-
Nice playing, man! Some serious burning going on.
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
The fingerings I'm using are really close to what you've got going on with your A- version. My C-7 on the third fret is just (in order from lowest string to highest) CGBbEbG with the G being the melody note. Then the F-7 is the same basic structure built off the F on the 1st fret of the E-string.
When I jump up to the D-7b5 I'm just using a really common guitar voicing of DAbCF, and then the melody guides me down to a simple G7 shape, although I'm just grabbing the Rb73 on that one. The rest of them are what I described in the last post, starting on that Eb melody note I'm grabbing the roots as melody with my first finger, then the bass and 7th with my third and fourth fingers. Those aren't really standard voicings, just grabbing what I can to maintain.
When the melody gets lower it's all triads.
If you play it in A- and move it all the way up to the 12th fret, you could use fuller voicings for the lower parts of the melody.
Hope some of that is helpful! Good luck jumping into guitar, it's the weirdest and most beautiful instrument to me. A peasant's instrument that can be performed at a virtuosic level on the scale of piano, saxophone, etc.
-
01-27-2023 11:56 AM
-
Thank you! I can play a lot faster on my 1957 Selmer Mark VI, but I really like the tone I get out of this ancient beast. It's the metal. The Selmer is more refined but not as ballsy. New horns don't have good metal, but the ergos are great. The 1924 Conn's mechanism is awkward and the keys are at odd angles and small. Originally Posted by ecj
Barre chord on fret 3 w/middle finger on Eb fret 4? I've not tried barre chords yet. Hopefully the radius on the new Eastman works for those. Originally Posted by ecj
Thanks! I love half diminished chords. I couldn't finger that voicing on my smaller guitar. I can on my new giant Eastman 7>6 conversion! Originally Posted by ecj
I'm a little confused on this one.... root of chord with first finger = forefinger? Bass with 3rd finger = which chord tone? You've already got the root... Originally Posted by ecj
Thanks ... I will try that. So far, I've been trying to play along with a bassist on uTube: "Mr. Sunny Bass." Cat in Italy who has a boatload of just bass (mainly acoustic) videos for all the standards. Generally in the standard key, a few (like Autumn Leaves) in different ones. Originally Posted by ecj
Thank you! They "sing" like a horn, with chord ability. I do say saxophone is weirder (but not as weird as bass clarinet...) It's the "devil's horn," and it was "invented," rather than evolved, like guitar. Clarinet + trumpet + cheap plastic football noisemaker horn = saxophone (because it's a cone, not a cylinder). Originally Posted by ecj
-
When I say "root" with first finger, I just mean the melody is the "1". So, for example on that Eb-7 chord I'll grab the Eb on the second string with my first finger, then my third finger grabs the Eb on the fifth string, and my pinky is on the Db on the 3rd string. Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
If you want to get into solo guitar, that barre position is going to be essential so you can fret things on the low strings and grab the melody with the side of your first finger. That's the whole reason why the top two strings aren't tuned in perfect 4ths with the other strings, so that you can easily fret the root and fifth above the bass strings.
-
Typo? Do you mean: Originally Posted by ecj
Eb: S2F4 (string ___, fret ___)
Db: S3F6
Are you doubling the Eb?
S5F6
That doesn't seem possible!
I can play:
Eb: S2F4
Gb: S4F4
Db: S5F4 (or Db on S3F6, but S5F4 is easier for me); just keep the same shape going down the melody.
I know. However, there was no way that I could play a barre chord with the smaller guitar. No matter how hard or in which way I pressed, the notes would not sound / ring out. And just playing that Eb on S2 and Db on S3 was also impossible (I can do it now, on the big Eastman). On the smaller guitar, I would unintentionally mute the Eb, no matter which hand position I used. Size matters! Originally Posted by ecj
Last edited by Saxophone Tall; 01-27-2023 at 06:19 PM. Reason: typo
-
Sounds good man! You are a big guy. Alto looks like a curved soprano on you. Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
-
Yeah small guitars are weird. You eventually get used to little adjustments. Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
This shape is totally possible. You can also use the barre to add in the Gb:S4F4. I do it at 0:23 in that video if it helps to see it.
-
Thank you! Tenor looks like an alto on me, bari looks like a tenor. That one fits me best, but I mainly play tenor. Alto was easier to schlep all over Europe. It has corks all over it to make it bigger. You can see why I needed a wide neck guitar! Originally Posted by ccroft
-
I'm confused as to why you'd double the Eb and omit the flat third... Originally Posted by ecj
I need to start with the absolute easiest barre chord possible!
