Best Jazz Guitar Etude Collection You’ve Found

[pamosmusic]

So in your mental model of the world we live in, what percentage of beginning jazz guitar students when they encounter a source like Barry Galbraith's fingerboard workbook do not just memorize a fingering per etude and play it for a few months until they are bored with it?

The same percentage who have bad or no teachers helping them through it

[Tal_175]

The same percentage who have bad or no teachers helping them through it

Glad you recognized this. Do you think it is reasonable to assume that a random jazz beginner poster here probably has a good teacher therefore need not be warned about the down sides of what might be their inclination when they practice "etudes"? It seems like you're just being a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. Perhaps bored?

[Tal_175]

And yes, I must be hanging out with other classical musicians. I mean … check out the Segovia editions of the Sor etudes. Segovia would’ve burned the building down if you’d told him classical guys were just treating those things as technical exercises to be memorized and not as pieces for building musical sensibility.

So they don't use them to build line vocabulary for variety of harmonic situations which is the discussion here. Execution with musical sensibility as part of a technical exercise.

[BreckerFan]

Im saying that if you’re just memorizing something and learning it as a rote technical exercise, then you’re using that thing wrong, no matter what it is.

This i disagree with. I've worked on my chops primarily by practicing etudes I've written that are solos or just straight 8ths over a tune. The idea being to target technique, but also to be working on language by writing and hearing things you would actually play. But the way I practice them is focused on technique.

Technical practice should always include a focus on musical elements like sound production, articulation, dynamics etc. but I don't see etudes of any variety as a way to build musical sensibility (unless we're talking about pieces designed to be played solo guitar, which typically isn't what I think of as a jazz etude). Especially for jazz, I don't think you can build musical sensibility by reading something off a page, at least not at first. Transcription, or at least deep listening, is the only game in town for that.

[pamosmusic]

Glad you recognized this. Do you think it is reasonable to assume that a random jazz beginner poster here probably has a good teacher therefore need not be warned about the down sides of what might be their inclination when they practice "etudes"? It seems like you're just being a contrarian for the sake of being a contrarian. Perhaps bored?

Geez Tal. Actually I’m not just being a contrarian. It actually seems a bit like you are.

[marcwhy]

+1 on the Greg Fishman studies on guitar!

[pamosmusic]

So they don't use them to build line vocabulary for variety of harmonic situations which is the discussion here. Execution with musical sensibility as part of a technical exercise.

For example, no … that’s actually not the discussion here.

The OP:

In Classical Guitar, there are collections of, what are considered, “Essential” Etudes… Carcassi, Guiliani etc.

I’m wondering what the Jazz equivalent is?

I suppose to ask it a different way - is there a book, or collection of “etudes” you’d see as Essential for a budding Jazz student? (Doesn’t need to be guitar specific, or could be chord melody or whatever).

So you’re burning an awful lot of word count arguing with me like the purpose of classical etudes is irrelevant here when the OP is asking specifically about them.

Youre initial input here was that learning etudes as sets of fingerings and rote technique was kind of useless. I told you that that isn’t the purpose of etudes at all. If that’s not what you meant and you’d like to clarify, that’s fine I guess. But at the moment you’re just shifting the goalposts a bunch, telling me I missed, and then telling me I must be bored to be such a contrarian.

[Tal_175]

For example, no … that’s actually not the discussion here.

The OP:



So you’re burning an awful lot of word count arguing with me like the purpose of classical etudes is irrelevant here when the OP is asking specifically about them.

Youre initial input here was that learning etudes as sets of fingerings and rote technique was kind of useless. I told you that that isn’t the purpose of etudes at all. If that’s not what you meant and you’d like to clarify, that’s fine I guess. But at the moment you’re just shifting the goalposts a bunch, telling me I missed, and then telling me I must be bored to be such a contrarian.

Yeah, I feel like you are the one who is moving the goal post. Your idea of the purpose of etudes not being technical exercises is a very transparently false statement in my opinion unless you have a very narrow definition of technique. I guess we'll agree to disagree.

[pamosmusic]

Yeah, I feel like you are the one who is moving the goal post. Your idea of the purpose of etudes not being technical exercises is a very transparently false statement in my opinion unless you have a very narrow definition of technique. I guess we'll agree to disagree.

Again … find where I said that, Tal. The purpose of an etude is to integrate technique into a musical context. The musical context being key.

[Tal_175]

Again … find where I said that, Tal. The purpose of an etude is to integrate technique into a musical context. The musical context being key.

So you didn't claim that etudes aren't technical exercises? For real? It seem to me like you said it multiple times.

[pamosmusic]

So you didn't claim that etudes aren't technical exercises? For real? It seem to me like you said it multiple times.

Tal, I was saying that memorizing etudes as rote sets of fingerings is not productive and but it’s also not the purpose of etudes.

The purpose of etudes is to integrate a technical skill into a musical context.

I have said that multiple times for whatever that’s worth

[Tal_175]

Tal, I was saying that memorizing etudes as rote sets of fingerings is not productive and but it’s also not the purpose of etudes.

The purpose of etudes is to integrate a technical skill into a musical context.

