-
Well gentlemen, thinking it over, I think I won't say much more on this topic. No, it's not that. Fact is, those of you whom I've had a chance to hear play, are playing at a level so much higher than mine, that I have decided I'd be best advised to listen to you guys talk this out, since whatever I might think about technique is hardly born out by my amazing chops on the guitar ;-)
For now, I've made a pot of tea and am going to drink it and enjoy the company of my new (to me) Gibson ES165. I love this guitar so much that I have to put at least 4 fingers on it, even more if only I had them!
-
02-29-2016 07:05 PM
-
So what, if it was not his point? I was not discussing his point. I was making my point. So, It was my point. It's the single important thing around.
Originally Posted by christianm77
One technique is good enough, even if only barely, the other one is not.
-
It is really extraordinary how much Pasquale's 'self comps' sound like Bud Powell's left hand tonally....
-
What was your point? That Pasquale can play what Peter plays? I can probably play what Peter plays here. I can play what Charlie Christian and Grant Green play too. They still do it better than me because of this feel thing... And plus, y'know, they came up with it. Originally Posted by Vladan
Neither Charlie nor Grant can play what Pasquale plays (well they're a bit dead, but you know what I mean.) Perhaps no one can...
Pasquale seems to have set out to play Bud Powell on the guitar. He's accomplished it too which is an extraordinary achievement. Playing Bud Powell is hard enough on the piano.
He's kind of bypassed the history of jazz guitar here. (To be fair, so did Charlie Christian, Jimmy Raney and Allan Holdsworth to some extent...)
If you mean to say 4 fingered technique is more flexible because you can go as far with it as Pasquale has, I'll accept the point. There's no way you are doing that with 3 fingers.
But, Peter isn't interested in doing that. He has a different way of playing which is more connected to the tradition of Charlie Christian, and his phrasing is very different. I'll have a look for some examples of Pasquale playing in a group, but I would think the way he phrases would be very different. That's the point.
It's not about being a virtuoso, it's about the swing of it. I don't want to say Pasquale doesn't swing though, just that the way he swings is kind of different....Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 07:23 PM.
-
Oh, you missed it? OK, I'll repeat: Originally Posted by christianm77
And I will elaborate:One technique is good enough, even if only barely, the other one is not.
Whatever is playable with 3, is so with 4. The other way around, it is not.
-
So what? This is not the debate and it never has been. Originally Posted by Vladan
I wouldn't expect to play a Bach two part invention with three fingers. That would be stupid.Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 07:43 PM.
-
Yes it would.I wouldn't expect to play a Bach two part invention with three fingers. That would be stupid.
As for the topic, I thought it was about weather it's worth switching from 4 to 3, since some of the greats played that way. My point was one thing to take in consideration when making decision.
To the concrete technique issues, many times it was repeated in this thread, 4 fingers require thumb behind the neck, while thumb over somehow is implicit use of 3 fingers, predominantly, if not exclusively.
IM(NS?)HO, It seem to be highly dependent of the line being played.
For example I have some pet lines, ...
(mind you, they are beautiful lines, so colorful, more resembling the way horns would play, or the piano, they are not machine gun guitaristic BS.
I invented them while doing my ear training away from guitar, over at my digital portable vibraphone, where I'd play upper structure triads ..., sorry, I digress, but anyway,...)
... I play my lines using pinkie, while thumb is over, or very close to the top. If I try to play those same lines with pinkie being replaced by ring, I actually have to move my thumb behind and low.
Again, those are not lines, like those Grahambop played in his clip, you'd play with 3 fingers regardless of "school" you're coming from.Last edited by Vladan; 02-29-2016 at 08:29 PM.
-
Something funny struck me just now while I was on another thread.
George Benson said this about Peter Farrell: “Peter is the genius of the fingering, and one of the most amazing guitar players nowadays and if someone wants to know anything about me, they will have to look for this guy.” George Benson
Peter had classical training as a child in Brazil. And he's the guy George Benson, an American jazz giant, calls the genius of the fingering! Our own Mick McKoy (destinytot) has taken a skype lesson with Peter. I believe online lessons will be available from the recently-announced George Benson Music Institute. (Peter will be part of the faculty there.)
Peter Farrell ? George Benson Music Institute
-
Btw, Pasquale has won an international classical guitar competition or two.
Someone should tell him he is doing things all wrong....
Last edited by targuit; 02-29-2016 at 09:40 PM.
-
Well that's no surprise, I was thinking his technique looked super classical. Originally Posted by targuit
Btw, Pasquale has won an international classical guitar competition or two.
Someone should tell him he is doing things all wrong....
Hell of a player...
-
More Pasquale. It is uncanny how much his comping sounds like a piano, don't you think? Like an upright on an early 50s bop side, to specific.
Check out the solo. Soooo pianistic, it's untrue, from the triplets to the way he fills in the chords.... Well, he sounds like Barry. Or Bud...Last edited by christianm77; 02-29-2016 at 10:22 PM.
