-
Hi guys,
I'm currently trying to learn new scales for jazz soloing, like, Phrygian Dominant, Whole Tone, Diminished WH, Dorian b2 and I have a major philosophical and practical doubt.
I had some lessons with a teacher that had me learn the Major Scale and modes, starting with the 1st, 2nd, and 4th finger, on every string. I did find this approach very good for you to be able to connect your lines with no need for major jumps to go to the "pattern you know". Now comes my lazy side. This approach requires you to memorize A LOT of patterns, more than the CAGED 5 and the 3nps 7.
So I guess my LAZY question is: do I really need to learn like 11/12 positions for the Phrygian Dominant? Or should I just stick to some key positions just enough to connect the other shapes I already know. For instance, if I'm soloing over a Bm7b5 - E7b9, I have several positions I'm comfortable for the B Locrian, do I just need a couple of really simple shapes for the Phrygian Dominant, or would you say it's really important to also have all the shapes memorised because it's handy to be able to do the scale starting with the 4th finger on the B string??
Moreover, if you guys use just the 5 CAGED or the 7 3nps patterns, don't you find yourselves sometimes stuck, needing to do an awkward jump to solo over some progressions?
-
08-13-2018 03:42 PM
-
Um, you need more than scales and arps to solo in a Jazz style. The sooner you learn where the scales and arps are, the better, because the real work will start after that. You are just learning the alphabet, you need to learn to create a language with this alphabet.
Learning 12 ways to play each mode is not necessary. What works for me, and many many other players is to learn everything in 5 places (CAGED?), all the chord inversions (Drop 2, 3 etc), arps and scales. Then spend the rest of your life learning to combine patterns, devices and language to tell your stories. The hardest part of that is deciding which devices you will devote your 10,000 hours to, after all there is no book, or website/youtube for that.
Instead you have to use your taste, and decide what you like from the music of others, and certainly not just guitar players. Then you need to forensically analyse what these players are doing and derive a methodology from what you discover. This is not learning licks or lines by rote! That's not much harder than learning scales and arps! Instead, invent your own language where you can improvise endless variations on all your material against all situations, which will take years and years to develop. Blues, RC, Standards, W. Shorter type tunes and then the post modal stuff.
Or, learn some scales, form a fusion band and play bullshit over some vamps and impress your rock guitarist mates with how you can join all your scales all over the fretboard like, really fast (wow!)
-
The way I learned it, from an old pro here, is seven position system with first finger stretches where necessary, but NOT 3 NPS. Each position starts from second finger, and yields uniformity when you apply to chords etc.
Basically, he doesn't philosophically approach it from "learn to play everything seven ways". It's more from the standpoint of learning seven positions so that you can play each chord position in 3 or 4 inversions and always start on the same finger etc. To me, it's almost like you're doing MORE than five position caged, but almost LESS in another sense , because you're mostly thinking 3 or 4, and they're uniform , regardless of chord type etc.
Anyway, the major take away from this is that it makes learning the "other" scalesvastly easier, because they can easily be seen as the simple variations which they would be if you're playing them on keyboard or sax etc. It somewhat disrupts the "pattern problems" of guitar and helps with seeing absolute pitch etc.
-
Also, you did say "Jazz soloing", which, to me, implies the usual amount of chromaticism that makes Jazz, well, Jazz...
Your chromatic connections (approaches, enclosures etc) are always going to take you outside of any "shape" anyway, to the point you may eventually forget your scale shapes anyway because you may never play more than 3 diatonic scale notes in a row! Another reason not to waste too much time on scales. Does a poet recite the alphabet 100 times a day for 10 years?
On the issue of fretboard coverage and avoiding "jumps" from position to position, well that depends on the way you learn to play your own language. Some very famous 3 finger players learned their lines by playing along the strings (horizontally). That doesn't mean we all have to! It's sometimes less expedient to express your lines that way, and becomes harder to think and play in all 12 keys as these players tend to have pet lines in only a few fave keys and neck positions. That's a big downside that seldom gets discussed.
Anyway, you can get a lot of notes in your phrase just by hovering around a single position at a time. In fact transcribing players on most instruments I have found the majority of the phrases I like are playable on the guitar without the need to shift position mid phrase. You may want to shift position for your next phrase, and the one after that may go from the 3rd position to the 13th position, even if you don't want to rest between phrases. This is better technique in many ways. Forces you to use your pinky more often, makes your devices "modular" enough to get mileage in all positions and all keys and allows for greater accuracy and control given that the fret hand is not needlessly flying around the finger board mid phrase. Ever watch a sax player's hands? Or a trumpeter's?
