On the importance of basic scales and arpeggios

[targuit]

And this -

[targuit]

Yeah, Jay. Sonny probably never talks music with anyone. Can't describe it. Probably calls everything "something something". Real musicicians never use words. Let me just get back to playing the "thingy".

Matt- what the hell are you talking about? Imbibing this evening?

If you have a specific issue you would like me to address, put it out there. In truth, I often read your exchanges with Reg, and I can rarely understand what the hell you are talking about, though not from any lack of theoretical understanding on my part. Articulation is not always your strong point. But keep trying.

I suppose you want to argue with Sonny Rollins about how he approaches his improvisation and playing. Takes balls, my friend. Explain to Sonny the error of his ways and thinking. LOL.

And kirk - you have something you want to say or discuss? And the link to your playing is where??
(Crickets....................)

You know, Matt, in this instance as in the past, you are the aggressor for no good reason.

Want to talk about concrete music? Tonight I recorded But Beautiful by Jimmy Van Heusen. Want to talk about a great composer and a concrete song? Let's stick to the music and leave the aggression at home. For once let's talk concretely, theoretically, philosophically if you wish. But about music, not about personalities.

[pamosmusic]

I suppose you want to argue with Sonny Rollins about how he approaches his improvisation and playing. Takes balls, my friend. Explain to Sonny the error of his ways and thinking. LOL.

Jay ... do you think that the intense practicing he's talking about at the beginning of your second video (the rudiments) probably include the scales and arpeggios that everyone is talking about?

[targuit]

Of course, to a degree. Look, I took classical guitar lessons from the age of twelve for over four years. Richard Pick method. Segovia major and minor diatonic scales. Sor and Carcassi etudes. Bach, Britten, Villa Lobos, Debussy.....

Any schooled musician on any serious instrument incorporates scales into their early pedagogy. By the way, I have an issue with the use of the term arpeggios. From dictionary.com - arpeggio:

noun, plural arpeggios. Music. 1. the sounding of the notes of a chord in rapid succession instead of simultaneously.

2. a chord thus sounded.

I never really know what is meant by the study of arpeggios. Technically it is as defined in 1. and 2. Perhaps people intend etudes in which one learns varied ways to play chords.

And you can play scales until you are blue in the face. They are not equivalent to playing music. Scales are intended to develop finger strength, roundness of tone, and knowledge of the fret board as well as fluency. Just as certain exercises are intended to develop strength and agility to play football. But the skill to throw a pass fifty yards down field is not the same thing. Nor are scales the equivalent to playing guitar well. They are a tool to that end.

In any case I listened to your group on your web site link. You certainly sound like you studied scales yet you know that improvisation is much more than scales.

Do you relate to what Sonny says about tapping into his subconscious when playing? I certainly do. Some individuals here have difficulty with the notion that one can play what you intend or what you hear. Why is that notion so difficult to grok? Anyone think that Bill Evans was guessing at the piano?

[yaclaus]

So we should just stop practicing arpeggios, chord shapes and scales and let the subconscious do the work?

Do you have a suggestion for alternative terminology for "arpeggio"? Maybe "playing on the chord in thirds in single notes"?

[jazzguy100]

Do you relate to what Sonny says about tapping into his subconscious when playing? I certainly do. Some individuals here have difficulty with the notion that one can play what you intend or what you hear. Why is that notion so difficult to grok? Anyone think that Bill Evans was guessing at the piano?

so lets clear this up, you have to you know your stuff, thats why sonny don't need to think because he knows his stuff. you have to know your scales, arpeggios, chords etc. because that is the melodic material you are dealing with. in order to get those sounds get into your head you have to practice them.

[pamosmusic]

Of course, to a degree. Look, I took classical guitar lessons from the age of twelve for over four years. Richard Pick method. Segovia major and minor diatonic scales. Sor and Carcassi etudes. Bach, Britten, Villa Lobos, Debussy.....