-
For the record:
It would have been difficult for Jimmy Raney to have brought his cello training to the guitar during the late 40s and early 50s since he did not begin learning the cello until after his return to Louisville KY in 1960.
-
I'm tempted to offer an experiment. I have the Vol. 20 of the Aebersold play-a-longs, which involves Jimmy Raney improvising solos over the chord changes to standards. The solos were then transcribed and turned into a play-a-long packages. The solos are notation only, no tab, no notes at all on fingerings.
A few of us have been learning some of these solos going pretty slowly, discussing fingerings, etc.
I would love to see a mainly 3-finger handling of 64 bars of Raney's solo on "Like Someone In Love" from that set.
I know 3-finger doesn't mean totally avoiding the pinky, but I assume I ought to be able to watch a video of someone playing and say "Wow, he doesn't use his pinky very much, does he?" I think I could at least tell someone plays that solo with a lot less pinky action than I use on the same solo.
I doubt anyone would really want to give that a try, but as a hero of 3-finger playing, Raney's solos would be a great demonstration. I am working on my 3rd Raney solo, and I can't imagine playing them mainly in 3-finger technique. I'd really love to see that done.
-
Not with Jimmy, but I've done it with Charlie Christian already - didn't quite succeed in *entirely* using three fingers, but pretty close:
Here are my notes on the performance of the solo
Compare my fingerings with another - albeit impressive - positional take:
IMO she really needs to watch the bend of her left wrist - this is a real danger with thumb behind technique, and I managed to injure myself this way. A more classical posture would be advisable. It's just about OK if you aren;t attempting stretches.
I might do some stuff using three (ish) fingers as it kind of fits in with the type stuff I put up on my youtubez.
-
But that's just the point: Charlie Christian is not the fully developed bop player that Jimmy Raney was. Jimmy Raney has been held up as the master of 3 finger bop, so I'd just like to see a solo he produced specifically to teach players bebop done with a clearly recognizable 3 finger technique.
It's not a dare, just something I"d like to see. I've learned a couple of those, and I try for the easiest, most natural fingerings, and I work the pinky really hard to make those solos work. I'd love to see somebody do them substantially with 3 fingers.
I have a PDF for anyone who'd like to try.
-
I'm more likely to learn a Parker solo, as someone was daring me elsewhere to that, so I may as well amalgamate the dares haha... But Parker on the guitar is as good as Jimmy Raney, for our purposes, right? ;-) Originally Posted by lawson-stone
Are you learning the Raney stuff from notation or by ear, incidentally? I find that type of thing has a massive effect on my fingerings (probably because I'm not a great reader - I don't 'hear' phases on the page.)Last edited by christianm77; 03-01-2016 at 10:38 AM.
-
This video of Raney playing 'Billie's Bounce' shows some use of the little finger but his approach is predominantly a three-finger one. I don't think you'll get a better look at his fretting hand than this:
Last edited by David B; 03-01-2016 at 11:36 AM.
-
Something else I thought of - one of the interesting things about preparing the Charlie C solo for performance, as opposed to just getting the notes down was the level to which I had to dig into the nuances - which phrases are straight, which are more dotted, where the accents are, slides and so on. Little clues that key you into how Charlie Christian might be playing the phrase and what helps it sound the way it does. Originally Posted by lawson-stone
Because Charlie C is such an apparently 'simple player' these nuances are all important. If you don't play Charlie Christian phrases with the right rhythmic feel they sound - well boring, or even a bit clunky. This is more evident I think than in a player with a less 'simple' vocabulary. (Although as I point out in the video above people often think Charlie Christian is simpler than he is because his time is so in the pocket - Wes and Lester Young have the same quality.)
So to really understand Charlie's music, IMO, you have to pay attention to the brushstrokes.
On the other hand. If you are trying to work out exactly how Raney played his lines - a written transcription wouldn't, so to speak, give you the shape of the master's brush strokes, and therefore how the paint was applied. It's like looking at a low resolution photo of the painting...
(Apparently painters do actually do this when studying their craft - it reminds me so much of transcribing that I can't resist the analogy.)
-
To me, the interesting thing is not that he's not using his pinky....because at times he clearly is. What struck me is that his "ready position" ....kind of his default position if you will....is three fingers with the pinky kind of dangling down. He then swings it up into position to fret a note, when he does use it, and then it appears to drop back down. Originally Posted by David B
Is there a tendon or something that runs, anatomically, from the pinky to the third finger?!....and if so...does holding the four fingers together in a straight line, in a poised position (kind of like a sprinter before the start of a race) mean activating the third finger, and thereby slowing down the movement of the third finger...maybe only slightly...if these are true...maybe there is a good reason to prefer, anatomically, a primarily three-finger approach.
-
Seriously, my suggestion isn't a dare at all. More of simply an experiment. A parker solo would be just as good. Originally Posted by christianm77
I learned from notation and am not as impressed at the superiority of learning these by ear. I'm not expecting to sound like Jimmy Raney, just like Raney on guitar does not really sound like Parker on Sax or Diz on trumpet. I want to sound like ME playing bebop. And fingering is mainly about being able to play a note with enough control to impart whatever phrasing and dynamics one's own aesthetic requires.
