The way I look at basic fretboard mapping

[Christian Miller]

This may be useful for beginner to intermediate students and relates to a couple of discussions elsewhere on the forum.

I think linking chords and scales early on is incredibly useful for jazz. It won’t make you a jazz improviser, of course, thats a separate topic, but it will give you the lay of the land.

5 minutes of this a day will pay dividends in the long run for players getting into jazz guitar.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brent.h]

You should post that jacob collier vid too

[Christian Miller]

You should post that jacob collier vid too

The 5 string guitar thing is kind of annoying on a level I can’t fully articulate haha. I was very well behaved in the video. Let me say what (I think) I actually think.

Tbf I also find perfect fourths tuning annoying on an atomic level. So it’s probably best if I just pretend these things don’t exist.

I think why they annoy me is that they are fundamentally ways to make the guitar easier to learn, and yet everyone goes on as if they are a conceptual breakthrough of mega genius proportions.

To me, these types of regularised tuning systems are a more sophisticated version of putting stickers on the guitar to show you where the notes are.

It’s not the hack itself, more the way people talk about it and hype it up as some great advance. I mean I’ll happily put tippex on the side of a classical fretboard to help me with positions like Tedesco did (good real world survival hack)… but I don’t think that somehow makes me a better guitarist or musician for doing it. It’s a hack to offset my lack of practice in a certain area.

The Collier tuning does TBF produce some interesting sounds out of the box, mostly because of the fifths on the bottom three strings of the guitar (and tuning the guitar in fifths goes at least back to Carl Kress in the late 20s). This gives you spread triads and quintal arpeggios very naturally with a one or two fingers, with more normally guitaristic close voiced and quartal voicings on the other side.

As far as alternate tunings go - there’s a rich history there, and lots to discover…. Even in jazz guitar.

To uncharitable eyes this does look a bit like trying to shill a line of useless guitars off the back of a sort of personality cult of the MegaGenius. But perhaps the Gen Z’s will make it a thing and I’ll feel a million years old…

The general tendency for guitar players seems to go take things discovered in alternate tunings back to standard once these sonic discoveries are made, like Kurt with Zhivago. Apparently folk players tend to do this too with DADGAD.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[brent.h]

It’s a hack to offset my lack of practice in a certain area.

Yeah it's the intention behind it, isn't it. The tuning shouldn't be a shortcut to circumvent putting in quality hours to work on something.

Sometimes I wonder. These 'hacks' aren't good or bad in and of themselves. But what tendencies do they encourage in a student in this musical artform?

In my line of work, I have the option of clicking a button to have Ai-assistant do all my work for me from a few inputs. Because of how I'm trained, I'm extremely cautious with such tech and its outputs because of its inaccuracies, lack of nuance, etc.

But the guy next to me who's not trained or doesn't know any better, they'll be like, "Oh ok, this task is actually an easy thing with a click of a button." Again, nothing wrong with the tool, but because of the accessibility, the ease of use, the untrained guy will draw the wrong conclusion for himself which leads to all kinds of problems.

I'm not saying that P4 tuning is that Ai-assistant button, but the spirit of adopting it feels that way to me.

[Tal_175]

Excellent video. What worked for me was a slight variation of this approach. In the approach you show, the foundational reference is chord shapes (mostly root position). The alternative is to use one octave CAGED arpeggios of the major scale as the foundational reference. So the chord shapes and scales get layered on top later on keeping the arpeggio intervals as the main reference. The advantage is that you get the "scale theory" for the modes for free. Here is what I mean:

One first learns the major scale as a family of four note arpeggios. So you learn ii minor7, V7 etc arpeggios in relation to the parent major scale. So each scale note between the consecutive chord tones become obvious. For example in the context of the iii minor 7 arpeggio, the scale note between the root and the third is a half step. In this approach you figure that out by referencing back to the parent scale. If one was to use a minor 7 chord shape as the foundational reference, one has to know the half-whole step patterns of the Phrygian scale construction to figure this out (what you refer to as scale theory in the video).

Why CAGED? An important point in this approach is that the arpeggio shapes must come from CAGED, not 3 note per string system. This is because the chord grips get layered on the arpeggios in the next step and most guitaristic grips fall nicely into the CAGED forms, not so much the 3 note per string forms.

[GuyBoden]

We all play within our fretboard knowledge confinement.

Some players see the whole fretboard.

[Ascend to Victory]

The 5 string guitar thing is kind of annoying on a level I can’t fully articulate haha. I was very well behaved in the video. Let me say what (I think) I actually think.

Tbf I also find perfect fourths tuning annoying on an atomic level. So it’s probably best if I just pretend these things don’t exist.

I think why they annoy me is that they are fundamentally ways to make the guitar easier to learn, and yet everyone goes on as if they are a conceptual breakthrough of mega genius proportions.