Sure, there's a common complaint that if you don't play horizontally, you don't play "lyrically"
Haha, I seriously don't know how that one started, but I assume it has to do with novices that learn shapes or boxes and play the same things within them (like rock pent shape noodlers). If you have a few dozen different ways to address each chord (should you wish to) by use of any number of devices - many of which may involve chromatic embellishment - then you won't have to worry about being "boxed in" by any "shape", you won't see any shape! Do you see shapes when a sax player solos? Instead, economy of positional movement can actually be liberating, making many lines more accessible than they would other wise be.
Again, nothing wrong with horizontal shifting, it's a sound that can utilise slides if that's your thing. Of course, for comping you probably have little choice than to move around a lot if you wanna keep things interesting, but for soloing, 5 positions covers all you really need, concentrating on one position per phrase most of the time.
And one last thing, being "lazy" is clearly not going to be an option if you wish to improvise Jazz guitar, even at an intermediate level. But being time efficient is a must, absolutely, because life is too short!
And no, you won't figure out any "short cuts", not on your own, and not on this forum or any where else on the internet. Not in any one book either. Like everyone else, you will think you will be clever enough to the the exception, and like everyone else, you will waste years realising it just ain't so. Either find an excellent teacher and practice what your given diligently, or be patient, and I mean like, very patient. Good luck! 
-
I hate these types of analogies honestly.
Originally Posted by princeplanet
The answer: Of course not, but that's beside the point, and additionally they all KNOW the alphabet, wherever they recite it or not. Every sax player and piano player knows every iteration of basic major/ minor scales in junior high school.
Better philosophical questions might be:
Will knowing the alphabet actually INHIBIT your ability to think/read/speak/write"? Can most other competent adults who speak/write well etc. recite the alphabet? Does "wasting" time learning the alphabet take a band with which would otherwise be utilized for something more important regarding reading/writing etc?
These are the kind of conversations it's only guitarists have.
-
My suggestion is learn the 5 CAGED for major inside and out, then lower the 7th and learn them inside and out as 5 dominant scales (mixolydian). it sounds like you might already be able to play this. screw the other modes for now. Originally Posted by rsergio
Get the 1st Barry Harris dvd set and workbook. between that, tunes, and collecting you favorite phrases you will have a solid foundation.
Then go on your new fangled adventures in jazz theory (if you still want to).
just one more opinion. disclaimer: I’m not a pro
-
I find that people who like to practice scales a lot get very defensive about it. Certainly no need to get philosophical about it. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
And yes, these are discussions that only guitarists seem to have because they get hung up on scales way more than other instrumentalists, who know their scales and arps, but also know how to move on to make music with them. So " scales = alphabet" - it's an analogy I wish someone could have shared with me when I was starting out, and it's one I will always pass onto to other novice guitarists, because we need to hear it...
-
That's fine, but I feel like most of the time we're answering a different QUESTION than what was being asked. "How much time should we spend on scales?", "How important are scales versus vocabulary/tunes?" etc are all good questions. But they're different QUESTIONS. Originally Posted by princeplanet
I find that people who like to practice scales a lot get very defensive about it. Certainly no need to get philosophical about it. And yes, these are discussions that only guitarists seem to have because they get hung up on scales way more than other instrumentalists, who know their scales and arps, but also know how to move on to make music with them. So " scales = alphabet" - it's an analogy I wish someone could have shared with me when I was starting out, and it's one I will always pass onto to other novice guitarists, because we need to hear it...
I personally like the alphabet image ... for why we SHOULD learn scales in the first place. People will then get into arguments about how you don't need "alphabet", you need VOCABULARY. That completely ignores the fact that alphabet, vocabulary, syntax, idiom are largely separate things. You can't really argue "against" one in place of the other.
They aren't COMPETING ideas.
-
Once you learn your scales, you move on to the fun stuff. Sure, a bit of scale practice every now and then for technical maintenance, but no more. If you are still spending too much time on them, then I think they absolutely do compete against the time that could be used to learn to make music with the scales. I dunno about you, but I've known a million guitar players in my life, and the ones that get "serious" seem to get stuck on scales. It becomes like a game or some sports-like challenge, know the most scales in the most positions and play them faster than your friends can, or something ... It's out there, and it's common, and it needs to be ridiculed because, well, it's ridiculous. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
People need to be slapped out of it !