I have said that multiple times for whatever that’s worth

You said the purpose of etudes is not to treat them as technical exercises a few times (just scroll up the page).

It seems like you are separating technique from musical execution, to me technique is musical execution. Otherwise what is technique? Just making sounds?

[pamosmusic]

You said the purpose of etudes is not to treat them as technical exercises a few times (just scroll up the page).

It seems like you are separating technique from musical execution, to me technique is musical execution. Otherwise what is technique? Just making sounds?

Man if you’d like to represent what I said, then find it and quote me. It’s weird that I have to do this myself.

You’re almost certainly talking about this.

And yes, I must be hanging out with other classical musicians. I mean … check out the Segovia editions of the Sor etudes. Segovia would’ve burned the building down if you’d told him classical guys were just treating those things as technical exercises to be memorized and not as pieces for building musical sensibility.

But from the context here, I’m not saying that etudes aren’t for building technique. I’m saying they’re not rote technical exercises. Because they’re not. They’re etudes. If they’re solely for building technique, then we’d just play scales and do spider drills. We wouldn’t need the added layer of “etudes.” They serve an additional purpose.

and that purpose is musical context. Again for the people in the back.

[pamosmusic]

On a more productive note. I think the idea that jazz practice should be first and foremost about harmonic knowledge and vocabulary is very “guitar.”

It’s interesting, but other instruments don’t treat things this way. Articulation, dynamics, stylistic interpretation seem to play a larger role in the pedagogy of jazz horn players than guitarists. I think that’s to our detriment.

[Tal_175]

Man if you’d like to represent what I said, then find it and quote me. It’s weird that I have to do this myself.

You’re almost certainly talking about this.



But from the context here, I’m not saying that etudes aren’t for building technique. I’m saying they’re not rote technical exercises. Because they’re not. They’re etudes. If they’re solely for building technique, then we’d just play scales and do spider drills. We wouldn’t need the added layer of “etudes.” They serve an additional purpose.

and that purpose is musical context. Again for the people in the back.

Again you seem to separate execution elements like dynamics, inflections from technique I see them as part of technique. Technique in a style is inherently linked with musical execution of the melodic constructions, and phrases typical to the style.

Linear Expressions or Barry Galbraith books are examples of jazz etudes to me. They exemplify jazz phrases therefore provide a good technical framework for a jazz student on their instrument. But the point I was making earlier is, unlike classical students, there is more to playing etudes to jazz than good execution. Ideally these sorts of exercises also help build improvisational skills. For that, musical execution of a memorized (or read) long etude is not sufficient. Without more deliberate phrasal work and application to tunes, these etudes have a limited benefit in my experience.

[pamosmusic]

Again you seem to separate execution elements like dynamics, inflections from technique I see them as part of technique. Technique in a style is inherently linked with musical execution of the melodic constructions, and phrases typical to the style.

Linear Expressions or Barry Galbraith books are examples of jazz etudes to me. They exemplify jazz phrases therefore provide a good technical framework for a jazz student on their instrument. But the point I was making earlier is, unlike classical students, there is more to playing etudes to jazz than good execution. Ideally these sorts of exercises also help build improvisational skills. For that, musical execution of a memorized (or read) long etude is not sufficient. Without more deliberate phrasal work and application to tunes, these etudes have a limited benefit in my experience.

I would agree with most of this. Part of why I said way back in 1873 that I’m skeptical of the usefulness of “etudes” in jazz as distinct from transcribed solos.

[pamosmusic]

For what it’s worth… I think the distinction between technique and musical application for me would be …

Technique … can you play accent patterns in twos, threes, fives, etc

Musical application … in this jazz line, where should you place accents?

I think probably transcriptions are the best place for this, but that would be the purpose of something intermediary between technique and improvising

[Christian Miller]

This i disagree with. I've worked on my chops primarily by practicing etudes I've written that are solos or just straight 8ths over a tune. The idea being to target technique, but also to be working on language by writing and hearing things you would actually play. But the way I practice them is focused on technique.

Technical practice should always include a focus on musical elements like sound production, articulation, dynamics etc. but I don't see etudes of any variety as a way to build musical sensibility (unless we're talking about pieces designed to be played solo guitar, which typically isn't what I think of as a jazz etude). Especially for jazz, I don't think you can build musical sensibility by reading something off a page, at least not at first. Transcription, or at least deep listening, is the only game in town for that.

Can’t argue with the results


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rpjazzguitar]

I don't think there is a standard reference.

If there was it might be the Parker Omnibook, but I didn't find it easy to use. It would require a very focused approach, using backing tracks, the original recordings and going very slowly to get all those lines under the fingers.

For beginners I suggest Rhythms Complete by Colin and Bower.

For more advanced readers, maybe some of Lenny Niehaus' books written more for saxophone, but applicable.

To editorialize a bit, I wonder which books will really get a player sounding like jazz? I know from my own experience that it's possible to read through a ton of this material and still not sound that jazzy.

[pamosmusic]

Technical practice should always include a focus on musical elements like sound production, articulation, dynamics etc.

I would probably call those part of a musical sensibility. Technique is how and musicality is where and why.

