Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 210111213 LastLast
Posts 551 to 600 of 607
  1. #551

    User Info Menu

    Jonah did Pat O'Brien publish anything on this academically?

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #552

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Jonah did Pat O'Brien publish anything on this academically?
    he taught only orally. Most of his works were spread through his teaching students (something like Barry Harris?)...
    Now and then I see in master classes of many players the traces of his approaches.
    (Another vast topic for him was nervousness and self control on stage and during records)

    Also formally he could not cure people as he did not have some MD license, so he was never openly advertised.
    But I personally heard from a few players (one was top world one) how he saved their hands and careers when doctors could not help.
    I personally found that his abduction exercises and the whole conception moved my left hand on another level... at least for lutes.

    After his death lute society of America issued at least 3 magazines completely dedicated to his work. One of this issues is his long physiology lesson published from tapes where he in discussion form goes in all the details of his hand physiology conceptions, describes his most important exercises etc. and many other things and observations, some of which are extremely interesting, concerning kinesthetic memory, nature of virtuosity etc.(he speaks with bluegrass player by the way, though lutist too).

    I would love to share but as LSA lacks funds and annual membership gives access to all their magazines archives from 60s I just can encourage people to subscribe (usd55 is not that much, and there is plenty if other stuff as well )

  4. #553

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    No need to critique or discredit anything you are doing, sweet cheeks. If it works, it works, the only potential issue is whether or not it’s physically healthy.

    While I would be interested to see how you play, in general there’s enough out there to form an opinion.

    Mentioning the fact I’ve started (started, mind) a postgrad is not an attempt to ‘flex’ but to point out I now have a legitimate reason to dig into this stuff beyond blathering on the internet.

    Oh dear.
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Another point that occurred to me reading snoskiers comments is that a lot of guitar players won’t really be interested in the ins and outs of these questions, find it a bit academic, whereas I find myself getting deep into this stuff.... sure, I’m sure if you asked Jim Mullen about his technique he wouldn’t be able to tell you much, and would probably mostly be humble about it....

    The fact that you might not be interested in digging into these questions doesn’t mean they are not worth digging into. I feel we lack a good established model of best practice for non classical guitar, and while I don’t think it’s the best idea to standardise everything, I think it’s worth to me as a teacher to understand this stuff on a deep level and perhaps try and tie together some of the strands a little.

    Btw my initial quick search through the literature hasn’t thrown up much, but I would be surprised if no one has dug into this. The most relevant looking article was actually from a medical journal.
    My initial post was never intended to imply that this is not a worthwhile topic, but was simply to inject a little humor into the mix. My subsequent post was an attempt to clarify what I thought you were saying with some of your posts as some among us were apparently on a different page from you. Since then I’ve learned one thing... don’t do that.

    My reality, and then I’ll shut up, is that I care very much about technique and I enjoy reading your posts and the posts of many others because I always learn something I didn’t know and sometimes never even considered. This is actually a great example of that. I realize Django had a limited number of fingers to play with, and he made it work very well. That said, I never considered that there was such a thing as a three finger technique because I just use whatever fingers are available to do the job in the most efficient and effective manner possible. I’m sure that means at times I play primarily with two, three, or four fingers. I never, however, set out to limit or maximize the number of fingers I use. I simply use as many or as few as I need at a given time to get the best possible results. For me that usually has me using all of my fingers. For me to express that is nothing more nor less than an attempt at expressing an opinion which may or may not generate a discussion, and which in no way attempts or intends to discredit anyone else’s opinion. On a side note, of interst to this thread may be Jimmy Bruno’s suggestion to me through his online workshop that I limit my horizontal playing as it can potentially create tonal differences that may not be optimal. I’m sure it’s not as simple as that and as one of my all time favorite guitarists I would love to sit and pick Jimmy’s brain for days regarding jazz guitar, but unfortunately, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

    Regarding the physically healthy part, I couldn’t agree more. On your side of the pond I am what’s known as a physiotherapist. Over the years I have worked with some very accomplished classical and jazz musicians due to repetitive stress issues relating to improper posture of their choosing, or because of the genetic pool they were born into. That being the case, it is natural that I try to play in a way that minimizes undo stress and strain on my body, and as a formal educator I’m glad that matters to you as well.

    Finally, I don’t know what your opinion is regarding how you think I play, and it really doesn’t matter. I will remove all doubt and state that you are a much better player than I am. That being the case I play well enough for an occasional open mic night. I have yet to receive any death threats, but my playing days are not over and hopefully will not be for quite some time, so I’m not out of the woods yet.

  5. #554

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by snoskier63 View Post
    My initial post was never intended to imply that this is not a worthwhile topic, but was simply to inject a little humor into the mix. My subsequent post was an attempt to clarify what I thought you were saying with some of your posts as some among us were apparently on a different page from you. Since then I’ve learned one thing... don’t do that.

