Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 30 of 30
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    I know scales aren't the most important thing and I should start by working off triads and chord shapes to follow the changes in the beginning, but eventually I'm aiming for a Joe Pass style system where you always have a scale shape and an arpeggio available to you wherever you are on the neck, so I've arranged all my arpeggios within the scale positions, so it's important I can switch between these scale shapes fluidly and efficiently.

    Let's say I'm playing over the first 2 chords of a blues in G and I want to play G Mixolydian over the G7, and C Mixolydian over the C7, how do I make the switch between these scales?

    Is it a case of looking for the root notes of the shapes? When switching from G Mixolydian to C Mixolydian, when I finish playing the G Mixolydian part do I have to just quickly locate the nearest C note and apply the C Mixolydian scale shape I know has the C as a root note on that string? I've memorised the positions of the root notes within all the scale positions and I've been trying this and it seems inefficient and clunky so far since it takes me a second or two to locate the root note and apply the appropriate scale position to it.

    So basically I'm wondering if I should commit to putting in the time to practice this method or is there a better way that I should be doing this that I'm unaware of?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dionder_1
    I know scales aren't the most important thing and I should start by working off triads and chord shapes to follow the changes in the beginning, but eventually I'm aiming for a Joe Pass style system where you always have a scale shape and an arpeggio available to you wherever you are on the neck, so I've arranged all my arpeggios within the scale positions, so it's important I can switch between these scale shapes fluidly and efficiently.

    Let's say I'm playing over the first 2 chords of a blues in G and I want to play G Mixolydian over the G7, and C Mixolydian over the C7, how do I make the switch between these scales?

    Is it a case of looking for the root notes of the shapes? When switching from G Mixolydian to C Mixolydian, when I finish playing the G Mixolydian part do I have to just quickly locate the nearest C note and apply the C Mixolydian scale shape I know has the C as a root note on that string? I've memorised the positions of the root notes within all the scale positions and I've been trying this and it seems inefficient and clunky so far since it takes me a second or two to locate the root note and apply the appropriate scale position to it.

    So basically I'm wondering if I should commit to putting in the time to practice this method or is there a better way that I should be doing this that I'm unaware of?
    Oh hi did you comment on my channel (jazz guitar scrapbook)? Sorry comments of YouTube not the best place to discuss anything in depth haha.

    Heres a video I did a while back on scales/fretboard mapping. Also to let you know I have one in the pipe (it has been recorded) that I’m going to release soon about how to practice scales through a tune



    Probably the simplest answer to your question is when I started out I did indeed go from root to root in the way you describe, later joining things up once the basic shapes are on muscle memory. More recently I’ve done this with much smaller scale shapes which I find more useful for changes playing (see the video.)

    However playing a little piano helps with this is understanding the small differences between scales.

    For example, G7 and C7 scales (mixolydian) differ by one pitch - B to Bb, or the 3rd of G7. If you know where that note is and can change at the right time you can very easily move between the two scales. This is very obvious on piano, but not so obvious on guitar.
    Last edited by christianm77; 01-10-2021 at 06:40 AM.

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    I'm under the impression that the way you learn the fretboard is: you have a root and a dot pattern that go with that root. You don't instantly know the interval and the note names of those "dots", right? If so, I don't know if it's possible to connect scales freely with that approach.

    I took time with each chord (and still do) in various 2 octave areas, first the arpeggio notes, then the scale notes. Note the scale notes are another triad arpeggio (2 4 6). So you got the chord's 7th arpeggio and the in between 3 notes.

    When I work on the changes of a tune, I come up with a fretboard plan for the tune. This is how I map the changes to specific areas of the fretboard. The ultimate goal is to gradually be able to use the whole fretboard without having to "limit" certain parts of the tune to certain positions/areas.

    I then first work on each chord in their allocated areas (it doesn't have to be one per each chord). I make sure I know the area inside out for that chord. That means I mastered the 3 ways of relating to the chord:

    1 - The note name and how it relates to the chord without a physical fretboard reference to the root. Say I play F, I'm on G7, I know that it's the 7th, if I play Eb I instantly know that it's the b13th. The important thing in this category is that I don't look for the root to figure that out. I just know that I played "F" so it's the 7th. I try to also to hear the function of the note. This is really important and why it's good to do this with a backing track (as well as with a metronome). Take your time and pay attention to how each function sounds against the chord.