Any schooled musician on any serious instrument incorporates scales into their early pedagogy. By the way, I have an issue with the use of the term arpeggios. From dictionary.com - arpeggio:

noun, plural arpeggios. Music. 1. the sounding of the notes of a chord in rapid succession instead of simultaneously.

2. a chord thus sounded.

I never really know what is meant by the study of arpeggios. Technically it is as defined in 1. and 2. Perhaps people intend etudes in which one learns varied ways to play chords.

And you can play scales until you are blue in the face. They are not equivalent to playing music. Scales are intended to develop finger strength, roundness of tone, and knowledge of the fret board as well as fluency. Just as certain exercises are intended to develop strength and agility to play football. But the skill to throw a pass fifty yards down field is not the same thing. Nor are scales the equivalent to playing guitar well. They are a tool to that end.

In any case I listened to your group on your web site link. You certainly sound like you studied scales yet you know that improvisation is much more than scales.

Do you relate to what Sonny says about tapping into his subconscious when playing? I certainly do. Some individuals here have difficulty with the notion that one can play what you intend or what you hear. Why is that notion so difficult to grok? Anyone think that Bill Evans was guessing at the piano?

A classical background is great ... But jazz musicians and classical musicians use scales for different ends. Scales for jazz musicians don't stop at finger strength, tone, and fretboard knowledge. Jazz musicians use scales (to some degree or another) as a mine for improvisational material. Classical guitarists don't. And either way ... Segovia scales do not serve as a particularly effective means of expanding fretboard knowledge. They just don't.

I don't know what to tell you about your issue with arpeggio. Thats a term I'm confident everyone on this thread agrees on. You're making statements that suggest you should be well beyond asking what jazz musicians mean when they say "arpeggio" practice so I'll leave that one to someone else.

Yes you can practice scales til you're blue in the face and yes I do think Sonny's answer is pretty cool but you're misinterpreting it or interpreting it selectively. He said intense conscious focused practice is one thing and performing is another and that you should not be trying consciously to get your practice into your playing but rather letting go of that and playing from somewhere deeper. He said practice and performance are separate and distinct in a lot of ways. So yes ... Performing should be something that happens beyond conscious note choice or change navigation but it's not the same as practice. If you find yourself in your subconscious all the time - "performing" while you are playing alone - then that's wonderful but you should be aware that you might not be practicing.

[ronjazz]

The Leavitt Method, along with the ancillary publications by Bill (Classical Studies, Sight-reading, duets, etc.) comprise a complete approach to mastering plectrum guitar in the 20th-century idiom, thus is probably the most effective overall method for aspiring or even accomplished jazz guitarists. As mentioned above several times, the guitar is often approached as a tool for social interaction, being a "whore" of an instrument: very easy to learn to play basic dumb stuff, yet very difficult to master.

Part of the guitar's difficulty is that there is no one method for sounding the strings, there are, essentially, 4: plectrum style, finger-style, hybrid picking, and tapping (as well as Wes's thumb). It's also tuned funny, making reading somewhat more difficult than on other instruments, and it's a large instrument with a demanding area to cover, physically. It is also relatively new, and still developing, unlike the violin family or most of the orchestral instruments. Even the classical guitar is undergoing drastic changes in build methods and materials, and the electric guitar comes in a huge variety of shapes, sizes, numbers of strings, scale lengths, etc. Many of us compound the problem by owning and playing several instruments with different dimensions and technical demands. Doubling on fretted instruments often means playing vastly different tunings, scale lengths, stringing (single or double courses, for instance, between guitar and mandolin), unlike doubling on trumpet and flugelhorn, or sax and clarinet.

Of course, the ease with which simple chords and rhythms are learned on the guitar has effectively lowered the overall sophistication level of pop music world-wide. When popular music was written at the piano, it gave rise to the Gershwins and Kerns of the musical world; the guitar gave us Hank Williams and Buddy Holly, and many thousands of three- and four-chord ditties that became the musical coin of the realm.

