-
Is there a "rule of thumb" or "preferred" limit to the number of frets that any given melody should only use?
I don't mean when improvising, I mean when actually playing the melody itself.
For example: Blue Bossa, Key of G:
First note is open G string
Second note is one octave up, B string, fret 8 (I have no idea how to get / insert those snazzy fretboard diagrams...)
To illustrate my question, the next note in the melody is F...
2 Choices:
1. Stay on the B string, so B string, fret 6 OR
2. Switch strings to the D string, so D string, fret 10
Similar choices are presented throughout the melody.
I ask because...
I'm a saxophone player. 50 years this year (YIKES!). I've played Blue Bossa on saxophone for, well, 50 years... (DOUBLE YIKES!)
On sax, you can only play a melody in any given key by pressing ONE combination of buttons (alternative / false / special effects fingerings aside...)
I also play piano (54 years this year - TRIPLE YIKES!). Same deal, a G is a G is a G, octaves aside....
Whereas on guitar, as all you swinging cats know, the same note can be played by pushing down on different frets (tonal considerations aside).
Two questions...:
1. When playing a given melody (e.g., head to Blue Bossa), do you learn ONE combination of fret choices, or do you routinely play the melody by switching freely between the available choices?
I suppose this question is somewhat related to the "3 note per string" or "4 note per string" rule / preference, but it exists even with 2 notes, as in my example above. BTW, which is preferred, 3 or 4? Or does THAT matter?
2. When playing a given melody, is there a rule / preference for the number of frets away from the first melody note that one can go? In other words, how "horizontally" or "vertically" should one play the melody? My guess is that when chord melody is being used, then more frets are OK, because that yields more "room" beneath the melody note for the chord to sit (if one is playing the chord / harmony notes exclusively lower in pitch than the melody). When chord melody is not being used, is it merely a matter of tonal color preference? Or is the thought that there is more dexterity with one way (play more horizontally) or the other (play more vertically).
Thanks...
-
01-24-2023 05:07 PM
-
I would play that first G on the 4th string, 5th fret. For me, in general, the less movement along the neck the better.
-
Thank you.
By "less movement," do you mean less movement horizontally or less movement vertically?
-
Different places to play the same note yield different colors and of course different articulations can also alter the meaning of a note. Location and articulation are 2 tools that affect how a melody sounds. What PCjazz expresses is pretty common position for guitarists, stay in one place as much as possible, minimizing shifting, use articulation to shape the melody. This is likely the most rational strategy for an experienced musician but new to guitar person to jump in.
Exponentially as you have noticed the possible different pathways for fingerings are many.
Experience success making music on guitar first and then if so inclined you can begin to explore the multitude of alternate choices for your next 54 years.
-
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
-
Originally Posted by bako
For example, which is preferable from a "shifting," "place" standpoint?
1. B string, fret 8 (G) > B string, fret 6 (F) > G string, fret 8 (Eb) > G string, fret 7 (D) > D string, fret 10 (C) (5 frets used) OR
2. B string, fret 8 (G) > G string, fret 10 (F) > G string, fret 8 (Eb) > G string, fret 7 (D) > D string, fret 10 (C)? (4 frets used)?
3 strings for either one, FWIW... And I favor #2 for tone...
Thank you!
Originally Posted by bako
-
"Horizontally or vertically" needs to be defined with respect to "across
the width" of the finger board (floor/ceiling) or along the length of the
finger board (nut /bridge); I have read instances of both definition; for
me, "vertical" is the nut to bridge dimension, moving "higher up" and
"lower down" on the neck.
Three vs four pitches per string does not strictly characterize the fret
span on a single string; a common form of diatonic scale fingering is
often played with a five fret span for six of the pitches on two strings
using three pitches per string spanning five frets, so this may depend
somewhat on if you utilize three or all four fingers to play the lines.
The main thing is to remain mentally flexible and not try to enforce a
strict rule. With time and experience the fingers themselves will know
the most effective solution for playing a melody line; they will "hear it"
as you desire to hear that sound of the line and will just automatically
formulate a good fingering solution... and the more you anticipate the
hearing of the line (including subsequent parts coming up), the more
the fingers will hear in advance, and the better the fingering solutions
because the solution will take into account looking forward to possible
position shifts (so forming a solution that places the fingers at the end
of a phrase or part of a line in better position to continue on the next
phrase or part of the line - and many other invisible mechanics like this.
This is just like on the sax where you practice scales in all keys to learn
which of the multiple fingerings are smoothest for each key so that you
automatically learn to use the specific fingerings for the particular keys.
Same as on the piano where you practice scales in order to teach your
hands how to cross your fingers over your thumbs and how to use the
best finger for the first pitch of a line or phrase, so that the hand is best
positioned for the playing of the upcoming pitches of the line or phrase.
The only difference on the guitar is that compared to the sax, all of the
fingering patterns are "the same" in all keys, so easier than the sax, and
likewise compared to the piano - the variation of occurrence of black and
white keys is altogether absent in the schema of a fingering pattern with
the guitar, same patterns for all keys, so an important simplification here.
Trust your hands; they are designed to perform extremely complicated
tasks and will themselves learn to solve any and all fingering challenges
with experience and listening. Listening is how your hands will learn this.
-
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
You've already chosen tone so there's no real best way unless you are imitating /copying a specific version/tone/ interpretation.
Excerpt from Barry Greene's instructional Blue bossa video..... note how he keeps it all quite compact vertically: http://youtube.com/watch?v=1t0dffJB_8Q à la Joe Pass...
Or, use them long digits ......Pasquale Grasso does this so well....
S
-
Originally Posted by SOLR
Originally Posted by SOLR
Originally Posted by SOLR;1244652Excerpt from Barry Greene's instructional Blue bossa video..... note how he keeps it all quite compact vertically: [URL
Originally Posted by SOLR
S[/QUOTE]
-
One gets different melodic potential depending on how one phrases and that's dependent on whether you approach position wise or whether you approach along the string. When I started out, it was really helpful for me to find comfortable positions by which I could play "across" the strings. But the more I came to hear the phrasing of musical ideas, it became a matter of mixing single string playing with positional playing.
There are sounds that will be naturally realized from positional playing and sounds that are the result of a Unitar approach. For my own playing, I think strong notes create a gravity that is best served by being open to shifting and sliding and approached by positional scalular thinking.
I'm still learning about the guitar, myself, but I like letting the phrase dictate the position.
Some melodic options can be internalized by keeping your mind open to the fact that you, yourself, create the best approach to fingering. Especially in improvisation, there is no one single rule book.
Last edited by Jimmy blue note; 01-25-2023 at 07:13 PM.
-
Originally Posted by pauln
When I was in music school, I actually used to practice my tenor saxophone 15 hours a day, which is kind of absurd, but it worked; I
am pretty much melded to the instrument and can play whatever I want. Of course I'm not there on guitar yet, but getting my new Eastman Jazz Elite 7 > 6 string that actually fits me is huge (and, it's huge!).
By "vertically," I mean low E string to high E string. By "Horizontally," I mean nut to bridge. Is this incorrect terminology?Last edited by Saxophone Tall; 01-24-2023 at 07:54 PM. Reason: add content
-
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
I must've missed that post were it finally came to fruition Happy that it all worked out.....
S
-
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
The vertical/horizontal terminology is too confusing to really be right or wrong;
wish it would change to "across" or "along" the strings, or something like that.
-
Let the phrase dictate the position is good advice.
I'm not aware of any rules like 3 or 4 NPS. It all depends on the phrase and where you need to be at the end of it in prep for the next one.
A lot of times it's more dense than that. Depends on the head. Blue Bossa is one thing, but if you're gonna take on something like Donna Lee you have to optimize your fingerings for the picking and the articulations that suit the head. Sometimes a hammer-on or a slide will be more like the original, and sometimes you need to prepare for that. It should lead you to some new territories. It's about getting the right phrasing.
Joy Spring's another. Just when I think I've finally nailed it down I get a new idea. Then you work that for a while. Sometimes it's better. Sometimes after you've worked the new one up to tempo you find out the old one was better.
Even something like Stolen Moments. I've been doing it in octaves forever, but just recently I found a different fingering that just flows the tune better. I'm still practising the new way almost daily because the old was so ingrained I sometimes get stuck between the two.
Pianists do have the same types of decisions: the note is always in the same place, but you have 10 different possible digits to play it with.
-
Wes Montgomery, playing with his thumb, was probably more aware than most of the "logistics" of fingering. I used to think his fingering was to make it easier for his thumb; I watched videos and thought he seemed to use peculiar fingerings, and I had seen some transcriptions supposed to represent his fingering which also seemed strange... but examining his fingerings, I noticed he crafted his "phrase and movement" fingering perfectly to maximize the effectiveness of using his thumb (not to make up for the thumb, but because I think his thumb was faster than his fingers!). Watch his hands here and notice how his fingering is a chain of connected set-ups that put the end of the previous in front of the next... to save time, to keep up with his thumb.
-
Originally Posted by paulnOriginally Posted by SOLR
S
-
Thank you OP, for a reminder of our weird and wonderful guitars!
Someone mentioned Kreisberg in passing, and I recalled a video of him repeating a short chromatic sequence raising it by a half step each time, beginning on the low strings but high up the neck and spanning the entire fretboard, in which he takes full advantage of the odd guitaristic quirk of there being multiple places to finger the same note. Anyone see it?
And there’s another of Segovia explaining how the guitar is an orchestra in itself, which refers in part to the timbral variations possible, due to the same quirk.
About using open strings, there’s a Joe Pass video in which he joked that using too many will put the audience to sleep, and which I took to mean it’s all good, in measured amounts.
-
Originally Posted by SOLR
-
Originally Posted by pauln
I'll adopt across / along...
-
Originally Posted by JazzPadd
I'm not sure which one is weirder - saxophone (plenty weird...) or guitar, but nothing says "weird" to me (in a good way) better than bass clarinet!
Here's the great Bob Mintzer, co-leader of the Yellowjackets, runs the Jazz program at USC, had the big band with Jaco, etc.. He plays tenor sax & EWI & bass clarinet. I've never heard him perform on it, but he's also an excellent Jazz pianist and has a book out on the subject:
-
Originally Posted by ccroft
Last edited by Saxophone Tall; 01-25-2023 at 12:45 AM.
-
Originally Posted by SOLR
Measurements (taken with caliper):
61.40 mm = 2.4175" = 2 53/128" @ RH51.75 mm = 2.0370" = 2 5/128" nut itself
46.38 mm = 1.8260" = 1 53/64" string spacing @ nut
This thing is exquisite, and Zipracer went above & beyond to convert it for me!
It fits my hands about as perfectly as possible. The neck isn't deep, so there is no problem reaching the low E. I "thought" I needed /wanted a larger number @ the RH, but any more than the 61.4 mm would make the left hand play area (fretboard) "too" wide. And the RH is great; I can play each string without bumping into the others. I needed bigger @ both ends of the instrument.
It just might be the world's largest Jazz archtop!
Here's some photos, taken when I first opened the case, so it still has the low tack tape @ the bridge for shipping.Last edited by Saxophone Tall; 01-25-2023 at 12:53 AM. Reason: formatting
-
I must've missed that post were it finally came to fruition Happy that it all worked out.....
S[/QUOTE]
-
Originally Posted by SOLR
-
Originally Posted by Saxophone Tall
Thanks!
Transcriber wanted
Today, 04:35 PM in Improvisation