    2- I'm aware of the root of the chord and I see the note I play as the interval from the root. Here the point is not the note names but the physical relationship of the note and the chord root. Knowing that it's the 7th interval.

    3- Seeing the note in the context of the 2 octave scale position. This doesn't have to be 2 octaves. If you are using a positional system, that amounts to seeing the note in the context of the position that the note resides in.

    Once you get good at each point above for each chord of the tune according to the fretboard plan, next is to work on each pair in the progression and connect them. This gets easier of course as more tunes you learn this way. I still have to put quite a bit of time for each new tune if I want to learn it well.

    1- With a metronome playing first continuous quarter notes then eighth notes changing to the nearest note as the chord changes.

    2- Once you get a handle of the first then more freely playing phrases on each chord and connecting the phrases. The phrases can initially be arpeggios starting from different chord tones, chromatic passing notes, approach notes, 1235/1345 patterns starting from different notes.

    Yes a lot of work. There are other ways perhaps, but ultimately they all should lead to the same place.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 01-10-2021 at 10:29 AM.

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    My own biggest mistake was to practice stuff isolated from other stuff.
    For example. When a scale was well in the bones, I went ahead and practiced something else (the dry morning workout type of practice), thinking that it's all well and ready.
    Instead, I had a bunch of things "done" that had almost no connections to each other.

    So, I'd advise always use pairs of things when learning new stuff. Those pairs can be.. literally everything. D7 arp + mixolydian.. triad&inversions + their notes as arp.. one scale in 2 keys with instant switch (as the OP currently asked for).
    Yeah. 2 bars one thing, 2 bars the other. Must get it fluid.

    Point is, you probably end up practicing the connections between all kinds of things. Just to run with something on the neck up and down - thats is only the 1st basic step.

    But you know, switching between..all kinds of things.. it gets easier. First there's a lot of stumbling and hiccups. Then it gets faster... and THEN.. you will be able to think ahead! Thats where the real fun starts

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Let's say I'm playing over the first 2 chords of a blues in G and I want to play G Mixolydian over the G7, and C Mixolydian over the C7, how do I make the switch between these scales?
    Look for the commonality and the differential between two scales and modify notes right where you are as needed.

    GABCDEF
    GABbCDEF

    one note differential B>Bb

    -----------------------------------1-3------------------------------------1-3-----
    ------------------------------3-5------------------------------------3-5----------
    ----------------------2-4-5----------------------------------2-3-5---------------
    --------------2-3-5-----------------------------------2-3-5-----------------------
    -------2-3-5-----------------------------------1-3-5------------------------------
    --3-5--------------------------------------3-5-------------------------------------

    You can do a similar move regardless of what fingering you are presently
    playing or how many note difference exists between the two scales.

    Within every 5 frets there exists 2 1/3 octaves of the chromatic scale + one unison note. Therefore it is possible to address any scale or arpeggio within the limits of available range. This is a position approach and probably the best place to start. A similar note adjustment strategy is of course also available when playing up or down the fingerboard.

  7. #6
    Yep that was me who commented Christian. Great channel by the way. I don't understand why you get so few views on your videos. You should be at least at the level of similar youtubers like Christian Van Hemert. I suppose Jazz is a bit of a niche market though so it's probably hard to build an audience.

    And thanks for the video suggestion, I'll definitely give smaller positions a shot and see how it goes. A large part of my struggle is likely coming from how slow I am at recalling the notes on the neck so I definitely need to put some more time into that.

  8. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    I'm under the impression that the way you learn the fretboard is: you have a root and a dot pattern that go with that root. You don't instantly know the interval and the note names of those "dots", right? If so, I don't know if it's possible to connect scales freely with that approach.

    I took time with each chord (and still do) in various 2 octave areas, first the arpeggio notes, then the scale notes. Note the scale notes are another triad arpeggio (2 4 6). So you got the chord's 7th arpeggio and the in between 3 notes.

    When I work on the changes of a tune, I come up with a fretboard plan for the tune. This is how I map the changes to specific areas of the fretboard. The ultimate goal is to gradually be able to use the whole fretboard without having to "limit" certain parts of the tune to certain positions/areas.

    I then first work on each chord in their allocated areas (it doesn't have to be one per each chord). I make sure I know the area inside out for that chord. That means I mastered the 3 ways of relating to the chord:

    1 - The note name and how it relates to the chord without a physical fretboard reference to the root. Say I play F, I'm on G7, I know that it's the 7th, if I play Eb I instantly know that it's the b13th. The important thing in this category is that I don't look for the root to figure that out. I just know that I played "F" so it's the 7th. I try to also to hear the function of the note. This is really important and why it's good to do this with a backing track (as well as with a metronome). Take your time and pay attention to how each function sounds against the chord.

    2- I'm aware of the root of the chord and I see the note I play as the interval from the root. Here the point is not the note names but the physical relationship of the note and the chord root. Knowing that it's the 7th interval.

    3- Seeing the note in the context of the 2 octave scale position. This doesn't have to be 2 octaves. If you are using a positional system, that amounts to seeing the note in the context of the position that the note resides in.

    Once you get good at each point above for each chord of the tune according to the fretboard plan, next is to work on each pair in the progression and connect them. This gets easier of course as more tunes you learn this way. I still have to put quite a bit of time for each new tune if I want to learn it well.

    1- With a metronome playing first continuous quarter notes then eighth notes changing to the nearest note as the chord changes.

    2- Once you get a handle of the first then more freely playing phrases on each chord and connecting the phrases. The phrases can initially be arpeggios starting from different chord tones, chromatic passing notes, approach notes, 1235/1345 patterns starting from different notes.

    Yes a lot of work. There are other ways perhaps, but ultimately they all should lead to the same place.

    Thanks for the help. I see I have a lot of work ahead of me.

    In regards to your first paragraph, I basically use a CAGED system kind of thing, where for example with the major scale I have 5 positions spanning the whole fretboard and I have all the arpeggios of the scale organised within these 5 shapes to make them easily accessible at all times. I've memorised all the notes of the fretboard(albeit I am slow at recalling them which is definitely something I have to work on) I also have the positions of the root notes memorised for each of the positions which I use to locate them across the neck.

    Ultimately I'm aiming for a Joe Pass like system as you can see here: Learn the Fretboard Like Joe Pass | Guitar World where he always has both the scale and arpeggio available wherever he is on the neck. So what I was wondering was how he switches between the shapes when switching keys. I always assumed it was based on the root notes judging by how they're always highlighted throughout the shape.

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    How do I switch between scales?

    You understand where the notes are on the neck.

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dionder_1
    Thanks for the help. I see I have a lot of work ahead of me.

    In regards to your first paragraph, I basically use a CAGED system kind of thing, where for example with the major scale I have 5 positions spanning the whole fretboard and I have all the arpeggios of the scale organised within these 5 shapes to make them easily accessible at all times. I've memorised all the notes of the fretboard(albeit I am slow at recalling them which is definitely something I have to work on) I also have the positions of the root notes memorised for each of the positions which I use to locate them across the neck.

    Ultimately I'm aiming for a Joe Pass like system as you can see here: Learn the Fretboard Like Joe Pass | Guitar World where he always has both the scale and arpeggio available wherever he is on the neck. So what I was wondering was how he switches between the shapes when switching keys. I always assumed it was based on the root notes judging by how they're always highlighted throughout the shape.
    Root is of course important as it defines the chord being played and how we hear the other notes in the chord scale (3rd, b9 etc). It takes a lot of work to internalize shapes to the extent that you can connect them. There is no magic really, just practice.

    On the one hand it's important to internalize the chord material (chord scales, arpeggio setc) for each chord before connecting it to others. But just internalizing each chord separately doesn't lead to connecting them easily. That's where a lot of work is, but it's the more musical part of the process.