That doesn't, of course, erase the contributions of Johnny Smith, Segovia, Paco de Lucia, Chet Atkins, Lenny Breau, Ted Greene, George Van Eps or their followers, but it does explain the giant collection of infantile guitar methods on music store shelves, and the sad state, in general, of guitar-playing.

[targuit]

Peter - Frankly, I disagree with your premises. I have practiced classical guitar from Day One learning to read notation, scale work, etudes, and the like. I knew that stuff when I was twelve and thirteen years old - some fifty plus years ago. The primary distinction between Jazz and Classical study is that the jazz guitarist employs an element of improvisation while that tends not to be the case with classical guitarists. But what is improvisation? Some like to call it "spontaneous composition". Yet unless one is dealing with totally original material, the jazz guitarist is not operating in a void. He has the song before him - the melody, harmony, and bass as composed by the original composer of the song.

Perhaps you use scales to do your improvisation over jazz standards. What is a scale? A series of tones drawn from the pool of twelve tones in the Western scale generally. Are the major and minor diatonic scales different in terms of intervals for the jazz versus classical guitarist? Not that I am aware. Oh, you can argue (the nonsense) that Segovia's fingering is not a jazz approach, yada yada yada. But the fact remains that the intervals from the tonic are the same. Yes or no? How you finger the scale may differ from someone else. But when you perform But Beautiful, does the audience give a crap how you finger your playing? I don't believe they give out Grammies for "Best Fingering of Scales". They give Grammies for your performance. Even if you play with your teeth or your toes.

Yet the very notion that jazz guitarists use scales to improvise is a modern day conception concocted mostly to justify music students paying for instruction at Berklee and other schools - CST. Tell me, did Lester Young use CST? Coleman Hawkins, Charlie Christian, Django, Joe Pass......??? Yes or no? Or perhaps according to you they were not jazz players? I can hardly contain the laughter envisioning you lecturing Joe Pass that he is not a jazz guitarist because he does not use his scales properly. Give me an effen' break!

As for arpeggios, let me help with that problem - finger a C chord wherever your wish on the neck and strum. Viola! Like magic you are playing an arpeggio. Be sure to study that for a decade till you get it down right. My problem, Peter, is not with playing arpeggios but the risible notion that you have to 'study' them!

What Sonny said requires that you actually listen to the video interviews. Yes, practice time is for woodshedding. If you don't know the melody or how to navigate the changes of the repertoire that you are working on, that is the time for you to pull out your CST treatise and try to figure out what scale goes over what chord in each measure. Or hopefully, if you have played for fifty years, you might just use your ears. Remember ears? Like Joe Pass, whom you are going to reeducate or Lester Young or Coleman Hawkins did.

Here is a tip for all you people who need to consult your CST treatises. If you can read notation well, create a detailed transcription of the song in question as notation with three, four, or five-note chords. As you improvise over the melody and harmony, if your ears don't work, check out those four or five-note chords. Each note is potentially a target tone. Don't say I never gave you any advise. Of course, it won't work for those who cannot read. They should continue to consult their Ouija Boards!

To get back to Sonny Rollins, an amateur sax player deluded into thinking he knows a thing or two having rubbed shoulders with more great Jazz musicians in his lifetime that anyone here ever will. He is actually just leading you all on with his lofty discourse about tapping into his subconscious when he plays. In reality, during performance he studies all the possible CST suggestions for improvisation over the chord progressions and chooses notes at random. Just like all of you. How comforting to know that he is just a pretentious old has been who could not possibly have anything to contribute to the discussion. And is just talking out his ass like so many on the forum.

Now that you have taught Joe Pass, Django, and Sonny Rollins how to play jazz, the next guy who needs a little reeducation is Bill Evans... LOL.....

[targuit]

"When you are on the stage, you let the music play you. To do that you have to have had good practice sessions at home so you understand the material, the songs.....so when you get on the stage the music is there already in your head. Then you forget it. Music is a mystical force. When you are playing on stage, you want to get to that place and want to let the music play you. Don't try to think about it." A paraphrase of what Sonny said about practice versus being on stage.