-
I'm grabbing the b3 with my first finger, too. Doubling because I want the bass motion of the ii-V. You don't have to play every note of every chord - a lot of stuff can skate. My biggest thing is clear melody and decent baselines, then just kind of grab what you can between those two things. Guitar isn't piano, and you have to make a ton of compromises when playing solo arrangements. Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
-
I think that may bet the way to go about it. Just enough to convey the chord while keeping the time. Originally Posted by ecj
-
Jim Hall talks a bit about fingering here starting about 24 min:
-
Thank you! One of my favorite guitarists. Nice to see an instructional video from such a master! Interesting comments, about playing along the string and using open strings... Originally Posted by RyanM
Last edited by Saxophone Tall; 01-28-2023 at 04:37 PM. Reason: add content
-
No, it certainly isn't, but that's cool. Please press "Watch on YouTube" so I can get some views... Thanks... Originally Posted by ecj
Last edited by Saxophone Tall; 01-28-2023 at 04:27 PM. Reason: add content
-
Without getting into much detail, chords on the guitar are mostly played with the root on the 5th or 6th string (at least up to an intermediate level). So most of the soloing revolves around them, meaning, as chords move on the fretboard, solos and melodies move around them. You can check out "shell voicings" or "guide tones" on YouTube, for the simplest comping system on the guitar, and then you build your melodies around the chords, it's a great way to start developing movement on the guitar fretboard.
-
Yeah, my (so far) limited guitar chord voicings are basically root, 3 and 7 (only 3 strings for now, no 5th!) on the 6th or 5th string. I suppose "build your melody around" (these) means start the melody where the first chord lays, selecting from the 5 and 6 string which one is closer to the first note of the melody? In the case of melody starting on the 3rd of the chord, easy enough. But what about when the melody starts on the 5th of the chord (e.g., "Love For Sale")? Originally Posted by Alter
-
Kevin Eubanks uses custom guitars (archtop as well as solidbody) with 2" wide necks and maybe a little wider. You're not alone with wanting a big neck. OTOH, Tal Farlow (who had famously huge hands) liked a standard 1 11/16" neck, but he fretted the 6th and 5th strings with his thumb often.
-
Good to know that about Kevin! He was on the Tonight Show with Branford and then took over the "Doc Severinson Chair" when Branford split. I sat in with Branford & his quartet at a 2000 person orchestra hall type venue (on saxophone). Originally Posted by Cunamara
My new converted 7>6 string Eastman has a 51.816 mm (2.04") nut & 61.4 mm (2.417323") string spacing @ right hand play area. Neck profile is shallow. It fits me about as perfectly as is possible and practicable. In theory, I could go bigger @RH, but the neck would then be too wide for the left hand.
I can fret the 5th and 6th strings with my left hand thumb on it. From what I can tell, my hands are quite a bit bigger than Tal's were. In fact, being able to fret the lower strings with my thumb was one factor in not going even wider at the nut. Another factor was that no such beast exists to convert. We're in custom territory at that point. Mine is as big as one can get without going full luthier. The final factor is that the left hand would actually be too big to play comfortably if the right hand spread was larger.
I think guitar manufacturers are missing the boat. It's easier for new players and easier for players with bigger hands. I saw two Les Pauls at Guitar Center, Hollywood (Flagship, with the hand prints). One was the current model, on the floor to play test. The other was Les' original, in a glass case on the wall, and signed by Les. I couldn't measure it, but the original had a much wider neck than the current model. Perhaps necks were wider in general years ago?
-
I'm absolutely dying at a sax/piano player learning guitar and immediately getting completely baffled by how stupidly overcomplicated the instrument is.
One thing you're going to discover is that there isn't a "unified theory of guitar fingerings." Instead, I think it's easier to think of fingering "paradigms." Different schools of players who, whether through influence or accident, focus on certain ways to play different musical ideas.
This takes a bit of careful transcription to figure out, but thankfully in this day of YouTube, it's become a lot easier.
Some notable ones:
Charlie Christian -> Wes Montgomery -> George Benson is one lineage. They often just play with their first three fingers (skipping the pinky) and most of their lines eschew big stretches in favor of shifting. It is a very natural, relaxed, guitaristic way to play, although certain sax/keyboard lines can be tough. Charlie Christian solos are great to transcribe because his lines are very much based off common guitar chords, and fit very nicely on the instrument. Great way to learn the idiosyncrasies of this often ridiculous instrument.
Jim Hall and his followers (Abercrombie, Goodrick, Pat Metheny, Sco, Frisell, etc) -- lots of scale work, but also lots of work playing lines and melodies on one string (or two), going horizontally across the neck. Very much opens up new possibilities, and is a very natural way for a piano or sax player to think of the instrument. A great mind expander, even if there's plenty of stuff you won't end up playing that way.
Holdsworth -- not the first to do it, but in my mind the most iconoclastic example. Three note per string scales as a sort of base, often stretching out to four notes per string (with a note missing). Stretches of a perfect fourth or greater on one string. Very unnatural feeling at first, and for some people their tendons and ligaments never agree with it, so handle with care. But it allows for Coltrane-esque lines that are near impossible to play otherwise.
For scales, there's all sorts of systems out there. CAGED, three not per string, the William Leavitt fingerings, the "middle finger always plays the root" fingerings (which I lovingly refer to as Reg fingerings), Segovia, etc etc. Explore some, pick ones that feel natural and just roll with them. Do not be afraid to experiment with different fingerings for a passage if you feel like your first choice isn't working. This is a lifetime process.
-
Glad to provide some humor! I'm only paritally baffled at this point. I've been practicing.... Originally Posted by dasein
Thanks for the framework analysis! Probably Dolphy for the Holdsworth, as well... Originally Posted by dasein
I'm going for the simplest fingerings / fewest notes possible, to allow for getting the timing / rhythm / coordination down. One hand has to do the job of two! Originally Posted by dasein
-
The guitar is a very different kind of instrument, one of the few that can truly be played without knowing "what" is being played.
When you play the sax, the fingering tells you what you are playing, even if you never learned the names of the pitches produced - you still know that a particular fingering plays "that one" even if you don't name it. On the piano, you can't play it without your hands knowing which of the white and black keys it's touching even if you don't know their names. Same with the trumpet's valves and lip, same with the trombone's slide and lip, and even the same for the other string instruments trained for orchestra - they learn specific position fingering and note names.
On the guitar, if you don't look, you can play a random note in the middle of the neck and truly not know which it is, not even as unnamed "that one" because the fingering schema for that note is "the same" as the others around it, same with played lines, same with chords, same with chord progressions. Not only does this allow for not really knowing which notes are being played, but also which key... which means transposition is easy and natural when desired. It is possible to learn a song, then close your eyes and play it in a different key using the same fingering shifted up or down the finger board.
This has two important results:
- musicians who play other instruments are startled that guitarists mysteriously transpose freely without effort (but it is simply because the fingering schema for anything on the guitar is isomorphic for all keys up to the extent of the finger board).
- guitarists, once they realize this early on, may tend to conceive music more abstractly (relationships among relative unnamed pitches and harmonies) vs more concretely (instances of particular named notes and chords). Which of those most likely comprises music language during a rehearsal or on the band stand...?
When a sax, piano, trumpet etc. musician says he is playing by ear, he still knows exactly which of the fingerings results in "those" particular pitches, and if he knows the names of the notes of those fingerings he can't help but know those as well as he plays; but when a guitarist says he plays by ear, he may mean something a bit different - that he does not know or need to know the names of the pitches, or their specific fingering - the specific fingering would not reveal the note names anyway, unless he looked and knew them. This is further confusing because some guitarists were trained in the conventional way of learning the pitch names and using that as the basis from which they conceive how to construct what they play, and may seem "normal" to the non-guitarist musician, whereas the guitarist that has abstracted the relationships and taken advantage of the isomorphism of fingering may seem like some kind of purple cow, showing musical abilities that he may not have the canonical musical language to explain. And likely most are a blend, so all guitarists are suspect, including even the ones that seem normal.
-
Actually, you name it, and because it's a transposing instrument, the same fingering is called a "C" even though it actually produces a Bb on tenor and an Eb on alto, so you have to learn to "hear" in each transposition and different fingerings for both for the same song. And we're taught to read right at the start, so that's ingrained immediately. Originally Posted by pauln
Also taught to read from the start, which I think is a mistake. Suzuki has it right, in my opinion. Originally Posted by pauln
I'm using a clip on tuner to verify them. I have a "low form" of perfect (absolute) pitch. Guitar is really testing how good my sense of absolute pitch is, that's for sure! Originally Posted by pauln
Cats like Bill Evans play every song in all keys and switch from one to the other at will. Originally Posted by pauln
I'm definitely playing intervalically. I can improvise fairly well because of this, without knowing what notes I'm playing (for the most part). They go by too fast to think about it. Originally Posted by pauln
I think the guitarist is doing the same thing that a person would do if a bunch of dots were randomly placed on a piece of paper, and pushing one of them produced a given pitch. It's all intervals. Originally Posted by pauln
Originally Posted by pauln
the guitarist that has abstracted the relationships and taken advantage of the isomorphism of fingering may seem like some kind of purple cow, showing musical abilities that he may not have the canonical musical language to explain. /QUOTE]
"How do you get a Rock guitarist to stop playing" "Put some sheet music in front of them..."
-
Thanks for thinking through it; I'm much fascinated in how
other instruments work and how their musicians play them.
-
They all haves their quirks and peculiarities! Guitar has nothing in common with saxophone. Tone production and intonation and inflection are a key, but the instrument is the most vocal-like and offers the opportunity for a personal sound. Originally Posted by pauln
It's interesting to learn all the cool quirks of guitar.
-
for me, the only thing what matters is the final audio result.
I mean, how it sounds. The player has the conception, how he want to formulate, phrase the melody. Some notes must be legato, some embelishements must be made, and last but not least it must possible to be executed technically at some level, which gives a satisfying listen experience.
...plus here are the not wounded E and B strings, which will give different sound (except using gear and settings what are so muddy and cloudy, you can not even hear what tone you are playing), so the player may aviod or minimize switching between the wounded and unwounded strings. I prefer not playing on E and B strings on frets fifths and below.
Reply With Quote
"Gertrude" - Daniel DeLorenzo
Today, 09:46 AM in Composition