-
It sounds to me like it's a good approach to "practice bloat" (where did I hear that phrase?).
Originally Posted by Jonzo
If you're quoting Bob Berg, he was a magnificent musician, and I'm in no position to contradict him. However, lots of these books are written for the serious jazz conservatory student who makes this his life. A beginner with a life outside of jazz may have to modify this approach and bow to practicality.
Even for a very serious student of music, I think this is an approach you take to a tune over time. It shouldn't be a "master step one before beginning step two" approach. It takes years to really internalize and master a tune. If you approach it in a blindly mechanical way, it will be years before you deem yourself qualified to play music.
I say life is short; play music now.
Jonzo says:
- Play the melody
- Play the roots of each chord
- Play the roots and thirds
- Play the thirds and sevenths
- Play the arpeggios
- Play the scales best suited to the chord
- Do all the above in several keys
- Play the song as a chord solo
- Play the changes as if accompanying a singer
- Play the song (soloing and comping) as if you were playing in a rhythm section
- Develop an intro and ending
- Do all the above at various tempos and feels, from very slow to blistering fast -- from latin to funk to swing
- Re-arrange the song in a different time signature, and repeat all the above
- Re-harmonize the song and repeat all the above
I say learn the song, play the song, mess around with the song. Improvise over the tune in any lame ass way you can. Over the next several months, work through the above steps, but don't feel like you have to master all that before you can really play the song. And don't feel like you have to master all this on one song before you're allowed to move on to another song. This is a process that takes years, not days. If you don't find ways to enjoy the music along the way, you'll give up.
I knew a guy once who committed himself to not learning a new tune until he had "fully mastered" the first tune he had worked on. He was a bassist, and would spend months just working on his bowing, trying to achieve the perfect technique. He never developed a repertoire of songs and never got past the point of just messing around with music. He essentially gave up.
I've got a day gig and a life. If I'm lucky, I get in a couple hours of playing in a day. My personal approach is to start with the melody and the chords. Then a chord melody. Then just comping, then soloing. I work on the song from the perspective of a solo guitarist, an accompanist, and as part of a rhythm section. Over time I work in many of the "steps" outlined above. Long before I master a tune I move on to other songs -- and I continually cycle back to others I haven't yet mastered (it's a long list).
Repertoire development is important, not just for gigging, but for musical development. The truth is that nobody masters all this stuff all at once. Trying to do it that way will definitely make your head explode. The Berg steps are steps you have to go through to achieve greatness, but they take years to master. And frankly, not everybody achieves greatness. My advice is not to make the "steps" your whole musical life, especially if you don't have 6-8 hours a day to pursue them.
This endeavor is a marathon, not a sprint. The important thing is that your enthusiasm for the music survives and thrives so you can maintain your efforts in a satisfying way over the long haul. This is about your love affair with your own music. I suggest you start with the music, then apply the rest of the stuff. Your long journey will be far more pleasant, and more productive too.
Just my two cents' worth...Last edited by Jonathan0996; 09-16-2012 at 11:02 AM.
-
09-16-2012 10:54 AM
-
One more thing....
I think somebody somewhere in this thread mentioned getting a good teacher. If you don't already have one, I highly recommend getting one.
A teacher's job is to help you sort through all these multiple priorities, and can help you focus on what you should be working on right now. You won't get that out of a book. You don't need a superstar teacher, but these days they're available via Skype. However, a good local jazz player who has a solid foundation can help you immeasurably. Find that teacher and the rest of the stuff will fall into place.
-
There is a popular book published over 50 years ago by Mickey Baker, Mickey Baker's Complete Course in Jazz Guitar: Book 1. He is very good about providing a limited frame of reference, within which you work out musical ideas. For example, he provides a pallet of a few dozen chords. He tells you to learn stuff first in one key - typically G or C - then "the most important keys" (C, F, G, Ab, Bb), and sometimes in all 12 keys. He provides a structured framework within which you expand on the given musical ideas and work out your own. Many times, he says things like "now these are the most important vamps", "these are the most important changes" etc. Other times he may provide a partially filled in template for you to complete with your own ideas. I do think some prior knowledge of music and jazz theory is very helpful with this particular book. But if that is not an issue for you, then perhaps a book like this might provide a helpful, limiting structure for you. I think it probably depends on exactly where you are in your journey.
Now by way of full disclosure, I just finished reading through the Mickey Baker book because 1) I am not a good guitarist, and 2) I am reading through few jazz guitar books for future reference (reading through them literally, as opposed to working through them; I cannot play through them yet). So aside from the "get a good teacher" option, I offer this as a suggestion for you to take with a grain of salt. If it is a bad idea, I would be as interested as you might be in hearing about that from the seasoned players here.
-
What I was trying to get at with the "practice sheet" method is a severely pruned, tune-based practice schedule. Of course, the last step is "improvise", which could take you anywhere.
There is always more that could be practiced.
I am waiting for the book, "Don't Bother: 100 Jazz Studies That You Shouldn't Do Today!"
Of course, it is the infinite variations available in Jazz that make it so interesting.Last edited by Jonzo; 09-16-2012 at 11:35 PM.
-
I always run through my arpeggios and scales in all keys to warm up (10-15 minutes). I'll then make up a progression - any progression (even bizarre progressions) and then record it and loop it infinitely to solo over for about 30 minutes or so. Lately, I've been doing inversion progressions - as in all chords in the progression have to be 1st inversion, or 2nd, 3rd, etc. Figure these inversions out yourself - don't use a book - you'll never forget them that way, and your learning will go through the roof. I practice jazz for about an hour a day to start - and then I get the nylon out and learn and play classical pieces most of the time - mixed in with fun, goofy gypsy jazz rhythms and progressions with fun picking styles (was doing the rhythm chords for "Fishing Hole" from Andy Griffith theme 'gypsy style', the other day just for the heck of it - it was a blast). Originally Posted by Jonzo
IMO, unless you're playing with other musicians, classical guitar is the most satisfying and sounds the best when you're by yourself. Work on the the geek technical stuff part of the time so you know the fingerboard without having to think - but don't kill yourself - make sure your excitement for music never subsides. If it does, Bach, Scarlatti, Villa Lobos, etc. will remedy that problem. Stay in love with your instrument - whatever it takes. Heck, learn some Van Halen licks to change things up if you also like some of the innovative shredders like EVH (I do). I still have a goal to be able to play "Spanish Fly" (VHII) on my nylon perfectly sometime before I die (probably an impossible feat, but you never know - I've said that before and proved myself wrong a few times). Anyway, whatever it takes to keep it exciting. Don't ever let it become a chore......ever! If it's a chore, then it's only a matter of time before the six-string goes six feet under (into its coffin and into the closet).
-
I tune in fourths. Less than half as many drop chords. Only ONE position for the major scale. ONE for HM. ONE for MM.
I had a teacher once that was running his scales in a way that took two years to complete the cycle. However, if here were tuning in fourths, it probably would have only taken three months.
-
The problem is that Mathematics and Music have so many things in common. You can use Mathematics to play Music, but you can play music without any knowledge on Mathematics.
-
Jster,
Symmetric tuning does cut down shape content significantly but I'm curious to understand what you said concerning scales.
When you say 1 position for scales, wouldn't you also use fingerings starting with different fingers and have a range of choices of when to shift for position changing scales?
-
For all scales you have three notes per string. So the pattern repeats after seven strings (albeit with a one fret shift). There is only that ONE pattern. When you move horizontally along the neck you just move into the ONE pattern at a different place. It is easier to see the ONE pattern when you have more strings. When I write out the pattern for some scale I don't use very often, say harmonic major, I write out the ONE pattern for a twenty string guitar. Originally Posted by bako
P4 is so beautiful. Questions naturally present themselves and naturally answer themselves. If you think something can be generalized, it can be, and easily. Right now I am working on gluing arpeggios, scales, and chord forms together with a view towards comping. Yesterday, in about 90 minutes, I was able to fully develop a comping strategy around the diatonic cycle that has some nice movement and allows me to move either up or down smoothly at any given moment (depending on what I want to do in real time). Mozart has nothing to worry about, but I was even a bit surprised at how much I could do in 90 minutes. I formulated a project and carried it out in only 90 minutes. It turned out to be twice as cool as I thought it would be. And I didn't have to write anything down. I couldn't imagine doing it with standard tuning. It would be too hard to navigate the G B string discontinuity. It would take days and then one would wonder whether it was worth one's time.
Reply With Quote
Moffa Mithra
Today, 08:31 AM in For Sale