Poor deluded old sod....luckily for Sonny there is still time for you all to teach him how to play jazz.

"...You should probably be aware that you're not the only one who has studied classical guitar. My performance degree is in classical guitar (not jazz oddly enough). Segovia patterns cover two major scale fingerings, and one or two of each of the three minor scales. Improvising generally requires a far more fluid fretboard knowledge. Like playing a C major scale on the E, A, and D strings at the twelfth fret. Segovia patterns don't cover that area so they are not sufficient for anything resembling complete fretboard knowledge. Yes the intervals are the same and classical guys have great fretboard knowledge ... that's not what I was pushing back against. I was pushing back against the argument that Segovia scales was where that might come from. They aren't." - Peter

I did not know that part about playing a C chord at the twelfth fret. You can do that??! Really? Wow! LOL! And all this time I've never gone above the fifth fret! That's cool! So tell me, who is the guru who can teach me these marvelous and mysterious jazz scales? Who truly has the keys to the Kingdom of Jazzdom?????? Let me guess....Peter Bernstein, Mimi Fox,, Daffy Duck? I'm going to go tear my poster of Segovia - which is right next to my poster of Farah Fawcett in my bedroom - right off the wall. Maybe I can find a poster of Peter Bernstein in a bikini - my wife might get suspicious. But I want to explore that great mysterious uncharted territory beyond the Fifth Fret. To go where few have ventured....(strains of Star Trek violins), as I, too, want the coveted and secret Holy Grail of Fret Board Knowledge, though I may lose my soul in the endeavor...

For the record, Peter, Segovia did venture beyond the singularity of the twelfth fret with his edition of Major and Minor Diatonic Scales. Even to the fifteenth or seventeenth or......I'm getting palpitations just thinking about it!

[dingusmingus]

Just a friendly reminder to everyone that the forum provides an ignore function!

[mr. beaumont]

Oh my. Let me try and "right the ship." Even though I should probably stay out of it...

Jay, this stuff you're saying right now is precisely why you get so much backlash here. Just take the small idea of arpeggios. If you ask any jazz player what an arpeggio is and why they're important they'll be able to tell you. And it has little to do with your dictionary definition--but it's not incorrect, either. Arpeggios are indeed the notes of a chord, sounded in succession. Jazz players practice them because they give you the "meat and potatoes" of a sound very quickly. They are also easy to visualize on the guitar, which for us here, is another bonus. When a jazz player improvises, they may use the arpeggio as a "touchstone," but they might not play the notes in order.

That is the jazz definition of arpeggios. There's no arguing it. That's what it means. When you argue against that, people get a red flag.

The Sonny Rollins bit about playing from the subconscious....cool stuff, right? Is it any different than the quote attributed so often to Charlie Parker-- the one that ends "forget that shit and play?" But see, here again, you go against common knowledge and useage--because everybody knows there's a first part of that quote too--the one about "mastering your instrument."

I assume you know the story of "The Bridge?"

Scales, arpeggios, these things are ways to master the instrument. They, through repetition, allow the player to hear possibilities. Have you ever tried the exercise where you take a tune, play an arpeggio from a chord tone "up" on the first chord, then chromatically descend (or descend in scale) over the second chord to a chord tone of the third chord, and so on? This is practical application of those things. Scales aren't necessarily practiced in a vacuum, once they are learned, but they can certainly still be used to come up with ideas.

Sometimes, ideas aren't obvious. Recently, I talked here about a sound I've enjoyed recently-- playing a half step above a dominant chord and resolving to the I. Could I have accessed this sound without knowing or practicing scales or arpeggios? Sure. But maybe I wouldn't have. But once I've heard it and practiced it enough, it can become part of my subconscious.

Jazz players practice access points. They collect sounds.

Anyway, I thought we were gonna play some music? Can only talk about it so much without just doing it.

edit: Saw your paraphrase of Sonny. Now how is that different than what anyone else is saying here? Is this still about Charlie Christian playing out of "chord shapes?"