-
The op was re learning basic phrygian dom etc. If you don't know harmonic minor..., again , sax players learned it in seventh or eighth grade. Over focus on scales for the rest your life or whatever at the expense of everything else is somewhat of a different conversation in my opinion. Originally Posted by princeplanet
Once you learn your scales, you move on to the fun stuff. Sure, a bit of scale practice every now and then for technical maintenance, but no more. If you are still spending too much time on them, then I think they absolutely do compete against the time that could be used to learn to make music with the scales. I dunno about you, but I've known a million guitar players in my life, and the ones that get "serious" seem to get stuck on scales. It becomes like a game or some sports-like challenge, know the most scales in the most positions and play them faster than your friends can, or something ... It's out there, and it's common, and it needs to be ridiculed because, well, it's ridiculous.
People need to be slapped out of it !
If a saxophone player plays too many scales, the SCALE itself isn't really the problem. Again, I feel like conversation about knowing the basics scale always devolves into conversations about not spending the rest your life ONLY playing scales.
The unintended consequence is that, by default, we are actually implying that guitarists don't need to have the basic competencyof being able to play a harmonic minor scale like the rest of the musical world.
The harmonic minor scale does not have to include in itself all of the answers to the Jazz universe . That's not its purpose. To argue that or that every good boy does fine "isn't a method" is a waste of time and beside the point. Of course it's not. But it's a nonsensical "argument". Scale is a scale. Every guitarist has the "right" to be illiterate I guess.
-
Matt, he was asking if he really needed to know 12 positions of Phrygian Dominant. If he feels he does, and every other mode in the texts books, in 12 positions in every key, then there's every chance he will be over focusing on scales for the rest of his life...
-
Okay, but I actually answered that aspect of it as well and tried to provide some context to that part , ...pairing things down. I'm advocating for knowing them really well over 3 chord inversions 1st. I certainly don't think you need to know 12 positions of phrygian dominant "before" a whole lot of OTHER things. Not saying that. Originally Posted by princeplanet
You need to cover some "basic" of several different things before you focus on 12 positions of anything in my opinion. That's what Reg has always advocated. Regardless of the way his approach is misunderstood, he is always been about simplicity and learning basic. The way some people talk you could spend three or four years just on basic major , in every conceivable iteration possible. Meanwhile, don't you need an understanding of BASIC harmonic minor or melodic minor just to understand simple harmony etc?
-
Dont meant to be condescending but have you learnt your major scales first?
-
Absolutely, learn the alphabet, learn some spelling and grammar, get some vocabulary and get started on the great American novel... Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
Anyway, I've offered my cautionary advice. The OP can decide for himself, as can any future novice that may stumble on this thread.
-
Originally Posted by don_oz
Yes I have. And that's a good point to reinforce.
I know the major scale, can start a line from every finger on every string. Can solo over standard progressions at a basic level. And I'm on the camp that says that the important thing is to make musical stuff, not to get to tied up in theory and scales, etc. BUT, as I play over basic progressions, trying to play "what sounds good to me", many times I can't and I feel there is not enough structure under.
For instance, on a ii-V-I, I'd use Dorian, Mixolydian, Major. But when you get to something like a Bm7b5 -> E7b9 you really start to feel the need for something else of course, you need that Locrian over the Bm7b5, you need something emphasising that b9 on the E. Or, for instance, you get a CM7-C#dim-Dm7-G7, at first I just played a simple diminished arpeggio over the dim chord, but that get's old quite quickly and you feel the need for actually knowing the proper diminished scale in several positions so you can do that run in several place on your fretboard and not just an anchor position.
And then begins my doubt, how do I go about learning the Diminished Whole Half scale? Like I was told "be able to start the scale on any string, on fingers 1,2, and 4, both ascending and descending"? Is this what most people learn? Would you say this is a bit overkill? That some key positions are really essential and cover 80% of the needs and then you just fill the blanks as you progress? How have you learnt it? What do you suggest?
-
Ah, the Reg system! I still have those sheets and may yet get those fingerings down. For now, I'm a 5-position guy. It's one way to make the fingerboard a 12-fret grid. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
One thing I like about Reg's way is that he has the 2nd finger on the low E for the root in every case. That's nifty.
