-
Fretting Hand Technique: Control Flying Fingers with this Exercise video
Is exercise a good idea?
-
10-07-2024 06:15 AM
-
Sure.
Originally Posted by GuyBoden
Scott Tenant has an exercise called “filling and emptying” in Pumping Nylon. I usually start folks with not even pressing the string down; just resting the finger on the string where you’d want it to go.
But yeah. I don’t like bare technical exercises much, but that one is probably worth doing if you have flutter fingers. Just do it when you play scales and play them super slow or something.
-
As he says in the video, for lots of guitarists their real issue is the "flicky pinky".
There's a way to stop that by playing rather than exercise. The flicky pinky happens when the third finger is being used where the pinky is not going to finger the fret above it, either just before or just after. This "gives permission" to the pinky to "go on break" instead of being at the ready. When you do engage the pinky it's right there where it's needed; the problem is that the pinky is there when needed but otherwise goes on break moving off and away from the finger board.
To fix that, simply do one thing - deliberately use the pinking for the highest note on each string for every position. For where the pinky would normally be that, do that, but where the third finger would usually be that, change that to the pinky. The clearest and easiest is to play blues pentatonic scales using just the index and the pinky. You can do that without much effort and every string will get the pinky on its highest note.
What this does is never let the pinky go on break. It will not take any effort to force the pinky to stay close over the strings, you'll just notice that it stays by itself because using for the top note on all strings prevents him from "going off duty".
After about 5 minutes of playing like this, go back to normal and you will notice the pinky stays close to the strings for a while as you play until he figures out the "continuous duty cycle" period is over.
Try it; you'll see it. That is proof that the intrinsic mechanics of the pinky don't have to misbehave. The fix is not so much physical as it is mental - moving from the pinky's habit of anticipating breaks by monitoring plans for itself to always being in the ready position at all times is done by imagining that you are using the pinky to maintain its ready status.
-
Ever seen Pat Martino's "flicky" fingers (not just pinky). In his case he needed the movement because he needed momentum enough to crash down on the heavy strings on heavy action. With enough practice, you can have excessive finger movement and still play fast and clean. Some say that having some "fight" with the strings can bring out more personality in one's playing.
I've heard more than a few players with really efficient left hand technique along with low action etc sound rather undynamic, and, well, a bit boring?
-
So to be clear: Originally Posted by princeplanet
Ever seen Pat Martino's "flicky" fingers (not just pinky). In his case he needed the movement because he needed momentum enough to crash down on the heavy strings on heavy action. With enough practice, you can have excessive finger movement and still play fast and clean. Some say that having some "fight" with the strings can bring out more personality in one's playing.
I've heard more than a few players with really efficient left hand technique along with low action etc sound rather undynamic, and, well, a bit boring?
3 fingers: why limit yourself and not use the pinky when you have it.
flutterfingers: good technique makes you sound undynamic.
-
That's forum advice for you. Originally Posted by pamosmusic
-
I'm not sure there is only one way to go about this. For instance in classical guitar Manuel Barrueco likes to have his fingers close to the strings on the other hand there is Angel Romero who likes to have more of a 'flying fingers' thing. Both sound great
-
Why do you see a disconnect? Why does 4F infer "good technique" as regards finger proximity to the strings? Originally Posted by pamosmusic
And yes, please, let's be clear.
-
Que? Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
Christian was saying that 3F playing seems to lend itself to the kind of articulation that jazz players are often looking for. But you seemed to be pretty keen to point out the limitations of using three fingers ("dunno what's so hard about using four fingers" ... "there are more downsides with 3F vs 4F"). Originally Posted by princeplanet
Why do you see a disconnect? Why does 4F infer "good technique" as regards finger proximity to the strings?
And yes, please, let's be clear.
Here you're making literally the exact opposite argument.
"With enough practice, you can have excessive finger movement and still play fast and clean. Some say that having some 'fight' with the strings can bring out more personality in one's playing."
-
Oh, I see, your reading that by "finger movement" I should also be suggesting that the extra lateral finger movement required for 3F should be OK (ie, dynamic?). But I'm talking about a rather different kind of finger movement, right? As in 4 fingers in position coming down like little hammers, haha. BTW, my fingers don't flail around like Pat M, nor do I play with anything like his early set up, but merely pointing to his technique as an example of how seemingly excessive downward movement need not interfere with an ability to execute your ideas at speed. Originally Posted by pamosmusic
However I stand by what I say about how having some fight with the guitar brings excitement sometimes, from Django to SRV...