[Jonah]

Is it any different than the quote attributed so often to Charlie Parker-- the one that ends "forget that shit and play?"

When someone gives me this quote as a argument that no knowledge needed to perform...

I always ask: " Ok... let's see what do we have now to be forgotten?" )

[Jazzism]

Just a friendly reminder to everyone that the forum provides an ignore function!

Thx, I'll certainly be using it. I've had enough of this pontificating bastard!

[joe2758]

Hey Targuit,

To be entirely transparent, I agree with Matt with most of what he said in response to your posts (and I find his posts very well articulated, so I don't know where that bit about him not making sense comes from).

It's very important to have varying opinions, and I'm glad you're here sharing them. I also think believing in your opinions that are based on life experience whole heartedly and without remorse as fact is a great attribute that you have.

If that's not balanced with any sense of open-mindedness and humility, personality conflicts are a given.

The resistance you're getting here stems from the tone of your posts which usually come off (intentionally or otherwise) as being presented by some sort of old wise sage who is only gracing our presence for the select few with "but little dust in their eyes" who will follow you into the all knowing.

I totally get everything you say about ideally playing entirely from the subconscious; I think most of us do (understand it). It IS the goal. However, the subconscious is only going to reveal to you what it has been shown. Those of us here who are wise enough to leave our white belts on indefinitely are teaching our subconscious to play back the sounds we like when we need them (i.e. an actual improvisational situation).

You come off (intentionally or otherwise) like you have nothing left to learn; like you play what you hear and what you hear couldn't be better. The only problem is, when we go and listen to your recordings it sounds like a guy who was too eager to put on a black belt, promoted himself, and then comes to show mere students the way. Ranking yourself up with real black belts like Reg. Meanwhile, there are white belts here slowly darkening it with sweat and grime who can already play levels ahead of you.

[jasonc]

I really don't understand why this is so difficult to grasp. You have to have a good technical ability on your instrument BEFORE you can really play. Guitarists generally lag behind other instruments in terms of having the command of their instrument. That's probably because they constantly hear stuff like "The very notion that jazz guitarists use scales to improvise is a modern day conception concocted mostly to justify music students paying for instruction at Berklee and other schools".



I guess Sonny Stitt learned this at Berklee. That's an excerpt from his solo on Constellation.



I'm sure Arban meant for the cornetist to finger a diminished seventh chord and strum.

[targuit]

Gosh, Jeff! When I got my first guitar at eleven, I had already mastered playing arpeggios the very first time I accidentally strummed it! But then again, I was a child prodigy like you guys all are.

Are you really maintaining that you have to "study arpeggios"? REALLY? Perhaps I missed something over the past fifty years of playing. What exactly is it that you have to study? Now that would not be something called "VOICINGS" would it?

I'm being jocular here because I cannot seriously believe that you have to study arpeggios. Or that people here dismiss Sonny Rollins. Sonny Rollins. Saxophone Colossus!

I damn well know about mastering my instrument after fifty years. How moronic to suggest otherwise.
"They (scales,arpeggios), through repetition, allow the player to hear possibilities. Have you ever tried the exercise where you take a tune, play an arpeggio from a chord tone "up" on the first chord, then chromatically descend (or descend in scale) over the second chord to a chord tone of the third chord, and so on? This is practical application of those things. Scales aren't necessarily practiced in a vacuum, once they are learned, but they can certainly still be used to come up with ideas."

Ahhh, no.Sorry, Jeff. You know I respect your actual playing. But this gobbledygook - I don't need to come up with ways to play over progressions. Twelve tones. Some are part of the chord tones, others are chromatic notes. Take your pick - there are only twelve tones in the octave after all. Maybe I just don't have enough of those wonderful chord diagrams where you fill up the entire fretboard with black and white dots. I guess I should study those....NOT!

