Jazz guitar arpeggio drills

[Vladan]

i'll just do the first arpeggio for you in 2 octaves. remember fingerings differ, some people like to roll their fingers, some don't.

Thank you. That is exactly what I wanted to see. Who likes and does what, without unnecessary "whys", although, the reasoning behind paarticular choice, I don't think would hurt anybody if revealed.

[nick1994]

maybe there are threads already on arpeggio fingerings. I'll check, if not I might start one, it's an interesting topic.

[Vladan]

I thought since this is the thread about "arpeggio drills" ...

[nick1994]

would've been a good thread just derailed. I found this thread I haven't read through it all yet but I will. https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/guita...-priority.html

[Vladan]

I've read that whole thread. Should I say, unfortunately.

Re this thread, maybe it's language thing, my lack of understanding what the drill is, or I'm just overly stupid, but I think fingerings belong here. Anyway, my previous post/ question was about specific arpeggio drill task, but no answer. Gotta be I don't understaand something, either the matter, or human social bonding, or both, or worse ...

[Jonah]

By the way - speaking of fingerings.. together with default fingerings and other types of what may be called 'efficient' fingering (that is when you try to minimize motion ans stay in one position).... I like using (mostly) 3 finger pattenrs that make the hand slide all the way up down...

[matt.guitarteacher]

I use reg's fingerings for scales which he posted in his live at the speed of jazz thread . I think I may have links to it earlier in the thread . I'll find it later. if you use seven positions , you can pretty well finger any arpeggio in position pretty well. In the past, I used William Levitt's five positions and caged. I just found that I had to go slightly out of position or borrow from other fingerings to get certain arpeggios in certain positions.

with the way reg does it, fingerings for the arpeggios are the same as the scales they're based on. The importance of the 13th thing the reg talks about I had not fully grasped until it was talked about again in this thread. Like so many things he says, the first dozen times I hear them maybe I resist the idea or just don't understand, and then one day, It clicks and I realize how right on he was about it. I would take seriously anything he suggests as being important.

I'll try to post something later on my thoughts regarding the thirteenth thing.

[Jonah]

''I'll try to post something later on my thoughts regarding the thirteenth thing.'' I am not sure what you mean but for me 13th is important because it has all the scale in reference in it.

[diminix]

I use reg's fingerings for scales which he posted in his live at the speed of jazz thread.

For my own use, I translated these into fretboard diagrams: fingerings_reg2.pdf (if I got all that correctly). I named the dots in relation to the major scale of the particular root note. As a beginner and know-nothing-at-all it helps me to get these patterns ingrained into my brain and fingers. Also there are interesting things to see (mundane for others, I guess), like the identical arpeggio patterns 2,3 and 6--obviously, the difference in Dorian, Phrygian and Aeolian sounds is not contained in the arpeggio notes, but in the scale degrees 2, 4 and 6 (or would these be called 9th, 11th and 13th, and that is part of what matt.gt means by "importance of 13th"?).

Robert

[MarkRhodes]

For my own use, I translated these into fretboard diagrams....
Robert

Thanks, Robert! I'm going to print that and put it in my "Reg" folder.

[destinytot]

I use reg's fingerings for scales which he posted in his live at the speed of jazz thread . I think I may have links to it earlier in the thread . I'll find it later. if you use seven positions , you can pretty well finger any arpeggio in position pretty well. In the past, I used William Levitt's five positions and caged. I just found that I had to go slightly out of position or borrow from other fingerings to get certain arpeggios in certain positions.

with the way reg does it, fingerings for the arpeggios are the same as the scales they're based on. The importance of the 13th thing the reg talks about I had not fully grasped until it was talked about again in this thread. Like so many things he says, the first dozen times I hear them maybe I resist the idea or just don't understand, and then one day, It clicks and I realize how right on he was about it. I would take seriously anything he suggests as being important.

I'll try to post something later on my thoughts regarding the thirteenth thing.