Especially for jazz, I don't think you can build musical sensibility by reading something off a page, at least not at first. Transcription, or at least deep listening, is the only game in town for that.

Not disagreeing on this part but at least as someone who teaches, I can sometimes feel like this is a little bit too easy. People should learn from listening, but there are patterns I feel like I should help a student draw out of those transcriptions too.

a buddy of mine recently got a book from his trumpet teacher with a bunch of trumpet transcriptions with the articulation meticulously transcribed, each solo chosen to show the progression of jazz articulation through six or seven decades. Kind of interesting … obviously you can’t learn them without listening but still

[BreckerFan]

Yeah I guess it depends on what's meant by musical sensibility (a rare occurrence of using different definitions on this forum).

IMO etudes can help you with learning language, sound production, rhythm, accents, technique, etc, as in the pure ability to to execute those things. What I don't think etudes can help with is the musical application of these things, and the combination of them in phrasing and time feel, because that is entirely context specific, and a written etude on its own has no context. To really learn the musical application requires listening on some level.

Once you've listened and have an idea of the overall musical vision you want to reach, you can probably use etudes to work on specific aspects of that. But I would be hesitant to throw a collection of etudes at a jazz beginner as a way to learn musicality because they don't have the context. That goal would be better served by listening, transcribing, and playing along with a recording. But I would use etudes to teach the technical ability to connect arpeggios over a set of changes, for example.

[pamosmusic]

Once you've listened and have an idea of the overall musical vision you want to reach, you can probably use etudes to work on specific aspects of that. But I would be hesitant to throw a collection of etudes at a jazz beginner as a way to learn musicality because they don't have the context. That goal would be better served by listening, transcribing, and playing along with a recording. But I would use etudes to teach the technical ability to connect arpeggios over a set of changes, for example.

I would agree with all of this. But I do think it’s interesting that most of what you say about articulation could be applied to connecting arpeggios too. Simple to do mechanically, but difficult to do musically.

Again … yes transcribing. Do I hand students etudes? No. I just think there’s something about guitar players that makes us think of the notes as being concrete and methodical but of the articulation and style as being mystical. I’d be interested to see that stuff explored in the same way we explore the notes themselves.

[pamosmusic]

For example … if I talk to a guitarist about how they think of changes they’re all thoughts. If I ask them how they think about slurs or articulation, they’re like “listening.”

And I think the implication that the two are actually all that different might be mistaken. Would it be bizarre and incoherent to have lots of thoughts about articulation and a solid philosophy of how to articulate lines, but then to answer the vocabulary question with “listening.”

I can listen to Grant Green and listen to Wes and listen to Clark Terry copy the articulation of all three but trying to copy them and apply it all would probably be incoherent in some ways. So at some point, shouldn’t I have some concept of how to do it? Or some understanding of how and why each does what they do?

Its an interesting question, I think.

[BreckerFan]

Yeah that is an interesting phenomenon, and a gap for a lot of guitarists. I think there is a degree to which notes are more concrete. You can write down the notes in a line, and if you play those notes, you will play the line, there's no ambiguity. Articulation has a lot more variables that are harder to define or replicate. Which isn't to say it's mystical, the sound is captured and defined. But it's hard to deduce striking the string at x angle with y velocity just from the sound.

It also seems to me that sheet music is totally inadequate to communicate all the required information to reproduce someones articulation. If we're just talking about patterns of picked vs hammered notes that's pretty clear, but what about like Holdsworth legato of no pull offs to avoid bending the pitch, mixed with his subtle purposeful pitch bends? Idk you've definitely thought about this more than me, how would you communicate articulation information to a student? I guess I would say listen to the recording because that's the most concrete, but I admit that's probably lazy haha.

[pamosmusic]

Yeah that is an interesting phenomenon, and a gap for a lot of guitarists. I think there is a degree to which notes are more concrete. You can write down the notes in a line, and if you play those notes, you will play the line, there's no ambiguity. Articulation has a lot more variables that are harder to define or replicate. Which isn't to say it's mystical, the sound is captured and defined. But it's hard to deduce striking the string at x angle with y velocity just from the sound.

Yeah that’s true.

It also seems to me that sheet music is totally inadequate to communicate all the required information to reproduce someones articulation. If we're just talking about patterns of picked vs hammered notes that's pretty clear, but what about like Holdsworth legato of no pull offs to avoid bending the pitch, mixed with his subtle purposeful pitch bends? Idk you've definitely thought about this more than me, how would you communicate articulation information to a student? I guess I would say listen to the recording because that's the most concrete, but I admit that's probably lazy haha.

Yeah I’ve thought about this a ton, though I’m not sure I’ve actually got any answer.

Anyway .. I think there are some aspects of articulation that etudes might serve well. I slur into downbeats when they’re not disrupted by a string crossing and sort of made that automatic by learning all the bebop heads I had that way and then finding them in five positions so that the string crossings were in different places in each. There are others that might be useful … accenting upbeats, or the tops of lines, different placements of ghost notes or grace notes.

Been thinking about that a lot lately. Again I’m not sure etudes are the way I’d go on that, but I think that stuff might work that way