To me, these types of regularised tuning systems are a more sophisticated version of putting stickers on the guitar to show you where the notes are.

It’s not the hack itself, more the way people talk about it and hype it up as some great advance. I mean I’ll happily put tippex on the side of a classical fretboard to help me with positions like Tedesco did (good real world survival hack)… but I don’t think that somehow makes me a better guitarist or musician for doing it. It’s a hack to offset my lack of practice in a certain area.

The Collier tuning does TBF produce some interesting sounds out of the box, mostly because of the fifths on the bottom three strings of the guitar (and tuning the guitar in fifths goes at least back to Carl Kress in the late 20s). This gives you spread triads and quintal arpeggios very naturally with a one or two fingers, with more normally guitaristic close voiced and quartal voicings on the other side.

As far as alternate tunings go - there’s a rich history there, and lots to discover…. Even in jazz guitar.

To uncharitable eyes this does look a bit like trying to shill a line of useless guitars off the back of a sort of personality cult of the MegaGenius. But perhaps the Gen Z’s will make it a thing and I’ll feel a million years old…

The general tendency for guitar players seems to go take things discovered in alternate tunings back to standard once these sonic discoveries are made, like Kurt with Zhivago. Apparently folk players tend to do this too with DADGAD.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Here's a comedic take on Collier's 5 string.

[wolflen]

Having watched countless Tom Quayle vids..Just tuning in 4ths on the top strings would take years to readjust fingerings/muscle memory.

He cautions.."..all the chord forms on the top strings no longer work.." ( good-bye basic D chord and friends)

Yet TQ does it on some vids and does admit..it took him alot of readjusting .. but to see him use both systems -on the fly so to speak..in the vids might

make some wish for another 20 years of intense practice.

[AllanAllen]

Keith Richard’s did a lot of great work with 5 strings.

[Christian Miller]

Having watched countless Tom Quayle vids..Just tuning in 4ths on the top strings would take years to readjust fingerings/muscle memory.

He cautions.."..all the chord forms on the top strings no longer work.." ( good-bye basic D chord and friends)

Yet TQ does it on some vids and does admit..it took him alot of readjusting .. but to see him use both systems -on the fly so to speak..in the vids might

make some wish for another 20 years of intense practice.

I played around with it for a little while about 20 years ago and came to the conclusion it makes life easier in the long run even if it would take some short term readjusting.

You drastically cut down the amount of new muscle memory you need to lay down. Certainly for the way I approach fretboard mapping ...

For instance, in my video I outline a major scale on strings 5, 4 and 3 around a 1-3-7 shell voicing.



This scale and chord shape are now moveable to any string set or position.

All your chord forms for major 1-5-1-3 for example become the 'E shape' on the lower four strings - PROVIDED you don't play the open strings, which are now different.

In standard tuning the shape 'mutates' as you cross the G and B strings. (Actually it may be helpful to view the guitar as a wonky perfect fourths tuning.)

This is closer to the way things work on instruments like the violin or cello. Or tenor banjo for that matter.I certainly don't think it would take someone 20 years to learn it, and it is not something that I find impressive of itself.

The flip side is you have to adapt the basic guitar stuff that you all play. But if you are the sort of player who isn't so interested in doing that, it will radically simplify things like learning your scales, arpeggios and chords in all positions and the benefits obviously outweigh the negatives of not being able to play Grandad's favourite Beatles tunes quite so easily... This is why the players who use it tend to be progressive, modern shred/fusion and contemporary jazz style players. They are quite seperate from the tradition of the instrument as it is.

Which is the reason why I ultimately decided not to go down this route (with respect to the excellent players I know who use it like Ant Law and Kevin Glasgow). All the other alternate tunings offer some new colour with the trade off of making the guitar less regular. Drop D and DADGAD are good examples of that. The only reason why perfect fourths exists is convenience, which is fine but it comes at the trade off of cutting you off - at least a little bit - from the tradition of the instrument. I didn't like that. Also making the guitar easier seems a bit like a cop out in a way? Maybe that says more about me.

There are some quirks about standard that are musically interesting too. OTOH those players I mentioned who do use perfect fourths are often making music on a complex level, so the convenience of being able to easily transpose things up the octave and so on compared to standard tuning is very useful. Standard kind of is a pain in the bottom. But for me, that comes with the territory.

[Christian Miller]

We all play within our fretboard knowledge confines.

You don't need to have fretboard confines.

[Christian Miller]

Keith Richard’s did a lot of great work with 5 strings.

It's not quite the same thing haha ...

Maybe if Keef had put out a line of five string teles. But he tunes to open chord anyway, which in my role as Guitar Gatekeeper for the World, I deem a perfectly acceptable way to tune the guitar.