But as I say, for me, the excessive lateral movement required by 3F, to play lines I want to, would actually make life harder, and not sound as clean (not to mention the extra string squeaks!). I mean, it always feels more comfortable, and I'm a little bit envious of that TBH, but I just can't go there.
-
Edit: dunno. My pinky is stupid, except in polyphonic music and chords when it looks pretty good.
Just stop using it for single notes, Problem solved innit.
Actually it’s not always that bad.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Problem solved. Yakuza. Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
Every answer needs to apply to every situation for all related, semi-related and un-related questions. Otherwise it's wrong. Originally Posted by princeplanet
-
OK, gotcha, thanks for the tip! Originally Posted by AllanAllen
-
Sorry, gotta disagree on that. I spent years looking for the single way to hold my pick that would let me play anything, the single way to fret that would let me play anything, the single way to conceptualize harmony that would let me play anything, etc. After trying MANY ways that would always fall short in some situation or another, sending me on a quest to find the next "best way" to do whatever I was trying to do, I finally understood that there are a LOT of ways to look at any challenge, and a LOT of ways that work well for a LOT of things... but maybe not for EVERY thing. It was a light bulb moment. If something doesn't work for everything, that doesn't make it bad. It just makes it good for some things and not for others. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
A couple of examples: generally I use "correct" classically-based fretting hand technique with arched fingers on the fretboard and thumb on the center of the back of the neck. But that won't cut it for string bending. For that, you've gotta get more leverage by wrapping your thumb over the top of the neck and often using more than one finger - maybe your whole hand and the muscles in your forearm - to bend the note. Then you switch back to the more ergonomic technique for non-bent notes. Tons of players switch between top-wrapped thumb vs back-of-the-neck thumb.
Likewise, many players (including myself) slant their thumb towards the headstock when necessary to contort to play certain jazz voicings. Many play this way all the time. I usually switch back to straight thumb on the back when I'm not grabbing convoluted chord grips. Having more than one way to do things is GOOD not bad...
Many players are not strict alternate pickers but switch between alt picking, hybrid picking, and fingerstyle as necessary to execute a musical idea. There's a Troy Grady vid where Jimmy Bruno demonstrates stashing the pick between first and second fingers to fingerpick then quickly putting it back into position for alt picking. He does it so much that it's basically unconscious muscle memory now. When TG asked him to demonstrate, Jimmy actually couldn't think consciously of how he does it - he had to just play a bit in order to make it happen for the camera.
It's been said that when the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail. I like to have lots of tools at my disposal, whether tools for picking, fretting, or thinking about music.
$0.02,
SJ
PS - do I try for minimal fretting-hand finger movement? yes. I find it more efficient and comfortable. It doesn't affect my ability to play with dynamics or different attacks in the least.
-
It was supposed to be so dimwitted that the sarcasm would come across. Sometimes the jokes on me I guess.
-
You’ve obviously got to work on being more dimwitted Originally Posted by AllanAllen
I also can’t tell if you’re mocking me or Prince. Or maybe both. In which case, excellent work.
-
Sarcasm wars, I love it, even if poor starjasmine thought you were being serious!
-
Prince Planet had a terrific point that, he's talking about two different and unique techniques pinky vs 3 finger and floppy fingers are not the same. StarJasmine is right, there aren't any right ways to do everything and nothing can apply to all situations.
I agree with PrincePlanet that the most technically advanced guitarists can end up flat. It's why I like listening to horns so much more than guitars. My favorite jazz guitar might actually be those Ahmad Jamal sides where the guy plays bongo guitar most of the time. Just an interesting and innovative way to use guitar. I should suggest those when people ask where to start transcribing. Get this hip ass rhythm thing down that nobody does anymore because it's not acrobatic and impressive.
-
Does anyone sometimes leave comments and not be quite sure if they themselves are being sarcastic or not? Or is it just me?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I usually assume I'm being sarcastic unless I hear otherwise Originally Posted by Christian Miller
-
I wasn't saying they're the same thing. Just that it's interesting that people are interested in technical flexibility in some situations and dismiss it in others. Originally Posted by AllanAllen
Honestly, I think it's utter nonsense. It's something that bubbles up on the forum from time to time, and it's never been true. Wes is technically advanced. Peter Bernstein is technically advanced. Oscar Moore was technically advanced. I get it if someone isn't into Adam Rogers, but the appropriate comparison for him would be someone like Mark Turner rather than someone like Sonny Stitt or Coleman Hawkins. It's totally fine to have preferences about who you like, but if you're attributing those differences to the sterility of being technically proficient at the instrument ... not really sure what to tell you there other than that you're wrong and that a little transcribing would disabuse you of the notion.I agree with PrincePlanet that the most technically advanced guitarists can end up flat. It's why I like listening to horns so much more than guitars.