    Some people believe that knowing the note names is not important for playing the changes. I find that the more ways I can connect the music, the fretboard, my ears, my knowledge together the better. I find it very useful and beneficial in a variety of ways to be able think in terms the notes. That doesn't mean I'm always conscious of the note names but they are always accessible. Intervals with relation to the root is more crucial.

    So how much emphasis you want to put in working with the note names is a personal choice. But the "dots" that are not the root should also have some individual meaning, as the intervals at least.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 01-10-2021 at 07:44 PM.

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dionder_1
    Thanks for the help. I see I have a lot of work ahead of me.

    In regards to your first paragraph, I basically use a CAGED system kind of thing, where for example with the major scale I have 5 positions spanning the whole fretboard and I have all the arpeggios of the scale organised within these 5 shapes to make them easily accessible at all times. I've memorised all the notes of the fretboard(albeit I am slow at recalling them which is definitely something I have to work on) I also have the positions of the root notes memorised for each of the positions which I use to locate them across the neck.

    Ultimately I'm aiming for a Joe Pass like system as you can see here: Learn the Fretboard Like Joe Pass | Guitar World where he always has both the scale and arpeggio available wherever he is on the neck. So what I was wondering was how he switches between the shapes when switching keys. I always assumed it was based on the root notes judging by how they're always highlighted throughout the shape.


    If you're already familiar with CAGED, you may do well to spend some time working with triad inversions on each set of three adjacent strings. These shapes will coincide with the larger CAGED shapes and also lend themselves very well to working with one-octave scale shapes as suggested by christianm77.

    .

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    There may be as many ways to do this as there are guitarists.

    The simplest answer is that you're using the notes of the first scale, making melody. When the chord change arrives, you start using the notes of the new scale. If you want it to sound smooth, one way is to make the first note of the new scale a minor third, or less away from the last note of the first scale.

    If you have to think about where the root is, you aren't there yet. You have to know where all the notes of the scale are. Otherwise you are "root bound" -- which is, hopefully, a temporary condition which stops when you learn where all the notes are.

    I think the goal is that if you decide to play a certain scale it is as if the fingerboard lights up on every note in that scale.

    Maybe the chord tones in a different color.

    I did it by learning the note names in the scales and arps I use. And, by learning the fingerboard -- every note, instantaneous.

    Others do it by linking patterns or by interval, or something.

    Great jazz has been played every which way.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jimmy blue note
    If you keep your ear active in hearing the differences, you'll start to hear where the key areas (scales) have common sounds. This is a natural process; it'll come with time. If you pay too much attention to fingerings and scales as a fingering exercise, if you don't hear it, it'll come slower. Ear, eye, fingers.
    I like this video.

    Have fun. Good question. You'll get it!
    I was under the impression that OP is about playing the changes, not key center soloing.

  14. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    I was under the impression that OP is about playing the changes, not key center soloing.
    Yup, my bad. I was trying to make a point that hearing the character of one harmonic place, and then hearing the next, was the thing I found best to focus on. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
    I've removed my post.

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Learn where the arpeggios fit within the scales. They are not different things. Arpeggios are embedded within the scales; scales connect and extend arpeggios. Anywhere you are on the fingerboard you have arpeggios and scales available. They are part of each other. Chord forms are arpeggios played simultaneously. They are not different from arpeggios nor are they different from scales.

    Try playing melodies just using the chord forms and pay attention to what happens and where notes go as the chords change.

    Once you understand that, shifting for example from G mixolydian to C mixolydian as when blues in G goes from I to IV will become easier. You will hear the switch between scales from one note to the next. And you won't have to count back to the root to do it.

    You can do this in a etude-y way to start to get it under your fingers. Play two measures of a motif based in G mixolydian; then two bars of the motif again in C mixolydian. Try it using the same scale degrees at first, so the motif moves up a 4th as a unit and back down. Go back and forth. Then do the same thing but aim the motif at one of the chord tones of the next chord- G mixolydian aiming at the 3rd or 7th of C7 (E or Bb), for example.

    Learn some BB King lines, some Jerry Garcia lines (Jerry works a lot out of the mixolydian scale), country music lines.

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    So the answer is... you need a Reference, a Tonal or Modal reference. It's somewhat like getting stuck in a forest .... you look at one or two trees and then try and understand the forest.

    What connects and fills in the blanks is the Tonal, (or modal) Reference... And generally its much easier and complete when you start with... Harmonic Reference.

    Simple example... your G7 and C7. Just using Mixolydian is just a technical exercise, yes you can play melodic games and basically be creative... noodle etc... But you need a Tonal Target or Reference, which creates musical organizations of whatever creative playing you want to do. (The Forest)

    When you pick a tune, style, melody or melodic 12 step rehab process.... they imply a Relationship, a Harmonic Relationship.

    Your G7 to C7.... could have as a Reference, G, C or even an implied Tonal Target of F. There are obviously other choices, but the one you choose .... creates and defines the relationship, the Harmonic relationship. You can develop that relationship.... melodically, harmonically, rhythmically or whatever you choose. But the guidelines start with your
    Starting Reference.

    This approach is different from the trial and error approach. And generally to be able to use organizational applications, like Tonal targets and references.... you need to have your technical shit together on your instrument. If your still figuring out how to play the guitar, well that usually comes first.

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Time out (please).

    Issues:
    #1 - viewing this as a guitar problem instead of a music problem.

    #2 - lack of familiarity with current day fundamental jazz improv educational material (Improv 101 and maybe a little bit of Improv 201)


    Solution areas:
    1. Familiarize yourself with what people refer to as "voice leading", "target notes", "approach notes", and "chord connection". All jazz improv students - regardless of instrument - need to; (1) understand these principles, (2) utilize practice drills to learn them on their chosen instrument, (3) apply them in transcribed solos, jazz solo etudes, and stolen licks, and (4) begin to improvise with them.

    Once you learn these techniques you'll hear and recognize them everywhere.

    The alternative and slower path is to; use your ears, copy lots of solos, doodle your brains out, and get to a place where maybe you can do it - albeit with only a limited understanding of what you're doing even though you know it sounds right. That's the old school way and may work for some, but takes much longer.

    It's 2021. Some codes have been cracked. There's no need to stumble around in the dark as if it were 1952. It's not so much that the old school way should be avoided (it shouldn't), it's just that the new school way should be included.


    Finally, the blues - and the I7 and IV7 chords in particular - are indeed a great place to start.
    Last edited by Donplaysguitar; 03-06-2021 at 02:26 AM.

  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by dionder_1
    I know scales aren't the most important thing and I should start by working off triads and chord shapes to follow the changes in the beginning, but eventually I'm aiming for a Joe Pass style system where you always have a scale shape and an arpeggio available to you wherever you are on the neck, so I've arranged all my arpeggios within the scale positions, so it's important I can switch between these scale shapes fluidly and efficiently.

    Let's say I'm playing over the first 2 chords of a blues in G and I want to play G Mixolydian over the G7, and C Mixolydian over the C7, how do I make the switch between these scales?

    Is it a case of looking for the root notes of the shapes? When switching from G Mixolydian to C Mixolydian, when I finish playing the G Mixolydian part do I have to just quickly locate the nearest C note and apply the C Mixolydian scale shape I know has the C as a root note on that string? I've memorised the positions of the root notes within all the scale positions and I've been trying this and it seems inefficient and clunky so far since it takes me a second or two to locate the root note and apply the appropriate scale position to it.

    So basically I'm wondering if I should commit to putting in the time to practice this method or is there a better way that I should be doing this that I'm unaware of?

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    Yea... no disrespect to anyone, but the mentioned approaches for getting past... Switching between Scales and eventually having all scales become connected. Using contrapuntal principles and devices, chord tones , target notes and resolution etc...are what is old school. That's how I was taught as a kid. I guess it the the standard starting point, but generally don't ever really get there. They do all have a musical reference... but it's really vanilla. Even the Blue Note approach just becomes embellishments. And generally most don't have principles with embellishment applications.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Yea... no disrespect to anyone, but the mentioned approaches for getting past... Switching between Scales and eventually having all scales become connected. Using contrapuntal principles and devices, chord tones , target notes and resolution etc...are what is old school. That's how I was taught as a kid. I guess it the the standard starting point, but generally don't ever really get there. They do all have a musical reference... but it's really vanilla. Even the Blue Note approach just becomes embellishments. And generally most don't have principles with embellishment applications.
    So where is there, and what is the path? Also, are we thinking more about modal/post-bop style or tunes that require frequent changes and key center moves? Or does it matter as far as you are concerned?