I already suggested we take a concrete song by the masters - a list of six or eight - and pick a couple to create a solo video to illustrate our varied approaches. You ridiculed that idea. So instead we talk about "studying arpeggios" and other arcane black arts.

How about my argument about Lester Young, Coleman Hawkins, Joe Pass, Django? How in the friggen' world did those guys ever get recorded without this forum? And no I don't go against the grain of common knowledge. I just have less tolerance for BS.

[lawson-stone]

Gosh, Jeff! When I got my first guitar at eleven, I had already mastered playing arpeggios the very first time I accidentally strummed it! But then again, I was a child prodigy like you guys all are.

Are you really maintaining that you have to "study arpeggios"? REALLY? Perhaps I missed something over the past fifty years of playing. What exactly is it that you have to study? Now that would not be something called "VOICINGS" would it?
[snip]
...

jay
Once again, your niggling people about terminology, while technically correct from one point of view, fails to grasp that what he said was actually perfectly true and sensible.

This nit-picking and school-marm style of interaction turns people off to the good things you have to share. I snipped the rest of this quotation because it's a rant, plain and simple, another thing that you do a lot and that turns people off, even people (like me) who like you a lot and appreciate your insight and love for the great American songbook.

A good thing to try is this: never post something so long people have to scroll to read it.

[Chuck]

[mr. beaumont]

Gosh, Jeff! When I got my first guitar at eleven, I had already mastered playing arpeggios the very first time I accidentally strummed it! But then again, I was a child prodigy like you guys all are.

Are you really maintaining that you have to "study arpeggios"? REALLY? Perhaps I missed something over the past fifty years of playing. What exactly is it that you have to study? Now that would not be something called "VOICINGS" would it?

I'm being jocular here because I cannot seriously believe that you have to study arpeggios. Or that people here dismiss Sonny Rollins. Sonny Rollins. Saxophone Colossus!

I damn well know about mastering my instrument after fifty years. How moronic to suggest otherwise.
"They (scales,arpeggios), through repetition, allow the player to hear possibilities. Have you ever tried the exercise where you take a tune, play an arpeggio from a chord tone "up" on the first chord, then chromatically descend (or descend in scale) over the second chord to a chord tone of the third chord, and so on? This is practical application of those things. Scales aren't necessarily practiced in a vacuum, once they are learned, but they can certainly still be used to come up with ideas."

Ahhh, no.Sorry, Jeff. You know I respect your actual playing. But this gobbledygook - I don't need to come up with ways to play over progressions. Twelve tones. Some are part of the chord tones, others are chromatic notes. Take your pick - there are only twelve tones in the octave after all. Maybe I just don't have enough of those wonderful chord diagrams where you fill up the entire fretboard with black and white dots. I guess I should study those....NOT!

I already suggested we take a concrete song by the masters - a list of six or eight - and pick a couple to create a solo video to illustrate our varied approaches. You ridiculed that idea. So instead we talk about "studying arpeggios" and other arcane black arts.

How about my argument about Lester Young, Coleman Hawkins, Joe Pass, Django? How in the friggen' world did those guys ever get recorded without this forum? And no I don't go against the grain of common knowledge. I just have less tolerance for BS.

Jay, I didn't ridicule your idea. I even suggested a song.


Any talk of approach would be "this is how I would practice this tune." Woodshedding.

In the moment, you think or plan too much, you're dead in the water. You know that, we all know that.

[targuit]

Hey Targuit,

To be entirely transparent, I agree with Matt with most of what he said in response to your posts (and I find his posts very well articulated, so I don't know where that bit about him not making sense comes from).

Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher Yeah, Jay. Sonny probably never talks music with anyone. Can't describe it. Probably calls everything "something something". Real musicicians never use words. Let me just get back to playing the "thingy". Yeah, I see what you mean, Joe. "Articulate" does not begin to describe it.

It's very important to have varying opinions, and I'm glad you're here sharing them. I also think believing in your opinions that are based on life experience whole heartedly and without remorse as fact is a great attribute that you have.

If that's not balanced with any sense of open-mindedness and humility, personality conflicts are a given.

Humility? I'm not the one suggesting that Sonny Rollins is bonkers or suffering from dementia.

The resistance you're getting here stems from the tone of your posts which usually come off (intentionally or otherwise) as being presented by some sort of old wise sage who is only gracing our presence for the select few with "but little dust in their eyes" who will follow you into the all knowing.

Well, at least I am old.

I totally get everything you say about ideally playing entirely from the subconscious; I think most of us do (understand it). It IS the goal. However, the subconscious is only going to reveal to you what it has been shown. Those of us here who are wise enough to leave our white belts on indefinitely are teaching our subconscious to play back the sounds we like when we need them (i.e. an actual improvisational situation).

You come off (intentionally or otherwise) like you have nothing left to learn; like you play what you hear and what you hear couldn't be better. The only problem is, when we go and listen to your recordings it sounds like a guy who was too eager to put on a black belt, promoted himself, and then comes to show mere students the way. Ranking yourself up with real black belts like Reg. Meanwhile, there are white belts here slowly darkening it with sweat and grime who can already play levels ahead of you.

Joe, I appreciate your response. I'm not trying to pontificate, just to suggest that the playing is the thing. I am not suggesting that you pick up a guitar, hum "OMMM" and you will play like Peter Bernstein. Of course not!
But this nonsense about practicing arpeggios or the inadequacy of Segovia's scales to play jazz ....there is just only so much BS you can swallow before you get frustrated with this nonsense.

The fact is that I have put up videos (audio) on YouTube and in my signature. I invite anyone of you to transcribe my improvised solo on The Shadow of Your Smile link on my YT channel. And then record yourself playing and singing as I did - actual performance. Am I the next Wes Montgomery or Joe Pass? No! But at least I have the balls to put my performances up and to link them. You know, when people go to hear music performed, all they care about is the end result. Put up a few recordings of complete songs - vocal, guitar, piano - that you all perform. Then we can talk. In fact I suggest that we all put up a solo interpretation of a couple of songs from the great composers like Kern, Arlen, Jobim. Then we can judge. I suggested as much earlier. Of course, then the suggestion came back to play Rose Room. Geez!

[targuit]

Love this!!

[targuit]

Jason - While I appreciate Sonny Stitt, that is for saxophone? I certainly can read it and play it - it is not a song I am familiar with. Or is it an etude? I will look it up on YT.

So where are the links in your signature to your performance? I admire your skill at constructing guitars. Fine stuff.

[joe2758]

I love Jason's playing; I hope he does choose to post some

[mr. beaumont]

Joe, I appreciate your response. I'm not trying to pontificate, just to suggest that the playing is the thing. I am not suggesting that you pick up a guitar, hum "OMMM" and you will play like Peter Bernstein. Of course not!
But this nonsense about practicing arpeggios or the inadequacy of Segovia's scales to play jazz ....there is just only so much BS you can swallow before you get frustrated with this nonsense.

The fact is that I have put up videos (audio) on YouTube and in my signature. I invite anyone of you to transcribe my improvised solo on The Shadow of Your Smile link on my YT channel. And then record yourself playing and singing as I did - actual performance. Am I the next Wes Montgomery or Joe Pass? No! But at least I have the balls to put my performances up and to link them. You know, when people go to hear music performed, all they care about is the end result. Put up a few recordings of complete songs - vocal, guitar, piano - that you all perform. Then we can talk. In fact I suggest that we all put up a solo interpretation of a couple of songs from the great composers like Kern, Arlen, Jobim. Then we can judge. I suggested as much earlier. Of course, then the suggestion came back to play Rose Room. Geez!

Because again, nobody is asking you to take a week and put out a polished product of you singing another ballad. Just blow. Play a tune you don't know.

As for "practicing arpeggios," you do realize it's not just holding down a chord and playing the strings sequentially, right?

And brother, it's not gobbeldygook. It's practice.