Yes - it's excellent. But, without being flippant, I'm using my hands - and I need to know how and (more importantly) why I'm using them in a particular way.

Where you place the fingers is important, but which finger(s) you use is also worth thinking about. EDIT No-one can do that thinking for you.

I would take seriously anything he suggests as being important.

I totally agree.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Yes - it's excellent. But, without being flippant, I'm using my hands - and I need to know how and (more importantly) why I'm using them in a particular way.

Where you place the fingers is important, but which finger(s) you use is also worth thinking about. EDIT No-one can do that thinking for you.

I totally agree.

Yeah. I do agree with that. Honestly, I arrived at it myself after listening to a lot of discussion from reg, Henry and others on this topic. Mainly, though, looking at different approaches to melodic minor with caged fingerings pushed me this way.

You have to compromise so much for those melodic minor fingerings in the way of stretches anyway. I also found that after working both caged and stretch fingers with William Levitt over the years., that my fingers basically "hear" better with the stretch fingerings because there's more constant reference . Shifting seems to disrupt this somewhat.

It's just kind of what I've come to personally .

[Mr. Pocket]

I've begun working with Reg's fingerings and I think they will make more sense to me once I start using them for melodic minor. In isolation, they first appear to use excessive stretching where my brain says "what would I do that for when I can do this just as fast?" by shifting one fret to a new 4 fret position. I don't see the harm in learning new fingerings, even after settling into the ones I know, because a new set of fingerings will make me less likely to play a mechanical pattern and to re-learn to hear what I'm playing. Sort of like how the one or two string approach always helps me to free myself from mechanics.

I keep thinking I have these new patterns down until I go to play with along with a metronome. I've also been recording chord sequences with my looper going through the scale and then the diatonic arpeggio. Haven't quite gone into anything except the diatonic chords, and some ii V I's

Reg, (if you're still here) you mentioned doing the diatonic chord scale in position with triads. Are you suggesting playing a root position triad for each scale tone, or inversions?

[matt.guitarteacher]

''I'll try to post something later on my thoughts regarding the thirteenth thing.'' I am not sure what you mean but for me 13th is important because it has all the scale in reference in it.

Yeah, that's what I was getting at basically. Major scale in thirds basically. He had always talked about playing the 13th arpeggio from the root (2nd finger), but I didn't see it.

Then, it occurred to me that if you do the same thing from the 1st finger as well, in thirds, you're literally covering the entire position in 3rds. There are only 2 iterations of stacked 3rd's in each position. It's actually a much more logical first step than what I was doing (and assume that most do), practicing all 7 diatonic chords from their roots, as if they're each separate entities, in each position. I think that once you've got the two iterations of 13ths solid in a position, then, the 7 diatonic chords would be almost automatic. I'll definitely approach new scales this way.

Also, just starting each position from the same finger is (like he always says) a good beginning reference. Ionian actually relates to everything, not just by pitch, but kinesthetically and visually, as you look at the fretboard. Honestly, as a hobbyist, it's always been my experience that when people start talking about b9's or #13ths, my eyes kind of roll back in my head, and I want to go play a simple chord melody or something. But with a constant reference, you can really easily see 3rd and 7th flatted from Ionian when you move up to Dorian, or more aptly, working on something like melodic minor from your major scale modes.

In my mind it's very much like the visual ease with which you can see things on a keyboard in the key of C. It's a starting reference. Doesn't mean that you're always going to play in C on keyboard, or that you'll always play from 6th string roots on guitar, but it IS great to have a constant.

[SeanZ]

Then, it occurred to me that if you do the same thing from the 1st finger as well, in thirds, you're literally covering the entire position in 3rds. There are only 2 iterations of stacked 3rd's in each position. It's actually a much more logical first step than what I was doing (and assume that most do), practicing all 7 diatonic chords from their roots, as if they're each separate entities, in each position. I think that once you've got the two iterations of 13ths solid in a position, then, the 7 diatonic chords would be almost automatic. I'll definitely approach new scales this way.