    It's funny because a lot of people will tell you that the old school way was very scale based (and much of it was) and didn't include very many insights into building lines that sounded much like jazz.

    For one example, I was rummaging through my old Dick Grove jazz improv materials a few weeks ago. I think it pales in comparison to what Bert Ligon shows with his Chord Outline focus in Connecting Chords with Linear Harmony, for one example. The same goes for Jerry Bergonzi, Chad LB, current Berklee improv studies etc.

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Donplaysguitar
    .

    For one example, I was rummaging through my old Dick Grove jazz improv materials a few weeks ago. I think it pales in comparison to what Bert Ligon shows with his Chord Outline focus in Connecting Chords with Linear Harmony, for one example.
    The same goes for Jerry Bergonzi, Chad LB, current Berklee improv studies etc .
    Sorry, I am too dumb to understand bolded part, above . Could you please clarify? Is it that current Berklee studies, Bergonzi ... pale in comparison with Bert Ligon, or it is the other way around, or you meant to say something completely different?


    My Band camp

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Sorry, I am too dumb to understand bolded part, above . Could you please clarify? Is it that current Berklee studies, Bergonzi ... pale in comparison with Bert Ligon, or it is the other way around, or you meant to say something completely different?


    My Band camp
    Sorry for any confusion. I was saying that all those authors have more insightful and useful explanations for Jazz language material, relative to what we had in the 70s. No disrespect to Dick Grove, who I studied with. I’m indebted to Dick Grove.

    another example is the great Joe Pass Guitar Style book. Some approach notes and enclosures were explained as altered tensions, but perhaps not by Joe. IMO Jazz Ed has made a lot of progress since then, just like other fields. New school Ed, for old school jazz.

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Donplaysguitar
    It's 2021. Some codes have been cracked. There's no need to stumble around in the dark as if it were 1952. It's not so much that the old school way should be avoided (it shouldn't), it's just that the new school way should be included.
    Beautiful!

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    I guess it is thinking in melody that helps....
    sometimes it seems we foreget that it is music - an artistic occupation - not engeneering.

    can you imagine a painter who says: I have mastered in drawing an ear and a brow (and they did studies of parts a lot) - how can I get it connected?
    Well... draw a face, draw a person.

    Any tools are good but they are nothing if you do not have some sense of artistic idea.

    You may say that it is not practical advice but I do not think so.
    Artistic thinking is also practice.
    I think that artistic study should not all be 'guided tour', in my opinion if someone picks up an instrument he has something musical already in his mind that he just cannot express yet...


    No disrespect to the OP - I do not say of course you cannot do anything...
    but my suggestion would be that general and simple: just try to find a melody when you want to play a melody.
    Your practice routine is left in the practice room, in performance room it is all different, it is all you, your ideas, your creativity, your personality.

    Yes just like this... no tips, no shortcusts...

    because I think one should not be taught to mimick musicality, obe should just have it or discover it in hisself. And combinations of scales will not help it.

    What can help is study of melodies and forms. It is all there.

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Well, J,
    You beat me to the punch. Your above post #23 was beautifully written and clearly defines the approach to music and improvisation from a learning perspective when you say "sometimes it seems we foreget that it is music - an artistic occupation - not engeneering. . . Jonah" And, it is just this perspective that details the difference between the hordes of "music machines" we hear today in Jazz and Classical Music with their predictable riffs and formulaic approach to Music that leaves you cold and bored rather than uplifted or inspired and is contrary to real creative improvisation and performance. We will not all become artists but we can think like an artist . . .not a "mechanic". I've often wondered how generations of "bedroom players" can ever develop a style and voice when their life is devoted to memorizing arithmetic improvisations and without ever playing in a group setting with live musicians. And, how much time do aspiring "Jazzers" devote to learning a tune inside out (a process of years if not a lifetime) and then experimenting with melody/harmony based on your tastes and imagination in lieu of this "formulaic approach" so popular in our internet age. And, this case in point is why, as a Forum, we devote such a disproportionate amount of time and discussion to creative musicians and the music they played over 50 years ago: Chet, Miles, Coltrane, Sims, Dexter, Rubenstein, Kempff, Horowitz, Segovia, Casals, Wes, Heifetz, Bream, Monk . . . well, you get the point. Great post, Jonah!