I've transcribed by ear as well, nothing against that, but for the question of whether a person can play a solo with sufficient control to be able to articulate and phrase any way they want (including imitating Raney's if that's the goal) notation is, I think, sufficient.
But this isn't a dare or even a challenge. It was a whimsical idea that we could all really have some fun with. Fun is what it's about for me. I already have a religion, a life-love, a family, a nation, etc. to get all worked up about.
I simply could find now way at all to play any of the solos I've worked on in even a rudimentary way without a significant use of the pinky. I am not classically trained, basically self-taught on the guitar, so I'm not bound to any method. I just physically, spatially don't see how someone could play those solos without the 4th finger being a full partner on the team. I would love to see otherwise.
-
I wondered at that too. Seems a certain turning of the hand is required to make that one's "default." Originally Posted by goldenwave77
-
As a painting teacher with a degree in oil painting, I can concur--we definitely do! Originally Posted by christianm77
This post is so spot on about CC. Maybe the easiest solos to play "note-wise," but the feel is...well..I kinda think you have it or you don't. I'm not sure it can be taught. Funny how coming from a rock/blues background can help this...my guess is it drives the classically trained NUTS.
-
I always love listening to you play this stuff. It's great! Originally Posted by christianm77
-
I think some of Barney Kessel's comments on Charlie and his playing are relevant here. This is from another thread and it ends with a link to a full article; unfortunately, that link no longer leads to the article. (If it did, I would just post that.)
Barney Kessel Interview on Meeting and Jamming With Charlie ChristianIn 1940, 16-year-old Barney Kessel met and jammed with Charlie Christian, back home in Oklahoma City during a break from the Benny Goodman Sextet. Forty years later, I asked Barney if he’d be willing to talk about Charlie. Barney not only agreed, but spoke non-stop – and with great insight and enthusiasm – for nearly an hour. He covered many, many aspects of Charlie’s personality, technique, tone, recordings, and legacy.
At the outset of our conversation, Kessel revealed, “Charlie Christian’s contribution to the electric guitar was as big as Thomas Edison’s contributions and Benjamin Franklin’s contributions in terms of changing the direction of the world. He changed the guitar world. He changed it not so much as being a superb guitar player, but rather the music that he made. And anyone that would study him can see where all the other guitar players who came after him evolved, that they came from his fountainhead. He was as much a way-shower as any philosophical giant that other people have come along and patterned themselves after.”
In another passage, Kessel praised Christian’s harmonic knowledge: “He was years ahead of most of the people he was playing with in terms of the lines he was playing. They involved certain chord changes that were not existent then. If you listen to any of the blues that he played, you will hear in the line that he has spelled out harmonic changes that none of the others on the record are playing, not even the background. And yet they’re refreshing and they fit, but he’s playing more chord changes in his lines, and also interesting ones, different ones than existed at the time.”
Regarding Charlie’s tone, Kessel said, “It’s more like the velvety sound of some of the saxophone players and trombone players. As a matter of fact, many people that heard him play that didn’t know him didn’t even know that they were listening to a guitar. They didn’t know anything about it. They just were simply going to this club where he might be playing, and they’d hear the music from outside, and they didn’t know that there was such a thing as an electric guitar. They’d think it was somehow a rather slightly percussive tenor sax, maybe even someone that is slap-tonguing it a little bit.”
What set Charlie apart from his predecessors, Kessel observed, was that unlike players like George Van Eps, Allan Reuss, Dick McDonough, and Carl Kress, Christian had no background in playing banjo. Instead, Barney said, his major influence was Lester Young. “When I hear Charlie Christian, I don’t think of him as a guitar player. I think of him as a person who possessed a great amount of feeling for expressing jazz, and he happened to choose the guitar.”
Barney reveals a wealth of other info about Charlie Christian and his contemporaries, as well as astute insights in what it means to be a musician. If you’d like to see the complete interview, published for the first time in its entirety, it’s at Barney Kessel Interview: On Meeting and Jamming With Charlie Christian.
-
What I would like to see is someone take couple of bars of above Raney's solo and do it in 4 for fingers way, so we could see the difference.
When you use 3 fingers to play licks of 3 fret span, that's not really 3 finger playing, because 3 fret span is covered with those same 3 fingers in 4 finger playing, just like it is in 3 fingers playing. What I see in Raney's playing is not 3 fingers playing, because he uses 4 fingers whenever there's a need for 4 fret span. Not once I spoted him reach with his ring. For that matter, I don't remember seeing him reach with his index, or pinkie, either.
What he does is constantly going out of position and returning to it, sliding up and down into notes, but that's hardly 3 fingers play, in my world, at least, it is not.
What it is, is avoiding stretches and reaches, while insisting on slides, instead.
3 fingers play ploy is more pile of BS than it is not.
Reply With Quote
Thoughts on triplet-swing.
Today, 06:59 AM in Rhythm, Swing & Phrasing