-
This is graduation week. We finish Section 1, and will be half way through the book.
This material looks to be easier than last week to me.
For me, last week's "Dynamic Etude" was the most difficult part of section one.
Page 58 is just for reference, there in nothing to practice from that page. So, we really just have 3 pages of practice material this week.
Remember to review.
-
04-30-2012 02:10 PM
-
Playing around with effects on this one.
-
The effects don't seem too much on this one; in fact, sound good, and you did a nice performance. I hope to one day play as relaxed as you look when you are playing. I've said it before - you make it look soooo easy!
Originally Posted by fep
-
Page 57, Duet in Eb.
A couple bloopers in it but this one has a nice feel to it and is fun to play.
Practice time is really tight, and I'm leaving on a long road trip for four days starting tomorrow, so this is probably it for me this week.
https://www.box.com/s/d8cd74bdb1429cd75664
ADD:
Page 56, Duet in A
http://www.box.com/s/178c1e00e41ebb5eba0aLast edited by oldhead; 05-03-2012 at 10:40 PM. Reason: posted wrong file, add Page 56 Duet in A
-
Excellent swing feeling Oldhead. Amazing what some syncopation can do for a piece. Very nicely done and stay safe on the trip. Had a very nice feel to it. Originally Posted by oldhead
-
Sounds good. A couple bloopers as you said. They both were good to listen too. Originally Posted by oldhead
I really like the way you played the melody for 'Duet in Eb'. It rings out real clear and feels good.
-
Nice improv, FEP, and the backing tracks sounds good with it. Originally Posted by fep
-
OK, we're on the cusp of section 2. Rhythm has come up, and it struck me some time ago that MM does not cover compound time (6/8, etc). So this is a little bite to fill the gap, again aimed at anyone learning to read from scratch and using Leavitt only.
A rough and simple definition of simple and compound time.
Simple time - when the tune runs faster than the beat, the beat is divided into 2. So we count 1, 2, 3, 4, 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 and. Common simple time signatures are 2/4, 3/4 and 4/4. (I know swing is different, but let's leave that aside for a moment - important bit being the beat is divided in two).
Compound time - when the tune runs faster than the beat, the beat is divided into three. We count 1, 2, 3, 4, 1 and a 2 and a 3 and a 4 and a. (Alternatively 1, 2, 3, 4, 1 trip let 2 trip let 3 trip let 4 trip let). Most common compound time signature is 6/8, but 9/8 and 12/8 are also fairly popular.
Songs you probably know in 6/8: Row row row your boat, house of the rising sun, norwegian wood.
Leavitt does introduce us to the triplet (e.g. p 37) though he writes them out as triplets. If you take that exercise, erase all the triplet marks and replace the 4/4 at the beginning with 12/8 (replace all the quarters with dotted quarters), it would play just the same. Generally, a writer will notate occasional triplets in 4/4 as triplets, but if a tune is all in 'triplet feel', they would use compound time.
I was taught the rule of 3: if the top number is divisible by 3, and the bottom number is 8, you're in compound time. Take the top number, divide it by 3, that gives you the number of beats in a bar. So 6/8 has 2 beats in a bar, 9/8 has 3, 12/8 has 4. One beat is one dotted quarter note. A 'tum ti tum ti tum ti tum rhythm is written quarter 1/8 quarter 1/8 quarter 1/8 quarter, etc. The 1/8s in one beat are beamed together to make it easier to read.
If you follow all the above, there is no need to read on. I don't want to over complicate this. Some people take the 6/8 literally as meaning 6 beats in a bar, where an 1/8 note is a beat. Then they count one two three four five six. This is OK if they remember to accent beat four, however, often they fall down because the mental energy of so many numbers is just too great. Then when they get to 9/8 and 12/8, they really don't cope. This is why I absolutely believe in the rule of 3: divide the top number by 3, and see the dotted crotchet as a beat.