That I would agree with. This would be a (rare) place where I agree with Reg though, that rhythm requires real technique, even if those rhythms aren't elaborate. I've been playing all this Jim Hall stuff lately, and I think most people would say he doesn't fall into the "technically advanced" camp, but I would have a serious bone to pick with those people. Those solos are super challenging in a lot of ways. He's obviously got monster technique.My favorite jazz guitar might actually be those Ahmad Jamal sides where the guy plays bongo guitar most of the time. Just an interesting and innovative way to use guitar. I should suggest those when people ask where to start transcribing. Get this hip ass rhythm thing down that nobody does anymore because it's not acrobatic and impressive.
I think if most people are really honest about this "technical people sound sterile" thing, they're going to find that it's just a way of separating people they subjectively like from people they subjectively don't and that all of them have great technique. Why they feel they need to argue that the people they don't like are the "technicians" is a different question.
-
I don’t think that’s the reason for his chosen technique. You can’t generate much more force (if any) on the string by raising your fingertips high and trying to slam them down than from just above the string. Originally Posted by princeplanet
Force = mass X acceleration. A fingertip has very little mass, and you can’t accelerate fingertip motion much more (if at all) by moving it 2” than you can from just above the string. It’s not a free falling mass subject to gravity - its velocity and acceleration are limited by your muscles, joints, and neurological control.
What holds the string against the fret is sustained pressure, which = force / contact area. Instantaneous force will not produce clean notes unless it can be sustained by your fingertip against the string. Sustaining that pressure for the duration of the note requires grip strength. The only things raising your finger further above the string and trying to pummel it will do are to generate an extraneous tone from the length of string between nut and finger and increase the delay between starting to fret a note and actually producing it.
Using your left fingers as mallets in an attempt to generate force is likely to give you joint pain in short order and repetitive use injuries if continued. If you can’t develop enough hand strength to fret the strings you’re using with the action you have, you need to lower your action and/or go lower on your string gauges. If you still have a problem, I’d start with a skilled hand physiotherapist.
Watch Freddie Green (seen clearly at about 16:15, for example). He’s not slamming his fingers on the strings, despite playing with clothesline strings and unbelievably high action:
I’ve been playing on heavy strings for over 60 years. I started with Gibson 940s on my first Gibson - a new 1957 LG-1 - they were 14-58. The Gibson E240 flats I initially used on my ‘59 175 (bought used in 1961) were 14-56. I went to 13-54 Guild EA610s when they appeared at my dealer about a year later and used them until they were no longer available (at which point I went to Chromes). They were labeled “medium”
For blues and rock, I used long neck banjo strings for E1 and B so I could bend them further.
I used hand grips daily for decades to strengthen my grip. After several periods of not using them for 2+ weeks (vacations, laziness etc), I discovered that practicing daily was enough to maintain my grip strength. I now use heavy (14-55) Benson TIs + a 75 Chrome 7th on my regular gigging archtop (laminated) and JS113s + a 75 on my two carved Eastmans. Flying fingers do not increase fretting force.
-
I'd agree with you here, though I'm not a physicist. Originally Posted by nevershouldhavesoldit
Part of the reason I still teach beginners is that it's easy to forget the simple stuff when you've been playing for a long time. And a big part of left hand technique for a beginner is the simple trade-off between proximity to the fret and force required. The closer you are to the fret, the less your finger has to do to get a clean sound. The further you are from the fret, the more work your finger has to do to get a clean sound.
When I teach, for example, hammering-on, I always tell folks that accuracy is way way way more important for a clear sound than hitting the string hard. Not only do flutter fingers not really help that much with hitting the string hard, it makes it harder to be accurate. I use the analogy of hammering in a nail (for obvious reasons). If you want to hammer a nail in as quickly as possible, you lift the hammer high over your head and hit it as hard as possible, right? Of course not. You'll miss. You also don't lift it a quarter inch off the nail and tap it because you're scared to miss. You lift it a reasonable distance and bring it down confidently.
And a subtle distinction but one that a trumpet player (since that is coming up in these technique threads) would understand immediately: speed and strength are not the same thing. Your finger needs some speed, but that speed doesn't require a lot of force from your hand if you're doing it right.
Reply With Quote
Gibson L5 Studio 1998 Bozeman MT Plant
Today, 07:53 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos