-
Hello, first time poster here playing the guitar again for a year or so after a very long hiatus.
I've been using the Beginning Jazz Guitar book by Jody Fisher, in it he provides a bunch of scale fingerings and some melodic patterns to practice on them.
The fingerings make sense when you play the scales straight up or down, but when you play the melodic patterns, often at some point using different fingers for different notes is much more convenient.
I was wondering whether as a beginner I should stick rigidly to the fingerings taught, or whether I should use them as a starting point only and use whatever fingering feels most comfortable for the melodic pattern concerned?
Thx for any input!
-
06-27-2016 03:38 AM
-
There are a lot of options for creating melody and ultimately, your goal is to make music. That being said, the guitar fingerboard is a very unnatural thing! As you're getting started, fingering guides are really helpful for pulling yourself out of the chaos. For each natural fingering favouring strong fingers or sensible movements, there are a lot more that will cause really awkward phrasing and, honestly, put notes out of convenient reach. So they are enormously useful.
I think fingering guides are really useful. I started with the Segovia scales, being classically trained from the old school and the intuitive combinations of shifts and strong musical fingerings took a while for me to acquire, but now they're in there on a level that's really unconscious and easy. The same with any well thought out set of fingering guides.
But it's got to be musical. You've got to use your ear to guide you once your fingers know safety in navigation. I think you picked up on that in your own playing approach-based on your question. Yes if you don't listen to your internal music, and you let your fingers run the line, let your hands create the phrase, let the ease of facility put you in the fast lane without the ability to creatively make a strongly phrased musical idea, then you'll sound like a scale. That's where you learn it and leave it.
To your question, yes. At the foundation level, it's really helpful to internalize a set of navigational aids to get across the fingerboard. These can be conventional fingering patterns bases on experience of a good player/teacher. And yes, additionally it's really good to be able to play up and down a string (Get Mick Goodrick's book The Advancing Guitarist and check out his idea about the unitar and combination position and linear playing).
If you keep an open mind and spend enough time on the instrument to develop a good musical sense (things that come as naturally as a voice, another good exercise) then you may find that moving out of position in the middle of a phrase is a good way to find strength in a line. This will become really apparent when you begin to assimilate embellishment tools into your language; finding a good melodic or rhythmic embellishment for a note may not come easily within a scalular fingering.
Scales teach you to see the notes of a scale as a convenient totality. Your ear will teach you to hear a phrase as the contribution of smaller melodic/scale based segments. Start with your fingers. Go with your ear.
My two cents.
David
-
Wow, what a great answer.
I am less esperienced and have little to add, except: you've asked a very good question without an easy answer. I can say that if you keep practicing, the fingerboard gradually begins to get clearer and it's easier to move among positions, or even play "without" positions. For me, at least, this is a very long term process, and the postitions have given me a way to play in the meantime.
edit to add: I haven't used Fisher's book. I'm speaking more generally of any system of scale fingerings. I started with CAGED/5 positions. I've also checked out three-note-per-string.Last edited by dingusmingus; 06-27-2016 at 09:19 AM.
-
That was at least seven cents, but money well spent. Mallard, you will also find that different recommended patterns exist. I have Jody's book, and much of it I like. I'm not crazy about some of his recommended patterns. That said I'm sure there is a valid reason for each. I'm also sure that they are not for everyone. Jimmy Bruno uses five fingerings that I find much more logical, and that improve my chances of sounding musical. Beyond that I'm sure there are other options as well. Find the approach that works for you regarding patterns and go from there. Good luck!
-
David's response is wise.
We all need a "default" way to get around the fingerboard. It doesn't have to be the same for each player, but it is good for each player to have at least one way he (or she) feels at home with, knows inside out. Build out from that.
One factor is hand size. For younger players (or older players with small hands) some stretches may risk injury and that's best avoided. For those with big hands, stretches may come easy (but some chord voicings may come hard because too many husky fingers are trying to occupy a skinny area.)
-
Agree, I started with Jody's fingerings, but much prefer Jimmy Bruno's.
-
Wow.
Originally Posted by TruthHertz
Think how many long, tortuous threads of acrimonious debate have been spent on this topic, and is a perfectly reasonable, totally practical statement.
No need to read the "do I need scale fingerings" threads anymore. This is the answer.
-
06-27-2016, 09:59 AM #8destinytot GuestNice!Start with your fingers. Go with your ear.
-
If we number the left hand fingers one, two, three, four, you should learn to play each scale starting with the first finger, starting with the second finger and starting with the fourth finger.
That gives you a optimal flexibility.
But then that is not enough. You should be able to stretch your first finger down one fret and or stretch your forefinger up one fret.
Thus, with a baseline of four fret coverage at any given moment, that gives you a total coverage of six frets. That is plenty to play the chromatic scale more or less in position with minimal movement across multiple strings.
The goal is left-hand independence: to be able to play music without worrying or thinking about which finger to use. These concepts will help with that .
-
There's something to be said for keeping fingerings consistent (Jimmy Bruno's point) but ultimately you should know what the notes are and (every) where they are on the neck. You should be able to play a scale on just one string, across 2 strings, in multiple positions and with multiple fingerings, up one string and down across all six strings, etc. The fingerings that work best for "playing a scale" may not be the best choice for playing a particular musical phrase. A three notes per string pattern is for me a very awkward way of playing a fast scalar passage but great for visualizing chromatic approach notes.
To answer your question, use your best judgement and do what sounds best to you. That fact that you asked this question means you've realized that "following the book" rigidly does not translate to the most musical outcome. Great work.
Welcome to the forum.
-
David's response is excellent. And perhaps it bears mention that some individuals here are quite adamant that Segovia's edition of the major and minor scales and associated fingering is somehow inadequate for jazz. I disagree gently with that notion, as I found them to be good tools to build a foundation for your playing. I might also be mentioned that some jazz guitars adopt a three finger rather than four finger approach to the left hand. My own feeling is that it is best to learn using four fingers. Then when you master that you can adopt a three finger deal if you feel it is better.
I think once you have truly assimilated the fret board per se and feel comfortable moving about freely that you will find you actually don't just play scales when you play a melody or even a chord melody. At that point you play the notes in any way that feels economic and efficient to you. But scales remain an excellent warm up tool as improving finger strength, agility, for lack of a better term roundness of tone.
-
I'm really a student myself, but I have personally been working through a lot of this stuff the last few years, and I'll go ahead and butt in. Jody Fishe ris an excellent teacher I'm sure. I actually have a lot of respect for him, but there is much in that method book which is nonsensical, and the scale fingerings, in my opinion, are probably the worst aspect. Rather than blowing up this thread, I'll link my previous rant. :-) Mickey Baker vs Jody Fisher?
Eventually, I'm sure we want to know countless ways to finger anything, ....and for thoughts of fingerings to not be even a consideration, .....but that being said, ALL instruments start with base fingerings. When you learn a horn, you learn optional fingerings later, which make particular passages easier. The beginning fingering isn't a rule to be eternally adhered to,not a law , not a religious decree, but it does give you a good base reference point. Fisher is basically starting with TWO reference points at the same time BEFORE giving you full use of one system.
Anyway, for most, it basically boils down to CAGED or stretch fingerings. Caged fingerings favor shifts to avoid stretching to reach out of position notes. Bruno is caged. Ignore anyone who tells you otherwise.
Stretch fingerings are mainly associated with William Leavitt, though like Bruno, he's not the first person to ever think of them. He did kind of codify them and systematize them, working through circles of fifths and chromatically in position and across positions very logically.
Anyway, the idea of deciding which you're going to go with seems to be often contentious on the forum. My opinion, after several years here , and a lot of time working through these things , is that they're mostly the same.
If you want to avoid commitments a little longer or just kind of look at things and decide what you want, start with the common denominator's. If you start with what could be called a Lydian scale form or C-form for CAGED, with the major scale roots on the fifth string/fourth finger , there are no shifts or stretches in either "system".
If you go down a fifth you're basically at E form scale position second finger/6th string root . Again, no stretches or shifts. They're the same.
Down the fifth, to the next position, is A-form, second finger root on the fifth string. On that one, you have to make a decision on shifting or stretching, for the 2nd/1st strings. If you exclude the stretch on the sixth string in that position, you really only have one stretch on the first string to get one note. Again, they're 99% the same. You've basically got the same thing if you go UP a fifth from the original C position to G-form scale, 4th finger root on the sixth string. There's one outside note that you kind of have to deal with with a stretch of the fourth finger or with the shift, again, 99% the same. You could definitely start learning to play some jazz with four positions.
The fifth position, common to Leavitt and caged, would basically be your Dorian or D-form type position . It's the one which bears almost no relation to the other fingerings system. They just look really different .
I personally really like the way reg organizes things, especially with relating scale positions to the second finger/sixth string notes (regardless of scale degree) rather than major scale roots on different fingers/strings. https://www.jazzguitar.be/forum/theory/22914-regs-thread-live-speed-jazz-post238326.html
Anyway, I think it's important to understand the similarities and that the differences in systems fingerings aren't quite what you'd sometimes think they are, in the beginning. I wish someone had shown me that.
By the way, listen very carefully to anything David (truthertz) says. :-)Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 06-27-2016 at 12:47 PM.
-
Wow, so many brilliant replies, thanks a lot, I really appreciate it!
I have been sticking very rigidly to the fingerings so far, it's nice to know I haven't been wasting my time. I'll continue to do this when practising scales and patterns on those scales but allow myself a bit more leeway when practising (my very basic) improvisation.
I'll also definitely check out the different approaches mentioned, Segovia, three-note vs four-note, Jimmy Bruno, Mickey Baker, CAGED etc. I'd ignorantly assumed there was one way, the "jazz" way, and that was what was being taught in Fischer's book. In particular the stretch vs shift approach is interesting to me as I don't have big hands and often get aches and pains in the back of my hand at which point the stretches can be quite uncomfortable (although that's more the case with some of the chords, the r357 Amaj7 voicing starting on the bottom string... ouch!)
Thanks again!
-
A few stray thoughts on the inheritance of a tradition or method and how religiously you follow it.
I might be helpful to keep in mind that each "method" is the product of one person's synthesis. Listen to the authors of the methods, see if you can conclude what the strengths of those ways are. At this early juncture of your study, if you have the desire to explore different ways, not to mention time, it can make you a stronger player. Originally Posted by mallard
Yes, of course there will be many who will try to tell you this is the case; that the way they know is "the" way. And of course the better their way serves them, and the less they know of other ways, the more adamantly they'll hold to their contention. It just means they've found their sound or their most comfortable for their hands. Originally Posted by mallard
I think it was Slonimsky who said "Genius is the realization of a tendency", by which he meant that if there is a strong drive or tendency to do things in a way that seems natural to you, you can go with that until you realize your own way of doing things. This is the case with so many who have made their own way: they may do something differently but it's natural to themselves, they had to follow their tendency and they wind up sounding like themselves. This comes from doing the hard work for yourself, and loving what you do so it doesn't occur to you that it's hard.
If you had only two fingers per hand and a four string guitar, and you worked with a focused devotion, you could end up doing something better than most and unlike anyone else. You'd own it.
In Segovia, I hear the ability to negotiate long diatonic lines fluidly through shifts that allow different intuitive octave lengths from different positions.
In Goodrick I see the lyric line of the single string wedded with the fast facility of the cross fingerboard transverse.
In three note per string I feel a solid use of the hand without using a lot of shifting movement, good for speed.
In four note per string I hear a fluid speed with the slight shift and a diagonal movement in reaching mult-octave lines covering a lot of range.