    My reality, and then I’ll shut up, is that I care very much about technique and I enjoy reading your posts and the posts of many others because I always learn something I didn’t know and sometimes never even considered. This is actually a great example of that. I realize Django had a limited number of fingers to play with, and he made it work very well. That said, I never considered that there was such a thing as a three finger technique because I just use whatever fingers are available to do the job in the most efficient and effective manner possible. I’m sure that means at times I play primarily with two, three, or four fingers. I never, however, set out to limit or maximize the number of fingers I use. I simply use as many or as few as I need at a given time to get the best possible results. For me that usually has me using all of my fingers. For me to express that is nothing more nor less than an attempt at expressing an opinion which may or may not generate a discussion, and which in no way attempts or intends to discredit anyone else’s opinion. On a side note, of interst to this thread may be Jimmy Bruno’s suggestion to me through his online workshop that I limit my horizontal playing as it can potentially create tonal differences that may not be optimal. I’m sure it’s not as simple as that and as one of my all time favorite guitarists I would love to sit and pick Jimmy’s brain for days regarding jazz guitar, but unfortunately, I don’t see that happening any time soon.

    Regarding the physically healthy part, I couldn’t agree more. On your side of the pond I am what’s known as a physiotherapist. Over the years I have worked with some very accomplished classical and jazz musicians due to repetitive stress issues relating to improper posture of their choosing, or because of the genetic pool they were born into. That being the case, it is natural that I try to play in a way that minimizes undo stress and strain on my body, and as a formal educator I’m glad that matters to you as well.

    Finally, I don’t know what your opinion is regarding how you think I play, and it really doesn’t matter. I will remove all doubt and state that you are a much better player than I am. That being the case I play well enough for an occasional open mic night. I have yet to receive any death threats, but my playing days are not over and hopefully will not be for quite some time, so I’m not out of the woods yet.
    Yeah, thanks for this.

    One related issue I’ve come across is whether or not a student practices using consistent fingering. That’s the main thing that’s important to me I’d say along with making sure the wrist is straight.

    Some students get this idea right away, while others seem to use different fingers every time and you have to tell them exactly what to do and get them to practice it super slow.

    In the former case it’s simply a matter of making a suggestion where their initial fingering might not be efficient. You can work with the student in terms of what their body seems to want to do naturally and adapt it using one’s knowledge to overcome problems.

    Consistent fingerings of course could be more reliant on the strong fingers, or positional, or something else. I do not believe it’s very natural to play in position but the amount of shifting etc varies from player to player.

    I also see a fair amount of bad technique that’s clearly been influenced by the idea of thumb behind classical style posture.

    I wouldn’t take what I said personally, I meant I would always be professionally interested to see what you do physically as I would with any player.

  6. #555

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175 View Post
    But then a head like Donna Lee which enormously benefits from fingering 3 notes per string along 4 fret reach would be the question for a 3 finger player in terms of if the pinky can be athletic enough to pull it off .
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Funny what people worry about

    I think it’s incorrect to imagine the pinky is a muscle that you exercise. Whether or not you can reliably use your pinky has much more to do with left hand alignment, and actuating the right joints.

    But in aligning the left hand ‘correctly’ (ie no pronation) you trade off a few of other things such as the reach of the third finger and the ability to pop the thumb over the top of the neck.
    But obviously this is a better position for Polyphonic fingerings, stretch chords and holdsworth style legato.

    Most players sit somewhere on a spectrum between the two extremes but I feel optimal technique is basically one or the other....

    We all pronate our hand to various degrees even in classical playing. For instance I was taught to fret a C major scale on the B and E strings 1 3 0 1 3.... in fact some teachers suggest 1 4 0 1 4. Look what your hand does in each case.... otoh can one cleanly play a C major open chord without pronating?

    So the fingers I don’t think is as important as the stance of the left hand. Stuff like what fingerings you use come naturally from that basis. A study of this axis of movement of the left hand I think is really useful for making informed decisions about fret hand technique.

    Lastly I have noticed that while many players are happy to copy equipment in order to imitate a player, fewer seem happy to copy what a player is doing physically. I think the main reason for that is dogmatic teaching.
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    'Three fingered' technique isn't limited though - different yes...

    In some ways four finger technique is limited - weaker tone, problems with applying vibrato and note bends, issues with using the pinky effectively for slurring (a lot of guitarists suffer from that), harder to stretch with the third finger, thumb fretting more difficult, left hand muting more difficult.

    Of course there's no law saying you can't change left hand stance according to the needs of the music.

    I can say from personal experience Peter has pretty savage double time chops! I think he holds back on gigs a long way...

    First of all I have to be honest here - not trying to be difficult .

    But as I said earlier - there is no such thing as '3 finger technique' .

    You have not defined it.

    All the so called 'advantages' or most of them break down for those of us who have put in 40,000 hours or more.

    So here's why it's a limited technique -

    Fusion Playing ...

    Wide intervals mixed into lines .

    Counterpoint , polyphonic playing.

    Playing Legato and or actually sounding like a Saxophone.

    Playing long lines in 8th notes and 16th notes with swing .
    Playing 32nd notes in time .

    Playing Arpeggios including simple ones like
    1 b3 5 9 vertically then moving it around .

    A] For every Player like Benson or Jesse Von Ruller - I have no idea if you call him a 3 finger Player because you haven't defined it and it doesn't affect what I do but IF you are talking about Modern Guitar Playing - none of the Modern Jazz Players ( who are my contemporaries technically ) ..are 3 finger players [ Marino , Hekselman , Kriesberg, Lage Lund,Julian Lage etc etc etc

    There is probably a 10 to 1 ratio of people who embrace the Pinky rather than avoid it - and there's a reason for that.

    Even Rock Shredders 10 to 1 and there's a reason for that .

    Reaching 3 fingers to a 4 fret span is a limited technique .

    And earlier in this thread you upvoted that .

    Now IF you are going to stretch your definition to say that Peter Farrel is a 3 fingered technique Player - he does not stretch 3 fingers over 4 frets - nor do I.

    So then we ALL use 3 fingered technique if Farrel does.

    And the term is meaningless.



    Stretching 3 fingers to cover 4 frets is a limited technique and cannot be maintained in 'time' - the Player will trip themselves up mentally , then physically .

    It's far more comprehensive to just train all 4 ...like almost all Modern High Level Players do...

    As soon as you Poll Guitarists who really have chops (time, fluidity, intervallic freedom and SWING) and ask them about restricting the Pinky or strongly favoring the first 3 fingers - they'll think 'why would I do that ?

    And possibly poitely say 'whatever works '.



    OK - as soon as there is a 4 fret span laterally - the pinky comes into play. See that ?

    Now IF you are going to call Farrel a' 3 fingered Player ' then fine .

    I am too and so are we all and you are just talking about variations in left hand and the definition of 3 fingered technique is so 'Vast ' lol I gave you a positive term that it includes everyone.

    Ironically- using a three fingers to cover a 4 fret span is not that bad physically - it's mentally where it will break down ESPECIALLY on long lines in 16ths and 8ths in locked time whether 'Swing ' or Classical time , because we have a problem where sometimes 3 fingers are 3 frets sometimes there are 4 ...too many exceptions ...guy trips .

    So I suggest you poll advanced Players who already have their chops and time not a work in progress.



    But in reality it's a limited technique which modern players don't espouse because - it's a limited technique.



    Same with Benson- I don't know how you call him a 3 fingered Player - but most people who get to 80 or 90% of Benson NEED all 4 fingers On Demand to do it.




    So having the 'Pinky ready On Demand' versus favoring the first 3 is the break point.
    Poll some people who have advanced chops - they'll say why would I restrict the Pinky? in any way ?"



    "3 fingered technique Players are not restricting the Pinky in any way , Robert "

    OK then ...never mind we are all 3 fingered Players ...
    Last edited by Robertkoa; 02-26-2019 at 01:10 PM.

  7. #556

    User Info Menu

    Look at the pronation of Farrell's hand, the position of thumb - behind the neck but somewhat back from classical position, the way his pinky flaps around and the tendency to shift. Actually he is pretty close to the way I play.

    Now watch carefully, is PF using the pinky on even footing with the other fingers? No. He's not using it 25% of the time.

    Compare to Adam Rogers on one extreme and Jim Mullen on the other. AR actually uses the pinky to position shift.

    Different right? PF is sort of in between, but still pretty pronated.

    Left hand technique is a spectrum. Most players pronate, but some, such as Ben Monder and AR, don't.

    You may as well use your pinky - I don't think any player never uses it. The point is that pronating your hand makes it less available anyway, and harder to stretch.

    Not sure what's so complicated about that concept, TBH. I'm gonna do a quick video.

  8. #557

    User Info Menu


  9. #558

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Look at the pronation of Farrell's hand, the position of thumb - behind the neck but somewhat back from classical position, the way his pinky flaps around and the tendency to shift. Actually he is pretty close to the way I play.

    Now watch carefully, is PF using the pinky on even footing with the other fingers? No. He's not using it 25% of the time.

    Compare to Adam Rogers on one extreme and Jim Mullen on the other. AR actually uses the pinky to position shift.

    Different right? PF is sort of in between, but still pretty pronated.

    Left hand technique is a spectrum. Most players pronate, but some, such as Ben Monder and AR, don't.

    You may as well use your pinky - I don't think any player never uses it. The point is that pronating your hand makes it less available anyway, and harder to stretch.

    Not sure what's so complicated about that concept, TBH. I'm gonna do a quick video.
    OK - I get the 25% thing definitely - that would mean that someone might be forcing the pinky into everything -
    'I practiced X hours with Pinky and I am going to use it all the time dammit ' lol.

    That is as irrational as not using it at all.

    Also - and here I am more novice than most of you going against my own ' points'
    rant (lol) .

    Someone mentioned earlier about this -
    The idea of moving laterally ( I do it but this thread made me more conscious of it ) ...
    WITHOUT using Pinky during the actual shift -

    So when you get there ( wherever it is ) you still have Pinky if you need it to continue the line smoothly mostly in ascending laterally - someone mentioned that.

    I think that might be a really good idea ... to continue the ascending line with pinky at new position then go up a string etc.

    But yeah - the chances that you would need the Pinky 25% of the time are slim - if that's the point I get it - AND it only took 12 pages lol .

    So we look and say - 'am I forcing the Pinky and either straining hands or putting commas in my lines unintentionally .'..

    Also the idea that ascending laterally the position largely STOPS when you place the pinky and you either go down OR continue to ascend but staying in that Position jumping to higher strings ...correct ? - I need to credit who said that before.

    Trolling - I don't know what the purpose would be for that.
    Last edited by Robertkoa; 03-02-2019 at 06:05 PM.

  10. #559

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Robertkoa View Post
    OK - I get the 25% thing definitely - that would mean that someone might be forcing the pinky into everything -
    'I practiced X hours with Pinky and I am going to use it all the time dammit ' lol.

    That is as irrational as not using it at all.

    Also - and here I am more novice than most of you going against my own ' points'
    rant (lol) .

    Someone mentioned earlier about this -
    The idea of moving laterally ( I do it but this thread made me more conscious of it ) ...
    WITHOUT using Pinky during the actual shift -

    So when you get there ( wherever it is ) you still have Pinky if you need it to continue the line smoothly mostly in ascending laterally - someone mentioned that.

    I think that might be a really good idea ... to continue the ascending line with pinky at new position then go up a string etc.

    But yeah - the chances that you would need the Pinky 25% of the time are slim - if that's the point I get it - AND it only took 12 pages lol .
    But some players do use it pretty much equally with the other fingers. People with very legit techniques.

    You are very hung up about the pinky... Watch the video. The pinky is simply less useful in some common right hand positions. Pinky use or otherwise is emergent from other considerations.

  11. #560

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I'm just embarrassed I went so far as to make a video. You win!

    Nah ... It was a fun video


    Quote Originally Posted by Robertkoa View Post
    But how well I can write and play is the thing ...
    I'm here for the players ... would love to see you play

  12. #561

    User Info Menu

    Unless I missed it! I find it interesting that within this discussion there has been little acknowledgement of the relationship of the angle between the floor and the fretboard in relation to left hand technique. Seems like some aspects of left hand technique are better served by having the neck at approx 45 degrees and other aspects are better served with the neck parallel to the floor. How the hand relates to the fretboard is quite different in either case.

    Will

  13. #562

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Ha! If you say so.

    What are you trying to say again?

    You know, I give up.... You are clearly trolling. Surely, no one can be this obtuse.

    I'm just embarrassed I went so far as to make a video. You win!
    the vid was cool , I now completely understand what you're saying Christian
    and as it happens I agree with you ....

    i dont get get why it got turned into Duelling banjos
    weird shit huh ....

    as an aside I for one really dig your playing
    you pick really clean and fast (much

    better than me ...dammit)

    still i I do what I do and sometimes people dig it
    so that's ok then

    pingu three fingers

  14. #563

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by WillMbCdn5 View Post
    Unless I missed it! I find it interesting that within this discussion there has been little acknowledgement of the relationship of the angle between the floor and the fretboard in relation to left hand technique. Seems like some aspects of left hand technique are better served by having the neck at approx 45 degrees and other aspects are better served with the neck parallel to the floor. How the hand relates to the fretboard is quite different in either case.

    Will
    I mention it briefly in the video. It’s an important consideration.

  15. #564

    User Info Menu

    Unless I missed it! I find it interesting that within this discussion there has been little acknowledgement of the relationship of the angle between the floor and the fretboard in relation to left hand technique. Seems like some aspects of left hand technique are better served by having the neck at approx 45 degrees and other aspects are better served with the neck parallel to the floor. How the hand relates to the fretboard is quite different in either case.

    Will
    I think I mentioned this but not directly whne I was describing elbow position and all the Pat O'Brien thing above.

  16. #565

    User Info Menu

    BY the way another technical thing on left hand that was some kind of discovery for me from Pat O'Brien's methods.

    I had an interesting experience. A luthier made a baroque and invited me to try it.
    I noticed that the neck was much much thinner than on my baroque guitar he had made before.

    I asked why. He said that it was his new conception of neck etc. basically derived from baroque lutes.

    But I said: on baroque lutes on has to fret 7th of 8th course sometimes that it why the neck should be very thin.

    This is one of the thing that Pat O'Brien describes in his abduction excercises: when you play on 1st string and then you move up (physically up not in pitch) to the 6th string... you thumb on the other side of the neck should move up too.
    This is the thing somehow many classical players do not notice - often they try to fix thumb in the middle of the neck and that makes the wrist curve outside too much for lower strings and inside for higher strings...


    Actually such a thin neck on baroque guitar can cause problems - because having only 5 courses it is narrow, there is really nowhere to move up actually...
    but being almost flat on back side you feel like there is nothing between your thumb and other fingers... and it increased tesion in the hand as if you tried to hold something you do not really have.. like trying to press a sheet of paper.

    On the contrary well-curved and rounded neck would help a wrist to achieve more natural position on such a narrow neck that many teachers describe as 'tennis ball' grab.

    And on baroque lute where you have very wide working surface of the fretboard you will have this 'tennis ball' grab only with with very thin neck profile.

    In that sense how efficient and natural grab the V-neck can give for early acoustic blues playing: three fingers and a thumb and almost horizonthal neck.

  17. #566

    User Info Menu



    I agree with the earlier Posts ( mine , lol ) about LFOD playing.



    LFOD Playing = Little Finger On Demand.

    Order it from your Cable Company today .



    The video about thumb up which points out the limited use of the pinky resultant from that neck grip taught me why I switched about 5 years ago - but I already knew why I did it.

    I don't really think about % of what fingers I use and deciding in advance would be restrictive...




















    I wasn't on this thread to 'learn' this wonderful new 3 finger technique but to warn people that it is not generally a good idea for people who wish to reach a high level of Play.







    I can and don't have to 'settle' or far far far less than before.


    If I am playing wide intervals my pinky might be 30 % ( I
    Last edited by Robertkoa; 03-05-2019 at 08:00 AM.

  18. #567

    User Info Menu

    I've responded to this thread in Private Messages, because I wasn't sure if I was ready to get back into posting on the Forum again.

    I actually studied with a classical guitarist recently, and one of the topics that we discussed was shifting. I've been practicing shifting techniques across the fretboard, informed by Segovia and Johnny Smith. He said it bluntly, shifting doesn't really occur all that often in classical guitar. He even said that the Segovia fingerings were 'almost' useless in real life classical guitar playing because "playing 2 or 3 octave scales doesn't really show up in most classical pieces". He did point me in the direction of a book by Abel Carlevaro, and there were some good shifting ideas in that book.

    In jazz, we are mostly playing music that is played on the horn (honk, honk). The demands are different. I think we should look at 3 finger vs. 4 finger techniques as choices instead of ultimatums. The one pet peeve I have about people talking about 3 finger technique is that they belittle it as a "lack of technique".

    I think this whole discussion could be useful if it got us all to think about being more strategic with our fretting hand, instead of arguing about what is considered "right" or "proper".
    Last edited by Irez87; 03-03-2019 at 02:53 AM.

  19. #568

    User Info Menu


  20. #569

    User Info Menu

    Hello All,
    I haven't been around for awhile. Just checking in. Nine years on and still talking about this. Wow!

  21. #570

    User Info Menu



    Half assed left hand Stochelo

  22. #571

    User Info Menu

    Anyway the reason why I picked out the Stochelo vid as it is indeed at circa 320 BPM. (Actually more like 330)

    Also I forgot to mention Steve Morse who is a master of cross string picking, but again AFAIK his fastest licks are not based on that.

    Again I'm not terribly interested in scalar shred runs or anything. The upper ceiling of someone who plays language and lines as opposed to mechanically optimised licks is always going to lower. The combination of scales, leaps and arpeggios will always present a greater challenge, but that's where the actual music is to me.

    In general very fast playing is usually based on things that work well mechanically with the player's technique, often intuitively.

    Even in Holdsworth's case, a lot his shreddy playing is based on 3 nps stretch patterns with string skipping. He had a million ways to use this basic pattern, but alternate picking these combinations would have been actually much more challenging, which is probably why you don't hear it done.
    Last edited by christianm77; 03-10-2019 at 11:59 AM.

  23. #572

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by djg View Post
    Beautiful playing man.

  24. #573

    User Info Menu

    yes, Chris77, teach more guitar players how to shift fer once.

    Position playing is great, CAGED has a ton of benefits, but shifting is also incredibly important.

    Too many people try to stick everything into one position.

    Here's a line from Mike Allemana, the guitarist who played the recorded etudes for Greg Fishman's Jazz Guitar Etudes

    "For example, position shifting is crucial in executing the (saxophone) lines of this book... One way that a student can learn about fingering is to watch great guitarists improvise. For example, Wes Montgomery had a very interesting approach, using mostly the first three fingers of his left hand, rarely using the pinky."

    Barry Greene told me that he is more of a positional player, but even he shifts around. Even Joe Pass shifts around to create interest and range in his lines. Other wise, it just sounds like a bunch of sameness.

    I think Cannonball sounded great because his time was ridiculous and his lines were incredibly "rangey".

    Another example, Ron Eschete. He's a positional player as well. However, he told me that he's sick of players who only play in one area of the neck for solos. He likes to hear the whole range of the guitar in an improvisation. A larger shape and arch, if you will.

    Once again, I only said that this conversation should really be about being more strategic with how we approach the fingerboard. I think some people got offended because they missed my point.
    Last edited by Irez87; 03-10-2019 at 01:10 PM.

  25. #574
    Quote Originally Posted by Irez87 View Post
    yes, Chris77, teach more guitar players how to shift fer once.

    Position playing is great, CAGED has a ton of benefits, but shifting is also incredibly important.

    Too many people try to stick everything into one position.

    Here's a line from Mike Allemana, the guitarist who played the recorded etudes for Greg Fishman's Jazz Guitar Etudes

    "For example, position shifting is crucial in executing the (saxophone) lines of this book... One way that a student can learn about fingering is to watch great guitarists improvise. For example, Wes Montgomery had a very interesting approach, using mostly the first three fingers of his left hand, rarely using the pinky."

    Barry Greene told me that he is more of a positional player, but even he shifts around. Even Joe Pass shifts around to create interest and range in his lines. Other wise, it just sounds like a bunch of sameness.

    I think Cannonball sounded great because his time was ridiculous and his lines were incredibly "rangey".

    Another example, Ron Eschete. He's a positional player as well. However, he told me that he's sick of players who only play in one area of the neck for solos. He likes to hear the whole range of the guitar in an improvisation. A larger shape and arch, if you will.

    Once again, I only said that this conversation should really be about being more strategic with how we approach the fingerboard. I think some people got offended because they missed my point.
    I'm struck by how many self-described position players shift like crazy. Reg has always talked about his playing in this self depricating way, like he's a boring "position player", but he shifts more than anyone.

  26. #575
    I think there is always an assumption of lost opportunity, in choosing "the wrong way" or what may eventually BE the wrong way for you in the end. If you spend too much time chasing after one thing , what's the cost of all that time that could've been spent pursuing one thing well?

    I now think that this fear is completely overblown. Hal Galper made a statement that kind of summed up what has become my gut feeling about learning things like this. He said, "All learning is global". If you work on 3-finger playing (or 2-finger) for a time, the end result may be that you "magically" achieve improved results in 4-finger playing as well. The mind doesn't work only in the linear, analytical way that we thing it does.

    I think the takeaway might be that not only is it OK to explore other ways without hindering your "real way" but also that the "lost time" and opportunity cost fear may be a non-issue as well.

    I feel like much of this discussion is based in the fear of choosing "the wrong way".

  27. #576

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    I'm struck by how many self-described position players shift like crazy. Reg has always talked about his playing in this self depricating way, like he's a boring "position player", but he shifts more than anyone.
    I have trouble aligning Reg the poster with Reg the player sometimes. He's just such a trad, goove based post-bop cat, and yet the way he talks in this sort of aphoristic algebra that I half understand...

    I think (sorry Reg) the boomer generation just learned more practically and experientially because there were just more gigs. The pedagogy and theory was never meant to cover that material. I think that's what Reg means by 'technical skills' and 'vanilla stuff' but I'm not sure....

    And that's why I suspect Gary Burton doesn't cover chord tones in his video. You're meant to know that stuff backwards by the time you get to his teaching.

  28. #577

    User Info Menu

    I always got the impression that Reg learned how to play, and later, learned the "school" names for all the stuff he already knew.

    I understand about a third of what he says, but I always learn something good from his posts. It's nice to hear from a guy who truly learned all that stuff and can actually get to the "forget that shit and play" part of the quote that people love to throw around.
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  29. #578
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    I have trouble aligning Reg the poster with Reg the player sometimes. He's just such a trad, goove based post-bop cat, and yet the way he talks in this sort of aphoristic algebra that I half understand...

    I think (sorry Reg) the boomer generation just learned more practically and experientially because there were just more gigs. The pedagogy and theory was never meant to cover that material. I think that's what Reg means by 'technical skills' and 'vanilla stuff' but I'm not sure....

    And that's why I suspect Gary Burton doesn't cover chord tones in his video. You're meant to know that stuff backwards by the time you get to his teaching.
    After several years, I honestly believe that Reg has a harder time understanding what other players don't see/understand etc., because the approach he adopted early on toward fretboard is so logical. When things start to read as being algebraic/analytical/theoretical to your eyes, understand that HE'S mostly coming from a very PHYSICAL/spacial/kinesthetic understanding of these things, with the guitar fretboard as the sliderule.

    The theoretical understanding is the BYPRODUCT of his PHYSICAL understanding much more than it is the reference point for designing the physical part. I've come to think that the rest of us mostly do it backwards. The repeating pattern of the fretboard is mostly a drawback with traditional approaches. His way utilizes the strengths more and diminishes the drawbacks.

    Anyway, I never really understood his relationships/references thing until I actually started playing it. It really is mostly a kinesthetic understanding which eventually yields the framework from which you can approach broader analytical and theoretical associations.
    Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 03-13-2019 at 10:50 AM.

  30. #579

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    After several years, I honestly believe that Reg has a harder time understanding what other players don't see/understand etc., because the approach he adopted early on toward fretboard so logical. When things start to read as being algebraic/analytical/theoretical to your reading, understand that HE'S mostly coming from a very PHYSICAL/spacial/kinesthetic understanding of these things, with the guitar fretboard as the sliderule.
    I think there's a lot to that. Reg has always stressed that point A is to know the fingerboard so it is a 12-fret grid that repeats and you know where everything is within that grid all the time. This point A, which is 'the given' for him, is something most people never get to (at least to the extent that he does.)

    Curiously, the only person I've heard describe the fretboard as a slide rule is Carol Kaye. Very different, though. Doesn't teach positions at all that I know of. But she will say things like "always think of a minor chord as a ii chord to play on." So if you're playing "Summertime" in Am, think of G, as Am is the ii of G. I don't know if anyone OTHER than her thinks of it this way. ;o) But she knows the guitar (and bass) every which a way.

    And now for something completely different: She once told me that in her first lesson with Horace Hatchett (famed guitar teacher), when she was 14 or so, he taught her "Tea For Two" and "Blue Skies." In short order, he hired her to teach beginners. (That's the only way she could keep taking lessons, as she couldn't afford them otherwise.) I wonder how many people she's taught over the decades who have gigged professionally.
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  31. #580

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    After several years, I honestly believe that Reg has a harder time understanding what other players don't see/understand etc., because the approach he adopted early on toward fretboard so logical. When things start to read as being algebraic/analytical/theoretical to your reading, understand that HE'S mostly coming from a very PHYSICAL/spacial/kinesthetic understanding of these things, with the guitar fretboard as the sliderule.

    The theoretical understanding of all of it is the BYPRODUCT of the PHYSICAL understanding more than it is the reference point for laying out physical understanding. I've come to think that the rest of this mostly do it backwards. the repeating pattern of the fretboard is mostly a drawback with traditional approaches. His way utilizes the strengths more and diminishes the drawbacks.

    Anyway, I never really understood his relationships/references thing until I actually started playing yet. It really is kinesthetic understanding which eventually yields the framework from which approach broader analytical and theoretical associations.
    I really must sit down and work out what he's talking about at some point.

  32. #581

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes View Post
    But she will say things like "always think of a minor chord as a ii chord to play on." So if you're playing "Summertime" in Am, think of G, as Am is the ii of G. I don't know if anyone OTHER than her thinks of it this way. ;o).
    Yeah, it sounds cray-cray to me...that song is SOOOO "in minor."

    BUT...If I hear that chord as an Am6, tonic minor chord...are there any different notes that are gonna sound good from my analysis versus Carol's? Not really...
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  33. #582

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont View Post
    Yeah, it sounds cray-cray to me...that song is SOOOO "in minor."

    BUT...If I hear that chord as an Am6, tonic minor chord...are there any different notes that are gonna sound good from my analysis versus Carol's? Not really...
    Well...... that’s a whole endless thread on its own

  34. #583

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post
    Well...... that’s a whole endless thread on its own
    I suppose it is...the combinations might change, but I maintain the note choices are pretty simple...over any chord, notes have three possibilities to me:

    1. In the damn chord, of course it sounds fine
    2. Not in the chord but it can be an extension, feel free to hang on it
    3. Not off limits but be careful with it.

    That's it.
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  35. #584

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mr. beaumont View Post
    Yeah, it sounds cray-cray to me...that song is SOOOO "in minor."

    BUT...If I hear that chord as an Am6, tonic minor chord...are there any different notes that are gonna sound good from my analysis versus Carol's? Not really...

    O, yes, she would agree that it's a minor key song. But Am is the ii of G. Most think of it as the vi of C, which it also is. The one different note would be F# (in G) for F (in C).
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  36. #585
    Reg's approach allows him to think of playing the guitar much like a pianist would because he always knows where every note is and how he can overlay stuff over the top of what he's playing.

  37. #586

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Robertkoa View Post
    I say the World Class 4 finger Player wins - not even close ....
    That's why he'll probably win a gold medal at the guitar olympics in 2022.
    I'm more interested in music than sports.

  38. #587
    For me at least, 3 finger technique is not about efficiency, but about authenticity of style. When learning the music of players that used it, on an instrument like the guitar, it makes sense to approach the fretboard in a similar fashion.

    Blues is the same way. You can fret the same old licks a million ways, but if you want to sound like you are coming from somewhere you have to do them in a specific fashion.

    For me its all part of finding your voice. I wouldn't use 3 fingers if playing metal or fusion for example, but for jazz and blues i like the way it makes you play and sound, so i mostly use it.

  39. #588

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes View Post
    O, yes, she would agree that it's a minor key song. But Am is the ii of G. Most think of it as the vi of C, which it also is. The one different note would be F# (in G) for F (in C).
    I think of it as the i of Am
    Jeff Matz, Jazz Guitar:
    http://www.youtube.com/user/jeffreymatz

    "Jazz is like life...it goes on longer than you think, and as soon as you're like 'oh, I get it,' it ends."

    --The Ghost of Duke Ellington

  40. #589
    I guess a sizeable chunk of this thread is gone now...

  41. #590

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    I guess a sizeable chunk of this thread is gone now...
    what do you mean, it got censored?
    White belt
    My Youtube

  42. #591

    User Info Menu

    Well, that's a loss to humanity

  43. #592

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77 View Post

    Yes. This. Exactly. Thank you, Christian.
    "Learn the repertoire. It’s all in the songs. If you learn 200 songs, you will have no problem improvising."
    Frank Vignola

  44. #593

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher View Post
    I think there is always an assumption of lost opportunity, in choosing "the wrong way" or what may eventually BE the wrong way for you in the end. If you spend too much time chasing after one thing , what's the cost of all that time that could've been spent pursuing one thing well?

    I now think that this fear is completely overblown. Hal Galper made a statement that kind of summed up what has become my gut feeling about learning things like this. He said, "All learning is global". If you work on 3-finger playing (or 2-finger) for a time, the end result may be that you "magically" achieve improved results in 4-finger playing as well. The mind doesn't work only in the linear, analytical way that we thing it does.

    I think the takeaway might be that not only is it OK to explore other ways without hindering your "real way" but also that the "lost time" and opportunity cost fear may be a non-issue as well.

    I feel like much of this discussion is based in the fear of choosing "the wrong way".
    Good post, Matt. I think that I may have touched on this in one of my posts early on in this thread. I can't begin to enumerate the number of times over the years that I've changed the way I hold a plectrum or how I address the fingerboard with my LH. I never thought of a change in technique as refuting anything that I had previously learned but rather a refinement of what I had already learned. I understand that some people are reluctant to make extreme changes after spending X amount of months, years, or decades playing a certain way. But for me, making these changes was a logical way to get closer to the music that I wanted to play.

    At one point, many years ago, I went on an obessive how-did-Django-use-his-lefthand journey for over a year. During that time I listened to nothing but Django. As I learned to play melodies and phrases that learned from recordings I noticed that the two-finger approach began to insert itself into things that I would play in other styles of music and that it began to blend itself with my use of three and four fingers.

    My big takeaway from this period was that I learned that learning to play guitar really well is about solving problems. That's what Django did. In the face of never being able to play again he rolled up his sleeves and he solved his problems.

    For me, learning to play the music that I wanted to play, in the manner in which it was played originally required me to do a lot of detective work and commit to making the changes I needed to make. After spending the time on Django's LH I then realized that there was also a RH thing going on that was going to require some serious work. I was willing to make the commitment. I never saw learning Django's technique or Charlie Christian's or George Van Eps' technique as refuting anything that I'd learned before but more an enlarging of my toolbox.

    As I've said before, do what you need to do to play the music you want to play. But as someone who has been playing for a half-century I can state without reservation that what you are doing today may not be what you want to do next year or 10 years from now.

    I believe the the best thing to be is flexible; flexible enough to realize that to be able to play what you want to play may require changing the way you've always done things.

    Regards,
    Jerome
    Last edited by monk; 03-17-2019 at 12:09 PM. Reason: Clarity and spelling

  45. #594

    User Info Menu

    Monk/Jerome good to have you participating in the Forum once again. Your posts are always constructive and insightful.

  46. #595

    User Info Menu

    Stochelo has done the 'software upgrade' I mentioned near the beginning of the thread...if you watch some of his other Vids you can see he can use his Pinky at will.

    You Guys are great for Theory - and I have learned and continue to learn ..

    But if you can't even play most of Stochelo's vocabulary and beyond - you can't teach me how to pick .
    I am learning WHAT to pick not HOW .

    But I can Play.



    So depending upon your Goals - I would do the 'software upgrade '...

    Won't matter to me . I been on this road a long long while.

  47. #596
    Quote Originally Posted by Robertkoa View Post
    Stochelo has done the 'software upgrade' I mentioned near the beginning of the thread...if you watch some of his other Vids you can see he can use his Pinky at will.

    You Guys are great for Theory - and I have learned and continue to learn ..

    But if you can't even play most of Stochelo's vocabulary and beyond - you can't teach me how to pick .
    I am learning WHAT to pick not HOW .

    But I can Play.



    So depending upon your Goals - I would do the 'software upgrade '...

    Won't matter to me . I been on this road a long long while.
    So, you spend the whole thread basically being the ONLY individual telling others what they should or should not be doing, and then your perception is that the opposite is actually occurring? Why don't you just ALLOW the people who actually WANT to discuss USING this technique the freedom to do so in peace?

    I'm probably NOT going to pursue the 3-finger thing anytime soon either, but doesn't that actually mean that it's not really OUR discussion?

  48. #597

    User Info Menu

    Matt- Your post is ridiculous - I was trying to understand and concede some possible benefits read the thread
    Stop trying to be Captain America and defend people against Robert K Scorpio the evil alternate cross picker from the dark matter universe.

    Read what I said earlier in the thread ...

    And I was never so arrogant to tell someone to leave the thread which you just did to me ..lol.

    So sure I never said they can not be 3 Fingered Players and I never said you can't be like a Captain America of the Forum either and carry a metal guitar that doubles as a shield.

    Now I did say that to play like the higher tier chops Players they will have to do the upgrade and work the pinky so it's ready - hardly a direct order or something that would hurt their fragile Psyche which you are sworn to protect.
    AND they could STILL be 3 fingered Players according to Christian's broader definition AFTER the upgrade .

    You didn't get it .And you are blinded by my confidence which is so offensive grrrrr - I get it...

    And I am not sworn to justify my thoughts or actions or right to free speech to you either - this is far more than you deserve of my time....

    Your Posts aren't even questioning my views or maybe I am incorrect ( sure a definite possibility ) ..on this Topic .

    Your posts are' why am I here commanding people to do things? and why am I on this thread .'.. it's twilight zone off Topic.
    And nothing was directed at you until now .




    Like I said to someone else -

    "Only People who like Teles ."

    "Only people who use P4 please"

    'Only GJ Players '

    No Grey Haired People

    People who use 3 Fingered Technique Only .

    I will stay away .

    I am not here to argue .

    I am here on this Post partially to put YOU in check for your arrogant exaggeration and mischaracterization of my posts .
    Look at what I wrote earlier in this thread And look at what you said above

    And telling me to leave ...

    Ridiculous .

    Leaving cuz out of time ....

    Green belts are driving Pros off the Forum gradually ....
    Last edited by Robertkoa; 04-06-2019 at 01:09 AM.

  49. #598
    Sheesh. No one is telling you to leave. You have the right to keep debating a topic that others don't seem to be interested in arguing about.

    Your "against" vote has been recorded multiple multiple times. At what point DOES it become the person who goes to the thread on "Best Pick up Configuration for Classic Tele Tone" who keeps restating over and over some variation of "You aren't listening. You just don't get it. Teles just suck". It's bad enough to shout down others with a constant opposition to the TOPIC of the OP, but when you basically accuse others of telling YOU what you should be doing re your own PLAYING?
    Too much. Never happened and it reads as delusion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Robertkoa View Post

    Green belts are driving Pros off the Forum gradually ....
    Where have you posted examples of your own amazing playing? I must have missed it?

  50. #599

    User Info Menu

    don't waste your time , didn't read your post ...no one cares ...exiting this thread...
    forever...getting too pathetic

  51. #600

    User Info Menu

    I wanted to be post #600 in a nine year old thread. Woo hoo!