[Christian Miller]

Is that a paid position?

Does it sound like one?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Mick-7]

in my role as Guitar Gatekeeper for the World

Is that a paid position?

Does it sound like one?

It was advertised as one in a parallel universe I visited, and so was being a jazz musician, but we aren't there so....

[AllanAllen]

It's not quite the same thing haha ...

Maybe if Keef had put out a line of five string teles. But he tunes to open chord anyway, which in my role as Guitar Gatekeeper for the World, I deem a perfectly acceptable way to tune the guitar.

I don’t know, I just saw 5 strings and make a joke. Collier isn’t my kind of music.

[Christian Miller]

I don’t know, I just saw 5 strings and make a joke. Collier isn’t my kind of music.

I can’t imagine anyone more different from Collier than Keef … so, lol, I guess

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GuyBoden]

Having watched countless Tom Quayle vids..Just tuning in 4ths on the top strings would take years to readjust fingerings/muscle memory.

He cautions.."..all the chord forms on the top strings no longer work.." ( good-bye basic D chord and friends)

Yet TQ does it on some vids and does admit..it took him alot of readjusting .. but to see him use both systems -on the fly so to speak..in the vids might

make some wish for another 20 years of intense practice.

I played around with it for a little while about 20 years ago and came to the conclusion it makes life easier in the long run even if it would take some short term readjusting.

You drastically cut down the amount of new muscle memory you need to lay down. Certainly for the way I approach fretboard mapping ...

For instance, in my video I outline a major scale on strings 5, 4 and 3 around a 1-3-7 shell voicing.



This scale and chord shape are now moveable to any string set or position.

All your chord forms for major 1-5-1-3 for example become the 'E shape' on the lower four strings - PROVIDED you don't play the open strings, which are now different.

In standard tuning the shape 'mutates' as you cross the G and B strings. (Actually it may be helpful to view the guitar as a wonky perfect fourths tuning.)

This is closer to the way things work on instruments like the violin or cello. Or tenor banjo for that matter.I certainly don't think it would take someone 20 years to learn it, and it is not something that I find impressive of itself.

The flip side is you have to adapt the basic guitar stuff that you all play. But if you are the sort of player who isn't so interested in doing that, it will radically simplify things like learning your scales, arpeggios and chords in all positions and the benefits obviously outweigh the negatives of not being able to play Grandad's favourite Beatles tunes quite so easily... This is why the players who use it tend to be progressive, modern shred/fusion and contemporary jazz style players. They are quite seperate from the tradition of the instrument as it is.

Which is the reason why I ultimately decided not to go down this route (with respect to the excellent players I know who use it like Ant Law and Kevin Glasgow). All the other alternate tunings offer some new colour with the trade off of making the guitar less regular. Drop D and DADGAD are good examples of that. The only reason why perfect fourths exists is convenience, which is fine but it comes at the trade off of cutting you off - at least a little bit - from the tradition of the instrument. I didn't like that. Also making the guitar easier seems a bit like a cop out in a way? Maybe that says more about me.

There are some quirks about standard that are musically interesting too. OTOH those players I mentioned who do use perfect fourths are often making music on a complex level, so the convenience of being able to easily transpose things up the octave and so on compared to standard tuning is very useful. Standard kind of is a pain in the bottom. But for me, that comes with the territory.

I've been playing in 4th Tuning (P4) exclusively for about 15 years, that was after 30+ years of standard Tuning

1. Single note lines are definitely easier for the whole fretboard.

2. Simple chords are easier for the whole fretboard..

3. Complex chords using the high strings are more difficult.

4. Guitaristic riffs are much more difficult. (Classic Rock riffs, Johnny Be Good, Charlie Christian licks etc.).

I'm reasonably happy with 4th tuning, I know the whole fretboard inside out in most keys. But, I wish I hadn't changed from standard. I'm too old (60's) change back.

By the way, Tom Quayle was taught 4th tuning (P4) by Graham Young in Leeds.

Graham Young has taught many guitarists P4 tuning over many, many years. Graham is one the best sounding 4th tuning (P4) Rock players I've heard, and I'm including Tom Quayle.

Graham Young website:
Guitar lessons in Leeds


Edit: The picture below shows the symmetrical simplicity of the 4th tuning fretboard. It's easier to see the notes on the whole fretboard by note name and scale interval, but it's only fretboard mechanics not music.

[jazznylon]

How about we make our lives harder instead? Lets make the most incovenient tuning possible

[AllanAllen]

How about we make our lives harder instead? Lets make the most incovenient tuning possible

That's not hard enough, we also should go to 10 strings.

[charlieparker]

I've been playing in 4th Tuning (P4) exclusively for about 15 years, that was after 30+ years of standard Tuning

1. Single note lines are definitely easier for the whole fretboard.

2. Simple chords are easier for the whole fretboard..

3. Complex chords using the high strings are more difficult.

4. Guitaristic riffs are much more difficult. (Classic Rock riffs, Johnny Be Good, Charlie Christian licks etc.).

I'm reasonably happy with 4th tuning, I know the whole fretboard inside out in most keys. But, I wish I hadn't changed from standard. I'm too old (60's) change back.

By the way, Tom Quayle was taught 4th tuning (P4) by Graham Young in Leeds.

Graham Young has taught many guitarists P4 tuning over many, many years. Graham is one the best sounding 4th tuning (P4) Rock players I've heard, and I'm including Tom Quayle.

Graham Young website:
Guitar lessons in Leeds


Edit: The picture below shows the symmetrical simplicity of the 4th tuning fretboard. It's easier to see the notes on the whole fretboard by note name and scale interval, but it's only fretboard mechanics not music.

I just switched back from fourths to standard. I found that fourths made certain riffs of even guys like Charlie Christian much harder to play. I did love the symmetry of it but I came to the conclusion that the advantages weren't worth the costs for me.

[Christian Miller]

I've been playing in 4th Tuning (P4) exclusively for about 15 years, that was after 30+ years of standard Tuning

1. Single note lines are definitely easier for the whole fretboard.

2. Simple chords are easier for the whole fretboard..

3. Complex chords using the high strings are more difficult.

4. Guitaristic riffs are much more difficult. (Classic Rock riffs, Johnny Be Good, Charlie Christian licks etc.).

I'm reasonably happy with 4th tuning, I know the whole fretboard inside out in most keys. But, I wish I hadn't changed from standard. I'm too old (60's) change back.

By the way, Tom Quayle was taught 4th tuning (P4) by Graham Young in Leeds.

Graham Young has taught many guitarists P4 tuning over many, many years. Graham is one the best sounding 4th tuning (P4) Rock players I've heard, and I'm including Tom Quayle.

I'm sure they'd all sound great if they'd learned in standard as well. I find the concept of P4 tuning annoying on a gut level. Anything I say here is simply a rationalisation of my basic feelings.

If I close my eyes I can't tell tho, so...

Actually, not having the outside strings be the same pitch classes is kind of upsetting to me for some reason as well.

[GuyBoden]

I'm sure they'd all sound great if they'd learned in standard as well. I find the concept of P4 tuning annoying on a gut level. Anything I say here is simply a rationalisation of my basic feelings.

If I close my eyes I can't tell tho, so...

Actually, not having the outside strings be the same pitch classes is kind of upsetting to me for some reason as well.

Well, you're a good player, your method has worked well.

At the end of the day, it's the note choices that matter most, whatever tuning or instrument you're playing.

Edit: But, do you see scales on the whole fretboard, not only in the small areas you're showing in your video?

[Christian Miller]

Well, you're a good player, your method has worked well.

At the end of the day, it's the note choices that matter most, whatever tuning or instrument you're playing.

Note choices are one aspect of what makes a good player. Perhaps less important than music college syllabuses suggest.

Edit: But, do you see scales on the whole fretboard, not only in the small areas you're showing in your video?

I mean if you want me to play a scale from the top of the guitar to the bottom, I can do that.

I could probably work a little more on 'random access'. That stuff is more useful for vamp playing, fusion stuff, or slow moving non functional changes, which I do do sometimes.

You can of course progress from the stuff in the video to mapping the entire neck as I demonstrate by linking these positions together.

But - this is the important thing we are always relating to chord forms. That's the point really. If you can play the C major 7 drop 2's up and down the neck, you should also be able to play all the scale notes around them. So you can link them up into a unified uberscale if you want.

Keeping things tight around the chords means you can easily self comp and switch to chord stuff as well as helping with soloing through changes.

This all should be quite applicable to P4 tuning.

[sully75]

I had a guitar in Fripp's New Standard Tuning...I didn't really do anything with it except play some Bach Cello Suites but that thing sounded amazing. It was just a Squier Strat but having the strings in fifths and that low C, it was really fun to play.

I'd have zero idea how to play anything BUT Bach on it, but it was nice.

I don't think there's anything wrong at all with tuning the guitar to make it easier to play, that's a pretty honorable tradition. Making a bunch of guitars with 5 strings that can't do other stuff is pretty dumb. What happens if you decide you don't want to play Collier's tuning? What string are you going to leave off then?

They'd maybe make a nice C G D A E guitar though. To me that would be cooler than all 4ths. 4ths don't make instruments sound amazing, you kind of have to fight it.

[AllanAllen]

Good golly, How many $2,800 5 string guitars does Taylor think he’s going to sell?