    Play live . . . Marinero

    Here's Dexter . . . I wonder how he connects chords?

    ?











  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    Agree with both M and Jonah. Seems most “jazz guitar” players spend their time copying old solos or arrangements note for note. To extend Jonah’s painting comment... it’s like painters doing nothing but doing reproductions of masters. How is that learning to play? Learning your voice? I don’t get the adoration for either reproduced art masters or reproduced WesMo solos. I’d much rather hear a mediocre but original style than a note perfect copy. IMHO, YMMV.
    At least the art copiers can sell their stuff on cruise ships lol!

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    It's funny how this forum can swing between, "learn every reharmonization technique and post-bop modal superimposition in every fingering and 12 keys" to "just meditate and let the notes come to you".

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    It's funny how this forum can swing between, "learn every reharmonization technique and post-bop modal superimposition in every fingering and 12 keys" to "just meditate and let the notes come to you".
    Kind of jazz in a nutshell.

    You know some basic nuts and bolts, and you can play a lot of tunes. Nothing esoteric about it. But the jazz mind says "keep searching." So you continue learning.

    But I really think a steady diet of chords, tunes, ear training (including copping licks) and arpeggios for a good solid year for any beginner will get them that foundation to where they CAN start exploring the less concrete stuff. By good lord, get the basics down first. Take it from a guy who realized it took him ten years to do what he could have in 1 or 2, if I hadn't kept getting sidetracked.

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    But the jazz mind says "keep searching." So you continue learning.
    I think jazz by nature is experimental music... in direct sense...
    you try something in practice and find out if it works or not.

    I think it is a part of its aesthetics, its philosphy (together with liberty and risk).

    It is easy to say it is like that every art is like this but I think it is not.

    I think this is where the opposition of 'play what you hear' against 'you should first play only then you hear' lues..
    lately I noticed it became more common to say the last.
    Obviously mature Beethoven did not need to play to hear something, was he less creative because of that? No. But as I ssid practical experiment is not typical for any art, for classical music in general - however great improvizers they were - it is not typical to noodle around the instrument with some approaches looking for new effects and sonoruties.

    But I do not think it is really an opposition for jazz too...

    'Play what you hear' does not mean 'stay within the limits of your comfort zone' .. actually I believe we often hear much more beyond it.

    'What we hear' is not even notes, it is rather images or ideas... and when they sound they become expressed in notes.

    'play what you hear' means trust your inner ear.
    It does not exclude - so typical for jazz - experimentation as described above but it rather describes the way you take the decision if it works or not.

    When we play on an instrument with some new unknown approaches unexpected sounds - we discover sounds that somehow respond to 'what we hear' inside with our innner hearing...

    Don't we all know that feeling of recognition of something we seem to never have met before?

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    I think "play what you hear" is solid advice. It should be coupled with "and keep expanding what you hear."

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    "But I really think a steady diet of chords, tunes, ear training (including copping licks) and arpeggios for a good solid year for any beginner will get them that foundation to where they CAN start exploring the less concrete stuff." Mr. B,



    Hi, B,
    This is exactly what musicians did from previous generations when they started playing gigs. You had to assemble these various elements to perform successfully. If you ever played with a group on a steady basis( 6 months to a year), you'd find your playing changes(for the better) over time. This is the natural process that many in my generation who were working musicians followed. However, when your playing felt stale or stunted, many in my generation "woodshedded" as was the case with players like Coltrane when he was seeking his personal musical identity. This is the "mechanical" side of music that hopefully translates into creativity. So, a solid musical foundation is essential to personal growth. However, it will not buy you a personal voice or creativity. That comes from the gods.
    Play live . . . Marinero