The Chieftains recorded albums with many artists right across genres and borders, and I remember an interview with one of them where he said there were two kinds of musicians: those that can count in 9/8 and those who can't. For those who can't, they just limited what they could put in the album!
I've scanned some local session tunes, and recorded the Butterfly which is in 9/8, to give you a feel for it:
https://www.box.com/s/5d62617193258c985508
https://www.box.com/s/895bf85b8e48ea2d150f
(Incidentally, recorded on my brand new whistle, which I got today!
yippee!)
Hopefully this is helpful. As well, if you take a look at the sheet music, it may help explain why compound time is helpful, why we can't just notate it all in triplets. We could notate in triplets, but when the rhythm gets more complex (e.g. 1/8, 1/16, rests at start of a beat) it would get mighty complicated to read as triplets.
Anyone else have music in compound time to share?
-
Well I joined you guys on page 59 today. Didn't think I would catch you until this coming week sometime so I am happy about that.
I haven't done much revision though as I only received the book last Tuesday. Some of my practise was perfect ( ie in time with metronome etc ) whilst some of my other reading was done at a very slow tempo without a metronome. For example I was away this weekend. I played guitar at play group last Friday so I took my instrument with me but I didn't pack the metronome ( edit: for the weekend ). Much of my playing over the weekend was done quietly while one of my boys slept so I am not sure if I would have used it even if I bought it.
THe different picking techniques are interesting as they are not something I am used too. I am also looking forward to getting faster at the 16th note exercises
I am somewhat suprised that there are no anticipatory notes to introduce tunes but perhaps like compound time that will come later. I knew that I should have bought the 3 in 1 book. Ha ha.
I tried recording with Audacity but the sound is absolutely terrible. Do I need a microphone when recording on the laptop ? I thought that the in build mike should have been sufficient. Therefore at the moment I can only record single parts though I did photocopy a few duets for a friend so that we can play the parts together ( he is interested in reading so perhaps may purchase the book(s) ). I'd love to be able to record the duets myself though.
I'll give Audacity another spin during the week though the end of the month is always a busy time work-wise for me.
Anyhow that's enough rambling from me.
Happy Pickin'
-
Page 59 Picking---A Different Technique
I found it's easier to follow Leavitt's picking if you use rest strokes on the downstrokes and just 'follow through' when switching to the next higher string.
Self critique - a couple of notes not picked cleanly. The accents could be more dynamic.
-
Thanks fep and TLT for listening to the exercises. Originally Posted by fep
I sort of cheated on the chord playing; I used my thumb instead of a pick. Often I'll palm the pick and use my thumb to brush down on the strings. I try to switch back and forth for different dynamics.
For the picking, I did the ascending the right way; always using a downstroke when changing strings. But I did the opposite when descending; using an upstroke instead of down when changing strings. Doesn't work all the time but that's the goal.
I'm not sure why gypsy style pickers use a downstroke when descending. Do you know why? Maybe it's louder?
-
Better late than never. I've really been slacking and have not been practicing from MMI hardly at all for a few different reasons, all of them personal reasons related to responsibilities requiring attention and medical for both me and the wife. I'll try to keep up but will have to see what happens. I've hardly been playing guitar at all and it worries me to an extent.
https://www.box.com/s/4c9a60db062b592d0612
https://www.box.com/s/2cff4d250610fcedb5f0
https://www.box.com/s/47963374113178598885
-
Hi Will, Good to hear from you! Sorry to hear you've been kept away from this, but clearly by much more important things. Hope all works out well in the end. MM will wait.
Good going on the recordings. I really like the liberties you took with little arpeggios here and there. There was one little mistake, out by a semitone in the duet in Eb, in the tune in the first phrase. Not really very important. The whole thing flowed well, I thought, and I enjoyed listening to it.
Do hope you can join us in the second half.
-
I finally crawled out this pit of doom called page 59!
p56. I tried to make Key of A Duet not too mechanical by upping my studying speed from 44Bpm 60Bpm. As a result it's even more mechanical and flabby and out of sync. Still I got on tape more or less alright for a first round.