Matt, I'm confused about the '2 iterations' could you please diagram them using G 6th string as the root.

many thanks

[Vladan]

Then, it occurred to me that if you do the same thing from the 1st finger as well, in thirds, you're literally covering the entire position in 3rds. There are only 2 iterations of stacked 3rd's in each position. It's actually a much more logical first step than what I was doing (and assume that most do), practicing all 7 diatonic chords from their roots, as if they're each separate entities, in each position. I think that once you've got the two iterations of 13ths solid in a position, then, the 7 diatonic chords would be almost automatic. I'll definitely approach new scales this way.

Matt, I'm confused about the '2 iterations' could you please diagram them using G 6th string as the root.

many thanks

G, position 2, root on 3rd frett, 6th string

iteration 1:
G(6/3) B(5/2) D(5/5) F#(4/4) A(3/2) C(3/5) E(2/5) G (1/3)

Iteration 2:
F# (6/2) A(6/5) C(5/3) E(4/2) G(4/5) B(3/4) D (2/3) F#(1/2) A (1/5)

All notes of G major coverred in 2 ways.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Then, it occurred to me that if you do the same thing from the 1st finger as well, in thirds, you're literally covering the entire position in 3rds. There are only 2 iterations of stacked 3rd's in each position. It's actually a much more logical first step than what I was doing (and assume that most do), practicing all 7 diatonic chords from their roots, as if they're each separate entities, in each position. I think that once you've got the two iterations of 13ths solid in a position, then, the 7 diatonic chords would be almost automatic. I'll definitely approach new scales this way.

Matt, I'm confused about the '2 iterations' could you please diagram them using G 6th string as the root.

many thanks

Yeah, what Vladan has is correct. I've got this in 7 positions on my office PC. I'll post it later.

[MarkRhodes]

Yeah, what Vladan has is correct. I've got this in 7 positions on my office PC. I'll post it later.

Looking forward to that! ;o)

[Jonah]

by the way I noticed misprint in Locrian pattern in thirds (13th arpeggio) template (Reg's pdf) - there's E at the top instead of F# (tabs are correct)

[Jonah]

eah, that's what I was getting at basically. Major scale in thirds basically. He had always talked about playing the 13th arpeggio from the root (2nd finger), but I didn't see it.

Then, it occurred to me that if you do the same thing from the 1st finger as well, in thirds, you're literally covering the entire position in 3rds. There are only 2 iterations of stacked 3rd's in each position. It's actually a much more logical first step than what I was doing (and assume that most do), practicing all 7 diatonic chords from their roots, as if they're each separate entities, in each position. I think that once you've got the two iterations of 13ths solid in a position, then, the 7 diatonic chords would be almost automatic. I'll definitely approach new scales this way.

Also, just starting each position from the same finger is (like he always says) a good beginning reference. Ionian actually relates to everything, not just by pitch, but kinesthetically and visually, as you look at the fretboard. Honestly, as a hobbyist, it's always been my experience that when people start talking about b9's or #13ths, my eyes kind of roll back in my head, and I want to go play a simple chord melody or something. But with a constant reference, you can really easily see 3rd and 7th flatted from Ionian when you move up to Dorian, or more aptly, working on something like melodic minor from your major scale modes.

In my mind it's very much like the visual ease with which you can see things on a keyboard in the key of C. It's a starting reference. Doesn't mean that you're always going to play in C on keyboard, or that you'll always play from 6th string roots on guitar, but it IS great to have a constant.

It's interesting observation, Matt.. but I do not see much advantage.. maybe just I take it in a wrong way...

To me on the contrary this approach would be misleading... at the beginning at least... because actually the basic idea you should get these notes in different postion (7th - Locrian pattern)... looks like it's important to refer different possintions to different chords and scales...