In seeing the patterns underlying a musical note oriented approach (targeting chord tones individually and shifting to emphasize those individual notes), there is a great potential to integrate embellished phrases and a greater ease to introduce harmonic substitution and chordal changes free of position playing.
And on and on.
If you found yourself on an island with a guitar and some idea of the music you loved/heard in your head, time would allow you discover yourself. That's why players at the beginning of a movement tend to have such strong identities, and individual ways of doing things. The more religiously you follow the ease of another's footsteps, the less you'll know of the options they didn't choose.
Good luck finding your own way!
David
-
I'm going to go against the grain just a bit. Yes, it is good to have a home base for fingerings, but be ready to deviate often. Over the years, I've learned that sticking strictly to a set of fingerings hinders you from getting to the next level. i.e. I had reached a plateau in my playing and could only overcome it by being more flexible with fingerings. This is especially true when working with arpeggios diagonally up and down the neck.
-
Sometimes I wonder, when threads like this come up, if people on this forum are playing Jazz, or if they're playing scales and arpeggios!
Are you guys using all 12 notes? The reason I ask is, although I have the CAGED shapes for scales and arps etched in my mind for positional reference, but that's all it is - a reference. Butif you use a lot of chromaticism and embellishments, then the shapes go out the window.
If you hear an idea you wanna express and it doesn't fall neatly within a known shape, then you gotta make a new one, out of (sometimes) dozens of options. The more you do it, the more you get better at it. If you need a note that puts you out of position, do you stretch down to it on one string, or slide up to it on another? The answer, as we know, always depends on what comes next. So it's not good enough to simply be able to pre hear all 7 notes of the scale shape you're in, you have to be able to pre hear the other 5 as well and be able to put your finger on any note you hear while being prepared to "improvise" with fingerings.
I mean if you don't do that, then the shapes are playing you, right? Ever tried to play Bird solos? It's like Twister for fingers. The great melodicists on our instrument (Wes, Rainey, Metheny etc) are way beyond shapes, infact, the whole fingerboard becomes one big "shape".
However in saying that, I don't agree that the left hand needs to move around as much as many players seem to like because employing stretches, temporary shifts and slides in and out of positions goes a long way to making most lines playable. I'm training myself to move positions only when I run out of notes, or when I'm after a specific sound or effect. Main reason is economy, speed and accuracy. If you play a lot of notes you'll play less flubs if you're not moving around all the time. I'd be surprised if Pat Martino moved positions as often as Jimmy Rainey.
..... Hmm, so after thinking this out loud (as I often do in my posts), I guess these matters are pretty much style dependent. I suppose not everyone uses chromatics as much as I do. Even so, can I just offer this warning to the learners out there- "Don't get caged in by CAGED"
-
I started with the Jodi Fisher book, too, about 5 years ago. I liked it and learned a lot from it. At one point early on I remember coming up with an exercise where I would just play a C major7 chord and then noodle on the C major scale- play the chord, noodle, play the chord, noodle, etc. That really helped me connect a musical improv quality to the scale exercise.
Last year I took a couple of lessons with Jerry Hahn & he had me work the scale exercises in his jazz guitar method book. I'm still working them. They are basically CAGED with a couple of quirks, plus associated arpeggios and chords. I really like their rather comprehensive nature. He's a real stickler for fingerings too. Working his approach has really helped me firm up technique and my ear too.
I drill my scales pretty hard, but when it comes to playing a tune it all gets thrown out the window!
-
Jazz is adventure; one should not stick to anything rigidly; experimentation is freedom.
-
Practice the fingerings. Be rigid. Whatever fingerings you choose - be consistent.
-
Marshall McLuhan's aphorism "the medium is the message" comes to mind when thinking about scale fingerings (conveniently, he coined the expression to explain how the medium controlled "the scale and form of human association and action"). Fingerings are not, IMO passive containers of information but rather an important aspect of the reciprocal relationship that is set up between player and musical material. Per princeplanet's example, Martino and Raney may have gravitated towards different fingerings and scale patterns to describe their musical thoughts but at what point did their choices condition ("massage") those same thoughts?