P56 Rythm Accompaniment 1 and 2. They are what they are I guess.
p57 Key of Eb Major wasn't as easy as I anticipated either. Remembering to play 3 flats.... was quite haevy on my mind.
p57 Duet in Eb. Well kept me busy for quite a bit, too. The recording isn't very enjoyable to listen to. Interesting harmonies and melodies in the piece itself though. Quite a few mistakes in the chording, but I really had to move on at some point.
p59 Picking- A Different Technique. Wow this guy really was my nemesis for this section. So annoying at times, but of course very glad I found my way through it. It feels powerful, also beneficial for alternate picking. Definitely more in control in my right hand since this bear.
Back with the youtube again finally found my way to the sound the way I wanted from Guitar Rig. And also the whole point is to show all differences in the picking of course
So, a couple of reviews that I will be doing first and then on to section n°2, Position Playing!Really happy that I picked this up again.
-
May I ask how everyone handled review from this point on and forward? I’ve been doing complete review once a week, which has become harder and harder to do. Today I spent like four hours on review. So I guess now is the natural time to split the review over the days. I already spend like 40-60 minutes reviewing the picking exercises every day, and I also work on “this week” pages.
One possible solution could be to review like 10 pages every day, which would let you review were we are in the book in one week. Did you still review the “other half” when you moved on to section two?
-
I don't think that "reviewing" means to review everything back from where you have come to all at once More about: check back and see what you've possibly have forgotten or not internalized enough - a refresher of some sort....
-
It's difficult to say over the internet without knowing exactly what challenges a player is dealing with, but I would say in general:
1. You should spend no more than about 15-20 minutes on daily review.
2. If you're having difficulty with the review then you may have moved ahead prematurely.
To be more specific: You should be able to nail, or at least play well, any tune or exercise that you are reviewing in 1-3 tries.
a. If you can't do that then make sure that you aren't playing too fast.
b. If you still can't do it then you may want to hang back until you can.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
Well, sometimes playing an exercise I haven't done in a long time can be hard. For example, if I go back to the earliest exercises, they can often be harder to play at a slow tempo, than the excersise I have worked on in the latest week. This is primarily because it kind of disappears a little from the muscle memory.
Do you agree with Tommo that one should only review things one think is harder, or do you review everything?
-
I'm not really sure I 100% understand the difference from playing the music in the Duet in Eb as notated compared to with swing feel..
Anyone care to elaborate?
I know this is a big concept of jazz, but I feel in the video it's very badly/shortly explained.
-
I would say review anything that is worthwhile. For example, some things are too easy, and later studies incorporate the same material together with more challenging material. So those later studies are more valuable. Originally Posted by znerken
Case in point - the material at page 19 and below...
-
Originally Posted by znerken
Yes, Google swing eighths - the precise notation for which is arguably non-existent.
Some people loosely characterize swing eighths as being equivalent to the first and third notes of an eighth-note triplet. Leavitt used a dotted eighth and sixteenth pattern in this study.
So he was telling the student to play it with "real' swing eighths, as opposed to playing it literally as notated.
At least that's how I interpret his instruction.
OTOH - You can also interpret his comment to means play the melody as written, but swing the rhythm guitar. That "degree" of swing in the melody is a bit out of step with modern sensibilities however. To the modernist it sounds hokey.
EDIT: see his comments on pages 42 and 81.Last edited by Jazzstdnt; 11-18-2018 at 03:16 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
So basically,
For example the notes marked in blue, represent one triplet each?
So you count the E and D for example, in the first bar, as ONE-(trip)-LET, so one is E and D is let, and you don't play the trip? While the notes are notated as one-e-and-a... and the E duration is one-e-and- and the D just a.
Basically like page 42.
-
I was referring to the dotted eighth and sixteenth groupings, not the dotted quarter and eighth.
And yes, try to play them like the 1rst and 3rd pulses of an eighth note triplet, with the first note sustained through the second pulse.
-
Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
Ah, so it's only the groupings like on page 42.. Makes sense. I'll try!
-
Well sure but the Duet in Eb on page 57 is full of those groupings, right?
But the most important take away is that you need to learn to play swing eighths when you see regular eighth note groupings. I believe that Leavitt was pushing the issue by using dotted eighth and sixteenth patterns to make the point more strongly.
-
I am still not quite sure I grasp this.. I hate when things get too abstract. I have played the video 20 times now, even slowed down, and when he compares swing and regular, there's no audible difference. Could anyone record this bar with and without swing, to show the difference?
-
straight would be a strict ONE e + A TWO e + A THREE etc
a swing feel should be dum de dum de dum etc
never seen the video
actually interesting way to teach this, usually teacher starts with straight 8ths and then "swings" them from there. Here he adds MORE distance between the down beat and the up beat. Picture swing being in between the example above and straight eighths
-
I think perhaps I finally got it?
Counting as triplet with a tie between the one and trip, makes it easier. So first note = one trip then the second note in the grouping = LET
ONE trip LET
-
That's the idea that Leavitt was teaching. So for now - you should learn to swing eighths AND play them straight.
All the while keeping in mind:
1. Not everybody did/does it exactly the same way, and
2. Over time jazzers have come to play them more evenly.
So it isn't a universal. But don't worry too much about all that right now.
-
Yeah, I had a problem with the same one as well! Luckily I found the dvd by Larry Baione at Berklee on youtube. This book is really good but it's really helpful to look at some of the videos for verification that you're playing it right, or in my case, I was playing it right.
-
Yes, I have understood there’s not a written in stone way of doing it, and probably as you say, newer jazzers play it more evenly. I even heard someone say it’s like in the middle of the straight eights and the triplet approach. Originally Posted by Jazzstdnt
-
It's getting there, thanks everyone
I also have come to understand that we are playing basic 8 notes grouping, like these:
but this is Leavitt's way of notating them as swing. Normally it would have the swing rythm indication at top and be like the photo above.
-
Taking this book in order is not necessarily very efficient. When I studied with Leavitt, he had me skipping things that I already could do, or marking things to go back to if I couldn't cut them, while we moved on to the next pages. He said, many times, that perfecting the exercises was unnecessary, as guitar-playing is accumulative, and every exercise helps every other technique a bit. So, playing scale studies should be easy and should not need much review, as you get scale studies every few pages anyway. I always saved the duets for sight-reading practice, rather than actually working on them, another of Bill's suggestions. Students should focus on strengthening weaknesses, not sliding by on easy stuff. As guitarists, sight-reading is what we do worst, most likely. If you want to hone certain techniques, get his Melodic Rhythm studies as well as his classical pick-style studies. The Modern Method is rather condensed, and moves quickly, so some adjunct studies can be very useful.
-
Well said. Originally Posted by ronjazz
Yes, I feel my sight reading skills gets better every day. I review stuff where I have trouble playing it. I tend to follow the study group speed, but if something is very easy I either jump ahead or work on something else. Anyway, I never perfect an exersise. I wouldn’t be able to with my current skill set.
-
A Modern Method for Guitar Vol. 1 Page 57 Duet in Eb
This piece actually really buzzed me
As a rock player trying to learn Jazz and move my approach entirely, this sounds like REAL Jazz to my ear and I want more.
Thing 1. The rhythm in soloing application. As a rock player, I would never have thought to incorporate that bouncy off beat/ syncopated rhythmic approach to my soloing. Are there any exercises / resources you can suggest where I could explore this sort of thing more thoroughly?
Thing 2. Also I am always interested in the key studies where the book puts in natural, sharps and flats, theses are always lessons in themselves, can you please talk about this? By this I mean bars 8 and 12.Last edited by jyoung; 01-17-2020 at 08:38 PM. Reason: to put in more information
-
Originally Posted by jyoung
On point 1:
- See the discussion on swing eighths in the above posts.
- To get some swing time exercises there are probably some rhythmic studies out there but I can't think of them right now. EarMaster? Also try Snidero's Easy Jazz Conception for Guitar and play along with it. Nail the timing.
- Finally, listen to jazz players whose sound you identify strongly with - and play along with them! (again, everybody swings a little differently, and be aware of the hokey sounding dotted eighth and sixteenth grouping. It's too extreme but it does force you away from playing even eighths)
On point 2.
- Bar 8 - Those accidentals form a chromatic passage in the melody.
- Bar 12 - The melody note (Cb) is simply matching the harmony (Abm chord) at that point. Listen to and play the chord progression in measures 9-13. Do you hear the line buried inside the chords going Bb-B-C-Cb, and then back to Bb in measure 13? Just a hunch that Leavitt wrote the chord progression first, then the melody, but who knows.
-
I am just about to reach the threshold of section two, but have a couple questions. For the relative minor keys, like nature/melodic/harmonic minor, should I have these keys memorized? Or were they put in the book merely to be introduced for later use?
Also, I have some trouble counting/reading the beats out loud. My internal sense of time is more or less fine for playing, but when I try counting aloud as I play, particularly if the notes go into something like "one and uh two and three and uh four" I can't manage that. Should that be something I am actively working on?
-
Ok naturally Ex.2 is in the key of G- what ide like to know is did the A7 come from D- or Dmaj as the Dominant7th chord?
Thanks.
-
Originally Posted by Richie
Ok naturally Ex.2 is in the key of G- what ide like to know is did the A7 come from D- or Dmaj as the Dominant7th chord?
Thanks.
I would say that the two exercises on the bottom of page 56 are in the keys of C minor and D minor, respectively. If true the second key signature is incorrect.
The progression is: Imi IVmi V7 Imi. The V7 chords are produced by Harmonic minor.
What do you think Richie?
-
You've got sharp eyes Originally Posted by Richie
Ok naturally Ex.2 is in the key of G- what ide like to know is did the A7 come from D- or Dmaj as the Dominant7th chord?
Thanks. That is likely a typo in key signature - I would expect to see one flat for a harmonic minor Dm (i) -> Gm (iv) -> A7(V) -> Dm(i).
Ex.1 above has 3 flats for the same progression in Cm. Not that it matters a lot for a chord exercise
-
Yep turns out to be a typo, referenced to my older copy of MMFG.
ThanksLast edited by Richie; 02-25-2021 at 06:02 PM.
-
As an aside, I think of key signatures as being more of a tool to make the notated music easier to read. As such it does not always indicate the key or the tonal center. Look at E.S.P. by Wayne Shorter for example, the key signature of no sharps or flats, one may think that it is in C major or A minor based on the key signature, it clearly is not as there is not a C or Am chord in the entire tune.
But in a chord symbol exercise the key signature isn't very relevant.
-
Well yesterday l was just revising the MMFG, Vol.1 2nd Ex. P56, when l noticed it had 2 flat keys so with out thinking to much l started playing Bb and Eb notes over it and it had a yes n no sound going on, obviously minor sound to it of course, looking into it further you can build it form the Bb Phrygian mode using Bb as the bass note.
Ex: Dm/Bb - Gm/Bb - A7/Bb - Dm/Bb. So from a typo you can get that out of it....lol , just goes to show how much of it is only a outline of what you can do with it.
Richie
-
Originally Posted by fep
Well.... I haven't looked at ESP but it's probably a "modal" tune? Anyway, Leavitt's stuff was not that. He used key signatures for his music, which seems appropriate. Further, in these exercises I think he was making a point - "this is practicing a I-IV-V progression in minor". The key signature indicates that in fewer words.
Like you say, he could have gone without a key signature and just emphasized the chords/chord diagrams like a chord book might do. But that was not his teaching style because he was apparently teaching guitarists how to get ready to read professional music charts, as opposed to "learn 1000 chords".
Reply With Quote
Rick Beato interviews Kurt Rosenwinkel
Today, 06:51 PM in The Players