) seems very tempting to get into:

Apologies for not having read your OP more thoroughly. It sounds like you've already done a lot of what I suggested. Just break those chords up - play the notes one at a time instead of all at once - and you're playing arpeggios aka "broken chords."

The diagram of the CAGED positions that you posted misses a critical point: the chord shapes for which each position is named. Each one is named after the first-position chord/cowboy chord that is familiar to a beginner guitar player.

The following page does a nice job of mapping the open chord shapes to their CAGED forms, arpeggios and scales. It also shows how each CAGED position connects to the next one.

https://appliedguitartheory.com/less...theory-system/

It's important to note that CAGED, Jens' fingerings and so on can be used as a way to understand how to play any chord, key, scale or mode in any position on the neck of the guitar. It takes a lot of dedicated practice to be able to execute this in real time, so don't frustrate yourself by expecting to do it overnight. I understood the concept within the scope of a one-hour lesson, because I understood diatonic theory very well when I took that lesson. But it took years of daily practice before I could execute these ideas in real time while playing.

[Rob MacKillop]

What approach was used by the greats? How can I learn it? I'd love to hear more about it!

I’d start with Charlie Christian. First listen to the recordings over and over, like learning a language by its sound. That’s what Barney Kessel and others did in their teens. If you want help from books there are a few that show you his thinking, such as “Swing to Bop” by Stan Ayeroff, published by Mel Bay. My edition came with two CDs which are probably download files today.

Thats for solo playing. For chord stuff, it’s still worth looking at both Mickey Baker books. The first book was the focus of one or two study groups on this forum, and I have an old webpage that might be of help, though it’s a bit slow my modern online standards: Mickey Baker – ArchtopGuitar.net

Charlie Christian was often simple in a good way, but it worked because he swung like crazy, and only listening and playing along will help you with that. But when he let his hair down at Minton’s, he got quite avant-garde for his day. He also loved saxophonist Lester Young, so go digging there too.

[geezer]

Sounds like you're practicing the scales and chord arpeggios vertically in each position, but not horizontally, from position to position up and down the fingerboard. You have to practice playing your scales and chords through various positions up and down the neck, which will require some alteration of the fingerings.

Try dividing the fingerboard in half: 1st to 6th frets, and 6th to 12th frets. Your hand would cover all the notes within a 6th fret radius (by shifting up or down one fret), which will give you only 2-3 positions.

Yes, I've only been practising vertically so going horizontal is definitetly something I want to explore more. At the moment Im working on Garrison Fewells approach which open up the neck in a beautiful way, with triads reaching quite far up the neck.

[GuyBoden]

I spent a good part of last year learning the major scale in 7 positions, like so:

Above, those 3NPS patterns stretches are not the best for playing most Jazz from before 1960's.

But, for Rock/Fusion/Modern/Allan Holdsworth, then the 3NPS are good patterns.

Edit: In my humble hobbyist opinion.

[geezer]

Above, those 3NPS patterns stretches are not the best for playing most Jazz from before 1960's.

Thanks for input! They're not pure 3NPS though. 2NPS in every box I reckon... Anyhoo, I'm not a fan of 3NPS, and quite detest the sound of legato used to liberally.

[Christian Miller]

Above, those 3NPS patterns stretches are not the best for playing most Jazz from before 1960's.

But, for Rock/Fusion/Modern/Allan Holdsworth, then the 3NPS are good patterns.

Edit: In my humble hobbyist opinion.

I think this is broadly speaking true. But the 3nos is mostly an Holdsworthian thing I would say - so it’s more that specific school like Tim Miller etc. Post fusion players like Kurt Rosenwinkel are very much playing using the more conventional Berklee style fingerings. (Notice that Kurt never stretches, he shifts, similar to Metheny and Wes.)

For music with a high rate of harmonic change (like bebop) I think it is best to have small manageable scale positions that relate clearly to chord shapes. These could be stretch positions like 3nps. I prefer positions with less stretches.

What’s that? Do I have a video on it? I thought you’d never ask!

Re the OP - I think it’s good to think of musical language, theory and fingerings as somewhat separate. There’s a bunch of ways to finger a triad arpeggio for example, but the notes will be the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuyBoden]

Thanks for input! They're not pure 3NPS though. 2NPS in every box I reckon... Anyhoo, I'm not a fan of 3NPS, and quite detest the sound of legato used to liberally.

I use these type of patterns, I shift positions (up/down a semi-tone), see below:


Edit: To sound more like the classic Jazz played before 1960, I think you need CHROMATICSIM, so listen to the great Jazz recordings.

[Christian Miller]

I use these. NB not quite sure what the b7 is doing there - should be labelled C7 scale obviously.

[geezer]

Edit: To sound more like the classic Jazz played before 1960, I think you need CHROMATICSIM, so listen to the great Jazz recordings.

Agreed! I want my playing to be based in triads, with the addition a couple scale notes, and a good sprinkling of chromaticism.

[Christian Miller]

To sound more like the classic jazz before 1960 you need to swing.

Chromaticism is linked to rhythm in bebop.

[GuyBoden]

Agreed! I want my playing to be based in triads, with the addition a couple scale notes, and a good sprinkling of chromaticism.

Get some lessons from Christian, he's great at teaching that stuff.

[geezer]

I think this is broadly speaking true. But the 3nos is mostly an Holdsworthian thing I would say - so it’s more that specific school like Tim Miller etc. Post fusion players like Kurt Rosenwinkel are very much playing using the more conventional Berklee style fingerings. (Notice that Kurt never stretches, he shifts, similar to Metheny and Wes.)

For music with a high rate of harmonic change (like bebop) I think it is best to have small manageable scale positions that relate clearly to chord shapes. These could be stretch positions like 3nps. I prefer positions with less stretches.

What’s that? Do I have a video on it? I thought you’d never ask!

Re the OP - I think it’s good to think of musical language, theory and fingerings as somewhat separate. There’s a bunch of ways to finger a triad arpeggio for example, but the notes will be the same.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That video was spot on!

Having smaller shapes will make things clearer and more manageable for me I think. Got the pdf and looking forward to applying it to some standards Thank you Christian!

I feel like spending all that time and energy learning 7-pos was a waste of time... but I guess you dont know until you try something...

[geezer]

To sound more like the classic jazz before 1960 you need to swing.

Chromaticism is linked to rhythm in bebop.

How do I start swinging?

I've looked at some of Barry Harris's teachings, very inspiring and the sounds that come out are wonderful. I do however think I'm not at a level where I can make use of his method right now...

What would you say are the prerequisites before starting with the BH stuff?

[pamosmusic]

Get some lessons from Christian, he's great at teaching that stuff.

No offense to Christian but I think he’d probably say he cribbed a lot of his good triad stuff from Jordan.

Which I can say … because I cribbed ALL my good triad stuff from Jordan.

On the real though … check out Jordan. But also get lessons with Christian if you like your triads cheeky and bejumpered. He’s cool too.

[Christian Miller]

Jordan’s stuff is hip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk