-
I'm not finding the The George Barnes Method for Electric Guitar book on this link
Originally Posted by christianm77
-
02-28-2016 07:15 PM
-
That's because it isn't there. They only have George Barnes Guitar Styles which is a good book but is a collection of arrangements rather than a method. Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
-
bobsguitars09,
If you're looking for an inexpensive bare bones introduction to the chord shape approach to jazz guitar soloing, I'd recommend A Common Sense Approach to Improvisation for Guitar by Joe Negri. It's only 40 pages but it will give you a very basic overview.
Regards,
Jerome
-
The Herb Ellis books teach the shape system too. (Three volumes: Swing Blues; Rhythm Shapes; and All the Shapes You Are.) I don't know if Herb is classified as a three-finger player or not, but he was certainly the real jazz deal.
-
Mark, Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
You're right. Ellis' book also teach the shape system. I think of Herb as a predominately three finger player in that he, along with Kessel, Mary Osborne, Wes and damn near everyone else, belongs to the generation that was immediately influenced by Charlie Christian.
Regards,
Jerome
-
My 2 cents,
classical guitar pedagogy has far more technical requirements which necessitates the use of 4 fingers, it has hundreds of years of pedagogical material, and the results FAR surpass what would be possible with only 3 fingers (and before anyone replies with Django, please watch Yamashita play.... Anything).
Why limit the amount of fingers you use?
As far as use in the real world.
1 - many people mentioned have hands the size of freaking Bigfoot tracks. With three fingers they can cover half the neck.
2 - many lines can't be played at tempo without 4 fingers.
Use whatever finger is closest to the note you want, even if it's the pinky, which if you use a lot is as dexterous as your other fingers.
Music starts in the mind, fingers are really of little consequence in many situations. That being said, it's not reason enough to dismiss use of an entire digit.
P.S. Do piano players also not use their pinky because it's "weak"??? Sax???
-
As I said in my post upstream, there are people who come here thinking that classical guitar training trumps everything. However, we are not discussing classical guitar here. Originally Posted by vintagelove
The discussion is about jazz guitar and the people who played it that we have come to regard as the Giants and Innovators and how THEY played the instrument. The discussion isn't about Segovia, Bream, Parkening, Ghiglia, Williams, Yamashita or any other classical guitarist. That's apples and oranges.
Again as I said upstream "Make your choice". If you want to use four fingers, go for it.
But please remember that we are discussing swing and bebop guitar. The people who played it, played it the way they played it and no amount of discussion or supposition will change that fact.
-
Good thoughts there. I will say that a lot of "ear" piano players traditionally favor fingers 124 over 135 or even 125. Originally Posted by vintagelove
I worked for a classically trained pianist who owned the music store where I first learned to teach lessons. Anyway, he did spend some time looking at the way people play by ear. He always told me about the fingering thing. When day, he interrupted me in the middle of a lesson I was teaching to show me something. It was a 10-year-old . Amazing by-ear player and mostly 1-2-4 . I can remember this guy saying, "just look at that". He was just fascinated with it.
-
First of all... I didn't say anything about 'correct' technique. Or did I? And maybe missed it?If you looked at the history of jazz guitar and eliminated all the guitarists who played with a classical left hand technique, you would still have a pretty comprehensive history of melodic jazz guitar.
I think that tells us that there is a correct technique for melodic plectrum guitar, and it is not the classical guitar left hand.
If this was not the case, why would Kurt and Peter Bernstein, say, move to a more conventional classical left hand when playing chords?
The reason is because that is the appropriate technique for the chordal/polyphonic material and the 3 fingered violinistic technique is the correct technique for the melodic stuff.
Furthermore, whenever I have played material with a three fingered technique and A/B'd them the listeners have always chosen the sound of the three fingered technique. It just sounds better.
And I do not say that technique should be classical...
But I believe that learning '3-fingers technique' methodically - especially when you already play 4-fingers is making the process close to HIPP - historical playing in classics when they try to find out lute technic to sound more authentic historically...
I don't say its wrong! I just see an approach in it... and I just say if you do it you get more into historical context (mayby in some aspects more than in musical - just a little.. just a little risk).
This is actually how I would interprete Mr. Beaumont's comment
that's why I thiunk there cannot be any method... and that's why I think that any methodical approach turns it into historical research... you're either born in the brothel it and learn it naturally and then it's brothel music...Oh dear, "correct technique" for brothel music.
Or you see it in a nice sweet house in a warm chair with scores and records trying to recreate historical style of playing...
I just want to explain that I am not actually arguining with anyone here - just trying to keep the conversation
-
A lot of great points from Monk. If you're inclined to explore the fingerings used by Wes, Jimmy Rainey, et. al., great! If you're happy with your concept, there's no need to change anything. Also great! But a few arguments that get made every time this subject comes up don't really hold water.
"I don't want to copy anybody....." With very few exceptions (Stanley Jordan? Holdsworth?) everyone playing today has copied someone's fingerings. Wes and Django seem at least as worth copying as Bill Leavitt or the guy who wrote the Guitar Grimoire.
"You wouldn't teach a beginner Wes/Metheney/Bernstein's fingerings...." I suppose that's true. But you don't teach calculus before addition and subtraction, or Shakespeare before Charlotte's Web. What I would teach a beginner is that the guitar has many fingering possibilities, and with more experience, you learn more options for how to play.
And, unquestionably, a lot of great guitar music has been played with classical technique, Leavitt fingerings, or any number of other approaches. . But for people that are drawn to a certain swing to bebop type of phrasing, it's worth exploring the fingerings that make that phrasing possible.
PK
-
Hey monk,Jonah,
The earliest blues recording I've ever heard was W.C. Handy's Memphis Blues Band recorded in 1917. A brass band!
During the first two decades of the Twentieth Century, the blues was associated with female singers like Mamie Smith, Ma Rainey and Bessie Smith performing with small orchestras of brass.
The guitar did not begin to come to the forefront until Blind Lemon Jefferson and Blind Blake began recording in the late Twenties.
first of all I would like to thank you for taking your time to share your knowledge on the topic.. it's really making this converation more interesting and important for me...
I am sure you're right but again from historical poin of view...
The earliest pointed arch in Europe is probably to be found in romanesque building but nevertheless it is not characterestic of the romanesque style...
What I mean is that artistic and aesthetical qualities do not necessary directly refer to historical evidence... though of course I would not exclude neither.
That's why I still have some points in question... beyond the historical data and accuracy I have some feel of style (yes very personal but still based on quite long and integral experience).
There are lots of different blues styles - I know.. no expert in it. But - let it be a generalization - I still see a difference in blues rooted - say - in 'folk tradition' - mostly vocal and usually backed by guitar and harp.
And blues in proffessional music - whch to W.C.Handy is
I heard some Lomax tapes - I guess it was made in prisons in the South in 30s.. it was mostly only vocals sometimes harp... no guitar but they had no guitar probably... but I would not have been surprised if I had heard guitar there... but brass band or W.C. Handy would have been more strange...
I am sure if we get in more details in teh period we can find the most unexpected (especially for me) forms and ways this music existed... but still there are some stylistic differences that obviously still exist in some forms now...
Modern professional blues tradition still has that characterestic folk feature it had in early days and records...
And modern jazz blues still has the same quality of professional music W.C. Handy records had...
Since you really know the history better I wonder what was the origin of blues guitar. You noted
But where did they come from with their guitars? How did guitar get into blues?The guitar did not begin to come to the forefront until Blind Lemon Jefferson and Blind Blake began recording in the late Twenties.
Thank you
-
I'm not really interested in getting into a discussion of this because I am unlikely to change my mind. To my mind the matter is really very clear.
But plenty of people play great with 4 fingers too.
BTW as mentioned above you don't need to use only 3 fingers even, the change is more in the posture of the left hand, in terms of not making all 4 fingers equal in the way that they are in classical technique and whether or not you favour stretches or shifts.
I will say that this is not something I came up with to argue on the web, it's something I have thought about for 20 years.
Here is an article by Miles Okazaki that talks about the three fingered thing.
Stompin' at Minton's(by Miles Okazaki) - Do The Math
Also remember the OT was someone asking for advice about playing three fingered.Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 06:27 AM.
-
Well TBH, it's a conversation that's been had many times Originally Posted by Jonah
4 finger polyphonic fingerstyle guitar playing is a pretty unusual thing. I don't know how many professional classical guitarists the market supports but I'm guessing not many. It's that which is a historical style of playing.
Most paid guitar playing work seems to be ensemble based plectrum guitar with lots of left hand muting. People might be able to do this with 4 fingered technique, but as a player of both approaches I find myself switching to thumb over for rhythm guitar. So much easier.
For me, jazz guitar comes from the same well spring as other popular guitar styles. To import ideas from classical guitar can be useful for some things (solo guitar, difficult chords etc) but it's not the root of the tree.
I am also profoundly uncomfortable with idea of saying someone like Wes Montgomery had bad technique. Really? i thought that for years until I realised I was looking at his playing through the filters of my 'education.'
I know both techniques well and use both in my playing. I would be interested to know how many who advocate 4 fingered playing have tried both approaches?Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 06:54 AM.
-
I am not really sure what you're talking about...4 finger polyphonic fingerstyle guitar playing is a pretty unusual thing. I don't know how many professional classical guitarists the market supports but I'm guessing not many. It's that which is a historical style of playing.
As a kid and in my teens I spent time mostly in classical music worls - and a great part of it was guitar - I played all Bach music available for guitar, I did transcritions and all... before I finally got more interest im piano, orchestral music and composition..
But I never heard somebody say something about 4 finger plyphonic technique and what the market supports about it...
Can you tell me what you mean?
-
First time I heard him I was 13, first time I saw him playing I was about 30 I think)))I am also profoundly uncomfortable with idea of saying someone like Wes Montgomery had bad technique. Really? i thought that for years until I realised I was looking at his playing through the filters of my 'education.'
So I had no idea about his technique)))
But remember that as a kid when I saw rock guys playing I had this kind of academical snobish feel... that these guys do not know how to do it properly....
Partly it has basis.. classical study gives very subtle feel of nuances, attack, dinamics... popular guitar styles are much more kitchy in concern of these aspects - so to classical ear they can sound ... raw
If I understand you correctly - I do both....I know both techniques well and use both in my playing. I would be interested to know how many who advocate 4 fingered playing have tried both approaches?
Even now - it happend so that the only acoustic I have now is classical solid -top (German construction - so the neck is pretty big, bigger than in Spanish)... I want to get steel strings flattop... maybe later
And at the same time I like plectrum playing and play a lot on electric archtop...
Sometimes I use pick on nylons but the sound is different... and I do not like it
But I'd say that I do not use classical technique in left hand now even on classical guitar... not strictly.
I think I will try to make picks of vids tonight - just to show how my hadn position changesLast edited by Jonah; 02-29-2016 at 07:05 AM.
-
Nice post Paul.
This so, so much. Originally Posted by paulkogut
I wouldn't teach a beginner to play with their thumb over, but I do sometimes wonder why not. (Convention, exams, the advantage of having a clear framework when you have 20 students in a day yadda yadda.)"You wouldn't teach a beginner Wes/Metheney/Bernstein's fingerings...." I suppose that's true. But you don't teach calculus before addition and subtraction, or Shakespeare before Charlotte's Web. What I would teach a beginner is that the guitar has many fingering possibilities, and with more experience, you learn more options for how to play.
And, unquestionably, a lot of great guitar music has been played with classical technique, Leavitt fingerings, or any number of other approaches. . But for people that are drawn to a certain swing to bebop type of phrasing, it's worth exploring the fingerings that make that phrasing possible.
PK
You need to have a clear right and wrong because otherwise the student gets very confused. You have to teach a simplification. (I do sometimes wonder if people take this attitude over into adult life...)
For the kids doing rock, classical technique is a disadvantage for bending etc. I suppose it's good to start with classical technique to get the basic chords nice and clear....
Most of my jazz students have been playing a while. The thumb over guys I get to hang onto the their technique, the classical guys carry on doing theirs.Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 07:05 AM.
-
Ah yes, the Sco thing. Would be interesting to see. Originally Posted by Jonah
Your sense of aesthetics are a completely great reason to aim your approach in a certain direction.
I don't like pick on nylon's either - sounds like the notes are being pecked.
-
Classical guitar left hand (like lute left hand) is designed to allow the required flexibility to finger music in several moving parts as well as allowing chord to ring clearly at all times. It does this by: Originally Posted by Jonah
- Allowing healthy stretches of the hand. (Stretches that are only healthy if the wrist is straight, necessitating a steeper angle of the instrument and the footstool etc.)
- Allowing more equality between the digits which allows flexibility in fingering melodies - important if another finger is holding down a bass note, for instance.
- Extracting as much sustain, clarity and sound as possible from every note and chord.
That's the main advantages it gives as far as I can see.... There may be others.
When I need to move to a thumb behind classical style playing position, it is invariably because I am playing some chords or maybe something polyphonic (I don't do that very much.)
If you are playing purely melodically on the other hand, you don't need to stretch and there is no requirement to finger melodies with any fingers other than the ones that are the strongest.
In terms of music, if you accept that the principle advantage of a thumb behind four fingered right hand technique is to facilitate the playing of music in parts and rich, complex, clean chords, then what music requires this facility?
Solo music largely, perhaps some duo/trio stuff. Whether jazz or classical or perhaps some sort of modern folk/acoustic.
Most of the playing work in popular music from the 1920s to today, is ensemble work, normally rhythm guitar with some lead stuff from time to time. Rhythm guitar or single notes... The sound needs to be controlled rhythmically necessitating some sort of left hand muting approach. Amplification adds to this. Not much polyphony in any case. Needless to say the market for pop is much bigger than classical, jazz etc, so that is kind of the 'mainstream' way to play the guitar....
Those who came to a more 'classical' style of jazz guitar such as George Van Eps, did so from a personal passion and motivation to push the instrument as a harmonic vehicle.Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 07:29 AM.
-
An interesting article on diagonal vs CAGED playing
Jazz Guitar Scales: How to Play Diagonal Scales
-
BTW - Jonah I managed to miss your point about questioning not the validity of a three fingered approach but more whether it is necessary to teach it in a systematic way. That's a very interesting point, and I'll have a think about that. Cheers!
-
I don't get this any more, at all.
Now, 3 fingers playing is equal to having your thumb over the neck? No sh*t? Like we are all blind and do not see people using pinkies while having thumbs over?
Now, it is playing with 4, but using pinkie a bit less? Really? Show me one player who uses pinkie as much as other fingers? I mean, is it even possible? Do not think so.
Maybe there are some who will fall for it, maybe there are some who will deliberately accept instruction to cripple them selves in a quest for the sound and feel of some great players of a yesteryear, who would not be in the 1st league of today players by a long shot?
What in the world classical polyphonic playing has to do with Jazz, Blues, Rock and other styles of POP? Nothing! The issue is and always have been in domain of single line playing in "modern" POP styles, like Jazz, Blues, Rock ... In any style, playing with 3 fingers is limiting and not really smart thing to do. Not to mention how ugly it is for the eyes. That is real 3 finger playing, when player insist on stretching so to use ring finger where it's natural and easy to use pinkie.
For certain figures, types of lines, some of you seem to love so much for whatever the reason, 3 fingers are the norm, that's how they are supposed to be played. In such cases you'd be fool to use your pinkie. But that is not "playing with 3 fingers" style, or method.
I will give one example, Dom7 arp, 2nd finger root on 6th, you could paly it (in finger numbers):
A:
6.: 2
5.: 1 - 4
4.: 2 - 4
3.: 3
2.: 2
1.: 1 - 2
Which is not exactly efficient way to play it, strictly positional.
Or you could play it:
B:
6.: 2
5.: 1 - 4, or3, whichever you find easier
4.: 1 -3
3.: 2
2.: 1 - 4
1.: 1
Which is logical, easy, natural and efficient, while being "4 fingers playing".
If you.d change B, so to play:
2.: 1 - 3,
only then it would be "3 fingers playing" and it would be the wrong way, by all imaginable means of reasoning.
Also, if I may add, this will be my last "smart and reasonable, helping post", in this and any other discussion.
From now on it will all be exclusively marketing and jokes, one way or another.Last edited by Vladan; 02-29-2016 at 07:52 AM.
-
Sensible chap. Wailing and tooth gnashing will result unless you (like me) have an infinite appetite for arguing the toss about absolutely anything... Originally Posted by Vladan
-
I don't really understand what all the fuss is about. I learned classical guitar first, so my thumb was behind the neck and I used all 4 fingers.
Then I became a teenager and discovered rock and wanted to play like Hendrix. So I got an electric guitar, a plectrum and an amplifier, I started putting my thumb over the neck, using 3 fingers, playing blues licks, bending strings etc. It was obvious to me that you had to do these things in order to play that style, so I did them. Of course it took a while to adapt from my 'classical' technique, but I don't recall it being overly difficult to make the change.
Then I grew up and discovered jazz, and realised that elements of both these approaches had their place. So playing a complex bop head like Donna Lee, or copping some Jimmy Raney licks, I would generally use all 4 fingers (and my thumb would probably creep back behind the neck a bit). But playing some Wes Montgomery or Kenny Burrell phrases, I could tell that these guys were using 3 fingers a lot and putting more energy in from the left hand, i.e. slurring notes, bluesy phrasing etc. So I would tend to revert a little to my 'rock' left hand to get this.
Bear in mind, all this time I was still playing some classical guitar, so that 'pure' technique didn't go away either.
Now I just tend to use whatever is required by the context, without even thinking about it. So I guess I'm switching constantly between the '3 fingers' approach and the '4 fingers' approach during a solo. To be honest I'm not even aware of it.
Maybe I'm just a bit odd in that I don't think about any of this stuff very much!
-
To be honest I envy those who can thumbover and retain all their 4 fingers spread over 5 frets like Tal can achieve
My dad is from the late 50s early 60s and used his thumb quite often, he never was really a jazz a player but was from that generation and was a very good comper for pop, wedding and social dance club.
Unfortunately I broke my left thumb in a tire factory 10 years ago and could never heal properly; I lost flexibility to properly execute thumbover but I am still trying too. I learned to play in the early 90s pretty much using the CAGED way and can see why I have tendency to phrase in a specific way.
Not sure I would switch completely to the 3 fingers centric diagonal fully, but can clearly see its potential and to integrate part of it.
The idea of a technique in my opinion is to help one achieve a result and hopefully in the most effective way.
It is a humility lesson to accept to change things we are already comfortable doing in another way.
-
Kind of my feeling about it really. I too learned classical, then blues/rock, then jazz. Originally Posted by grahambop
Some people like there to be a right and wrong answer to things... I'm sure if you sat down and played some Dowland or something, you would do so with perfectly appropriate left hand technique.
I think some classical teachers can be a bit 'never do anything that is not this technique' in the fear that it might 'ruin' their students technique. Maybe understandable if the student in question has a potential career as a concert guitarist, but even then I would question this type of stance.
Singing teachers can be like that - 'don't sing jazz if you sing classical etc.' How boring, music in little boxes. Some people like it that way though, makes them happy.
Reply With Quote
Kalamazoo award $17,000.00 pickup Rockford mi....
Yesterday, 06:24 PM in Getting Started