After an early, fruitless search for a kind of unified theory of everything regarding scale positions and fingerings, I took the other road and worked on as many variants as possible while still following Christian's angle of being consistent within each variant. I figure that it's just a big toolbox with different items appropriate to the task at hand. Each variant will bring both benefits and limitations. For example, timbral consistency is a byproduct of working on single-string scales yet they aren't particularly energy efficient. Ultimately, you'll reach a point out on Truthhertz Island that contains rejection and incorporation in equal parts.
-
Yeah, I'd basically agree with what's already been said. As a starting point early on, sticking with "correct" fingerings is a good thing. Over time you might start moving away from it as you figure out your own style or whatever.
There are things that I'll play with the same fingering every time, and other things where despite playing the exact same thing, I'll approach it differently on different occasions. The only times I really think about which fingers to use these days is trickier things where my "just play and let the left hand sort itself out" method seems to be not working out, or for some chord progressions where I might finger a chord differently because of what's before it or more likely what comes after it. In the first case though, I'd say it's probably more often something where on autopilot I am actually using "correct" fingerings and in fact I need to figure something else out coz maybe the line is a bit odd or whatever.
So I'd say a lot of the reason why I don't have to think about it much now is because in my early years I put in ridiculous amounts of time ripping through scales to a metronome, making sure to keep my technique clean and consistent. And then in the years since, encountering things that need something different... you do enough of it over time, and it all kinda becomes a part of your autopilot program. But they're all variations added on to a solid foundation.
-
I generally work at four-finger positions, but for some events -- oblique bends, Phrygian-dominant scale, etc -- I either cramp up or spread out, depending.
-
My basic principle is the same
- when I practice I follow strictly the limitations I set... whatever it is - a scale or a melodic idea if what I am doing is practicing I follow the rules I set
- when I perform I have only one limitation that is to set no limnitations to creative ideas...
The first should help the last...
My main idea is that as a result you should be able to play anything anywhere anyhow without ever thinking of the fingering or deviation I use here...
Practicing different scales in different fingerings helps to develope what I call 'physical knowledge' of the fretboard... but it takes time... first you get some basic or default fingerings.. then you feel some 'blind zones' and implement some other fingerings to cover it...
When you play music you play whatever you want but it is important that you should sound confident...
if your fingers do note feel the notes physically you will not have this confidence.
So you should not deviate rules or patterns when you practice - this way you're killing the whole idea of it...
But you should not set limits to the materials you need to practice... Practice deviation as a rule after all!
As a result it's like you apply punch card to the fretboard... I use G7 - bang! - all the fretboard is G7... I want G7b9 - immediately - punch card G7b9 is there... or I can use D-7b5 'card' instead...
To use any notes you can apply different concepts... depends on what you know and master
-
The short answer is yes you can use different fingerings. The fingering that makes the most sense for an ascending or descending scale is rarely the one that works the best for melodic lines. There are worse and better choices for alternate fingerings though. A good general rule is a fingering should do two things: use the least movement possible and be the easiest fingering with which to play the line at a blistering fast speed. Not that playing at a blistering fast speed is always desirable or appropriate, but it's the fingering that is easiest to play at the blistering fast speed that is usually the "right" fingering. The fast fingering CAN override the least movement possible rule, because the two fingerings are not always the same, and the bottom line is you want to be able to play any line at any speed you need. The first thing I always say to my students when teaching them or correcting them on a scale fingering is "This is just the fingering to use for going straight up and down the scale, we will have to change this later to fit the needs of the licks we are playing." That way they don't get it stuck in their head that there is one right way to finger something (anything for that matter).
Reply With Quote
dearmond 1100 reissue vs original which one is...
Today, 03:30 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos