The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 6 of 24 FirstFirst ... 4567816 ... LastLast
Posts 126 to 150 of 597
  1. #126

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I'm not finding the The George Barnes Method for Electric Guitar book on this link

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #127

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
    I'm not finding the The George Barnes Method for Electric Guitar book on this link
    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.

  4. #128

    User Info Menu

    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

  5. #129

    User Info Menu

    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.

  6. #130

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    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,
    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

  7. #131

    User Info Menu

    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???

  8. #132

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by vintagelove
    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.
    Hand size has nothing to do with it.
    2 - many lines can't be played at tempo without 4 fingers.
    Tell that to Wes, Martino, Reinhardt, Raney et al.
    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.
    Reinhardt! Yeah, I know you said not to but, if true, this statement kind of invalidates your argument to the contrary.
    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.

    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.

  9. #133
    Quote Originally Posted by vintagelove
    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???
    Good thoughts there. I will say that a lot of "ear" piano players traditionally favor fingers 124 over 135 or even 125.

    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.

  10. #134

    User Info Menu

    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.
    First of all... I didn't say anything about 'correct' technique. Or did I? And maybe missed it?

    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

    Oh dear, "correct technique" for brothel music.
    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...

    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

  11. #135

    User Info Menu

    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

  12. #136

    User Info Menu

    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.
    Hey monk,

    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

    The guitar did not begin to come to the forefront until Blind Lemon Jefferson and Blind Blake began recording in the late Twenties.
    But where did they come from with their guitars? How did guitar get into blues?

    Thank you

  13. #137

    User Info Menu

    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.

  14. #138

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    First of all... I didn't say anything about 'correct' technique. Or did I? And maybe missed it?

    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...

    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
    Well TBH, it's a conversation that's been had many times

    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.

  15. #139

    User Info Menu

    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.
    I am not really sure what you're talking about...

    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?

  16. #140

    User Info Menu

    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.'
    First time I heard him I was 13, first time I saw him playing I was about 30 I think)))
    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



    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?
    If I understand you correctly - I do both....

    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 changes
    Last edited by Jonah; 02-29-2016 at 07:05 AM.

  17. #141

    User Info Menu

    Nice post Paul.

    Quote Originally Posted by paulkogut
    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.
    This so, so much.

    "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
    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 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.

  18. #142

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    First time I heard him I was 13, first time I saw him playing I was about 30 I think)))
    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....

    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 changes
    Ah yes, the Sco thing. Would be interesting to see.

    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.

  19. #143

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonah
    I am not really sure what you're talking about...

    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?
    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:

    - 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.

  20. #144

    User Info Menu

    An interesting article on diagonal vs CAGED playing
    Jazz Guitar Scales: How to Play Diagonal Scales

  21. #145

    User Info Menu

    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!

  22. #146

    User Info Menu

    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.

  23. #147

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Also, if I may add, this will be my last "smart and reasonable, helping post", in this and any other discussion.
    Sensible chap. Wailing and tooth gnashing will result unless you (like me) have an infinite appetite for arguing the toss about absolutely anything...

  24. #148

    User Info Menu

    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!

  25. #149

    User Info Menu

    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.

  26. #150

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by grahambop
    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!
    Kind of my feeling about it really. I too learned classical, then blues/rock, then jazz.

    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.