-
On a slightly tangent but related note, so if you're playing over ii-V-I in C, do you always start on D over ii, G over V and C over I? If not, what makes you believe that you're playing Dorian, Mixolydian and Ionian over ii-V-I? May be you're playing Dorian over all three or Aeolian perhaps Originally Posted by rsergio
-
I find playing is so much more transparent, natural, and effortless if focus is moved away from the mechanical input of the process (fingers, positions, patterns, and shapes), and rather focused on the musical output of the process (the actual sound of what I want to hear coming out).
I imagine in my mind's ear the sound of what I want to hear and let my fingers themselves learn to produce those sounds. I find that they don't mind stretching or moving up and down the finger board, they routinely finger the same thing differently based on context, don't need to be directed by memorized positions, patterns, shapes, registration of a starting finger, or any other input controlling strategies. I drive my hands with the sound in my head and let my hands sing that sound out through my instrument.
-
Originally Posted by pauln
That's a lovely ideal, but for most of us mortals having the muscle memory of having practiced fingerings is an immense aid to being able to play quickly. That said, I do try to play melodies on a single string from time to time to force myself to recognize the pitches rather than playing out of a pattern.
-
I recommend trying it... think of what happens as "muscle melody" rather than "muscle memory"...
-
both are good. i use paul’s technique when improvisng based on the tune’s melody. however, i doubt ill ever be forming bebop lines atp 200 bpm like that
-
I'd say I'm playing each of the different modes because I can start on the root of each, in several strings/fingers, ascend, descend, focus on key tones like the 3rd, 7th, 6th, for each. Not simply doing mindless runs over the same Dorian D pattern. Originally Posted by Tal_175
On a slightly tangent but related note, so if you're playing over ii-V-I in C, do you always start on D over ii, G over V and C over I? If not, what makes you believe that you're playing Dorian, Mixolydian and Ionian over ii-V-I? May be you're playing Dorian over all three or Aeolian perhaps
And that's why I feel I really need to master the other important scales/modes, so I can play a proper Locrian and Phrygian Dominant over m7b5 and 7/susb9 chords, not just play a C Major run over a Bm7b5, or Mixolydian over 7b9. That way, you really miss the sonic shape and character of the underlying chord (and some notes will be plain "wrong").
-
I am not sure if I understood you correctly. You consider you are playing each of the different modes because you CAN play them starting from different roots? I understand that you know how to play them starting from different root, but I am wondering if you necessarily do when you play over ii V I? If you don't then what makes what you play over say D minor the Dorian scale? Originally Posted by rsergio
I am asking because before learning 11 or 12 positions of Phrygian dominant scale to play over minor ii V, it might be useful to make sure you know exactly why just learning the Harmonic Minor scale really well wouldn't be enough.
BTW, if you do transcriptions of solos of bebop legends, you'll quickly see that they almost never start their lines on the roots.Last edited by Tal_175; 08-14-2018 at 10:23 PM.
-
I'm finding everything PP says exactly in line with my experience. Nothing comes close to playing melodies in open position in every key by ear to make things stick, fingers start to think for themselves. And it makes every 'system' easier.
I simple and effective exercise is to play a four note chord in adjacent strings then play the scale you think you need to know from the base note to the top note. Then go up to the next inversion and do the same. It's easy to use chord shapes as containers for scales and sadly easy to lose sight of chords from running scales.
D.
-
The point I'm making is that the above rule is a training wheel for people who don't have their major scales together. It'll sound pretty dull and repetitive to always start on the root. If you're not starting on the root, then you are not really playing Dorian, Mixolydian and Ionian. Originally Posted by rsergio
The goal is to be able to play the major scale starting from ANY chord tone over any chord. For example over G7 one should be able to start from B (3rd) or D (5th) or F (b7th) as well as other tones. This is too hard to do in the beginning so people are taught a simplified view. Play Mixolydian over V7, Dorian over ii etc. That doesn't exist in the real world. People don't play C major starting on G over G7 when improvising. But until you get to a high level of mastery of the major scale, you can practice playing modes over their respective chords. That would align chord tones on the down beats and train your ears for the sound of the chord progression while playing scales. But just being able to do that doesn't mean one has learnt the major scale for the reasons I gave above.Last edited by Tal_175; 08-15-2018 at 10:53 AM.
Reply With Quote
Transcriber wanted
Today, 04:35 PM in Improvisation