What I really like about Reg's patterns - they are really easy to remember becasue they have very recognizeable shapes.. or ' outline'... major is different form minor and from half-dim

[goldenwave77]

For my own use, I translated these into fretboard diagrams: fingerings_reg2.pdf (if I got all that correctly). I named the dots in relation to the major scale of the particular root note. As a beginner and know-nothing-at-all it helps me to get these patterns ingrained into my brain and fingers. Also there are interesting things to see (mundane for others, I guess), like the identical arpeggio patterns 2,3 and 6--obviously, the difference in Dorian, Phrygian and Aeolian sounds is not contained in the arpeggio notes, but in the scale degrees 2, 4 and 6 (or would these be called 9th, 11th and 13th, and that is part of what matt.gt means by "importance of 13th"?).

Robert

I think your scale patterns are all transposed 2 frets more to the right than they should be. E.g. G major pattern has root beginning on 3rd fret, not 5th fret. Same with the others. Patterns look right.

On the arpeggios, maybe put in a roman numeral designation under the fret # if you want to keep it the way it is now. But visually, it would be better to have it appear exactly the same as the scale patterns...so maybe expand the fret diagram on the right to give yourself the room to do this. (A little bit of a pain, but the visual consistency is the point, so maybe a little redrawing is worthwhile.)

[matt.guitarteacher]

Yeah, what Vladan has is correct. I've got this in 7 positions on my office PC. I'll post it later.

Ok. I don't necessarily like the way it's organized here, but it is what it is. I probably would leave out the 3rd (bottom) row of grids if I were giving it to someone, but it was just for me and happens to fit the conversation re. 13th arps (stacked 3rds). All scale degrees are in reference to the chord, not the key center (G). The bottom row is 13th from the scale tone below the root. It's probably best described in terms of that note being the root, but once you get to 13th chords it's basically just the scale restacked in 3rds anyway. For example the bottom row under Gmaj7 begins with F#-A-C etc. Probably best to just learn 4 note arps, then 13ths with the 2nd finger reference.

Pdf's attached as well. Let me know about typos.

[matt.guitarteacher]

It's interesting observation, Matt.. but I do not see much advantage.. maybe just I take it in a wrong way...

To me on the contrary this approach would be misleading... at the beginning at least... because actually the basic idea you should get these notes in different postion (7th - Locrian pattern)... looks like it's important to refer different possintions to different chords and scales...

I understand, but I think your next statement....

What I really like about Reg's patterns - they are really easy to remember becasue they have very recognizeable shapes.. or ' outline'... major is different form minor and from half-dim

Kind of nails it. Think about piano, which everyone agrees is superior for understanding theory etc. When you learn chord concepts, at the beginning, you start with a physical/visual reference. Usually it's root position with the finger 1 (RH) or 5 (LH). You can build your chord in 13ths pretty easily in root position. Because of the positional and fingering reference, especially beginning in C, there's no thought to intervals (as far as half-step or whole-step). The interval reference is the physical layout. Simply skip a key. Young children easily do this.

On the guitar you can do the same thing by first mapping your thirds. Then, just like piano, once you learn the basic reference for the benefit of your thought process, you change fingerings, inversions, add or delete chord tones etc., but on the guitar we begin there. The physical reference is the one thing which makes the guitar more difficult.

The traditional method of learning positional playing with reference to major roots is very logical in the musical sense. It's pure logic on paper, but on the fretboard, the reference constantly changes that way, from position to position. Now if you think about piano, not just from the on-paper stand point, there's a finger reference. Regardless of which chord you're playing, as a beginner, you're probably at least starting with the same root/finger - left-hand 5-3-1.

And the thing is, by the time we start working on 7th chords and such on piano, we're pretty quickly talking about how they are constructed with parallel reference to major as much as the chord-scale, relative reference. By the time you get to basic jazz chords, you have to understand both. I think that with the more traditional approach, you're enforcing a very small amount of benefit in terms of relative/chord-scale type reference at a very large loss in regard to parallel reference for chord building, as well as physical and aural references.

Just my opinion as an amateur jazzer working through these things.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Last thing. If I could go back a few years and tell myself something re. arpeggios it would be this:

1. Learn the scale fingering from the 6th string, 2nd finger for all scale degrees (or modes if you like).
2. Learn the 2-octave 4-note arpeggios from the same finger/root at each scale degree.
3. Learn the 13th from same 2nd finger/root....
4. Learn 13th from 1st finger in each position
5. Learn the 2-octave 4-note arpeggios from the same 1st finger/root at each scale degree.
*At every step speak the scale degrees (for scales) and chord degrees (for arps) aloud and learn them. It won't take you any longer.

If you do this you've basically laid out your guitar in thirds mentally/visually/kinesthetically (like having "black keys" you can see on your guitar), and you can utilize it like a piano without writing everything down. Oh, yeah. Writing everything down... If you're like me and you've always needed a piece of paper or a piano to work out the most difficult things like altered scales/chords etc., you need to do this. You owe it to yourself.

I'm honestly pissed at myself for not hearing and understanding this properly about 5 years ago. It's like fingers 1-3-5 for beginner piano. Scale degrees are simple because theyr'e laid out in a consistent way. Previously, the old way in which I would have done the above would be something like:

1. Scale fingerings from the major root in each position (different finger/string for each position right?), which is Root up to the highest note, back down to the lowest, and then back up to the root, in position. (That's the way most books teach it). Honestly, this takes longer than #1 above. Each scale starts over with a new finger/string reference.
2. Learn all diatonic 4-note arps (Imaj7, iim7, iiim7, etc. in each position).

That's the starting point, right? What are we talking about? Weeks? Months? I honestly believe you could do the same with this stacked 3rds from 6th string/modal approach for all 7 positions in about the same time it would take you to do 4 or 5 positions the other way. You can visually see where the Aeolian's b13th is lowered from Dorian pretty easily, when you have a constant string/finger reference. By the time you apply Imaj7 or ii-7 to all positions you've already got the groundwork laid with the stacked thirds.

As an example, I've spent the last several weeks solidifying Maj7#5's and Min(maj)7 arps from 7 positions of melodic minor using my old 2-step approach, and it's a lot of work! For one thing, the Maj7#5 is built from the altered 3rd scale degree, which means you don't really have any reference to your normal maj7 fingerings. It's like starting everything over. But if the reference had been the 6th string 2nd finger..... it's pretty easy to see the relationships, and without paper, keyboard, or referencing root position on the guitar or something. I find that I can pretty easily work through MM 13th's even though I've never really practiced them.

This is probably obvious and old news to many here, who are smarter than I am, but for me, personally, having the 6th string/2nd finger reference is like simplifying the guitar layout into something more like a keyboard. Then, when you go to other positions, you have the ear/finger/visual reference.

Sorry to be long. I'll stop.

[diminix]

I think your scale patterns are all transposed 2 frets more to the right than they should be. E.g. G major pattern has root beginning on 3rd fret, not 5th fret. Same with the others. Patterns look right.

On the arpeggios, maybe put in a roman numeral designation under the fret # if you want to keep it the way it is now. But visually, it would be better to have it appear exactly the same as the scale patterns...so maybe expand the fret diagram on the right to give yourself the room to do this. (A little bit of a pain, but the visual consistency is the point, so maybe a little redrawing is worthwhile.)

Ah, know what you mean... My intention was not to show real fretboards with the first fret starting at the first vertical line on the left side (if I draw something like this, I use a double vertical line to indicate fret zero). These fretboards actually stretch endlessly to the left and to the right, they are showing relations only, hence I wrote "R" into the red root note, and not "g". Confusion is produced because I labeled the seven positions with the labels Reg used in his diagrams (like "G major 7 Ionian"). I did it this way to keep the connection to Reg's original. Maybe it is better like this: fingerings_reg2b.pdf

For me, it is enough to see the spatial relation of the seven positions for the scales only, drawing the arpeggios the same way wouldn't fit on a sheet anyway.

Thanks for taking a look to the PDF!

Robert