What do you guys work on when working technique?

[pauln]

Looks like a lot of guitarists formally break the whole thing down into components (rhythm, fingering, picking) and work on those components independently as exercises in order to develop a "global" facility or technique that will be applied to specific instances (songs).

The closest I came to something sort of like that was in the beginning, but only as a verbal conversation with my hands, in the form of three rules.

1) Rhythm is a given
Within a musical request, the rhythm is intrinsic to what it sounds like

2) Left hand uses four fingers
I only send musical requests to the left hand in the form of what it sounds like. The left hands's role is to select a fingering solution to execute the request, within the constraint of always using four fingers, all styles, tempos, positions, no exceptions.

3) Right hand is on his own
The right hand figures out how to move based on the left hand's fingering solution (the part of it that indicates sounded pitches and string changes, which includes the rhythm).

So I telepathically send an aural image of the sound I want to hear to my left hand, which converts that to a fingering solution of which a part provides the right hand's picking solution, the rhythm intrinsic.

My right hand technique spontaneously developed Chuck Wayne / efficiency picking and I have never given my right hand a conscious thought about what it does.

My left hand uses the fourth finger for about half of the pitches I play, has a pseudo-classical form, and I never think about positions or fingerings. I can play cleanly much faster than would ever be appropriate for performance.

Both hands have figured out to damp all unsounded strings, both chords and melody lines - if I "freeze" my hands while playing anything, I can verify that only the strings to be sounded are undamped, so this has been learned as part of the left hand's fingering solution shared with the right hand. I didn't know they did this until someone pointed it out.

I think technique needs to be well up for performance, but the real gap in most's playing is more the hand in hand relationship between musical judgement and listening. I think the best "exercise" for developing both the ear and musical judgement is to just learn songs. Everything that you need to know how to play is inside all of the songs you want to perform!

[jazznylon]

Looks like a lot of guitarists formally break the whole thing down into components (rhythm, fingering, picking) and work on those components independently as exercises in order to develop a "global" facility or technique that will be applied to specific instances (songs).

The closest I came to something sort of like that was in the beginning, but only as a verbal conversation with my hands, in the form of three rules.

1) Rhythm is a given
Within a musical request, the rhythm is intrinsic to what it sounds like

2) Left hand uses four fingers
I only send musical requests to the left hand in the form of what it sounds like. The left hands's role is to select a fingering solution to execute the request, within the constraint of always using four fingers, all styles, tempos, positions, no exceptions.

3) Right hand is on his own
The right hand figures out how to move based on the left hand's fingering solution (the part of it that indicates sounded pitches and string changes, which includes the rhythm).

So I telepathically send an aural image of the sound I want to hear to my left hand, which converts that to a fingering solution of which a part provides the right hand's picking solution, the rhythm intrinsic.

My right hand technique spontaneously developed Chuck Wayne / efficiency picking and I have never given my right hand a conscious thought about what it does.

My left hand uses the fourth finger for about half of the pitches I play, has a pseudo-classical form, and I never think about positions or fingerings. I can play cleanly much faster than would ever be appropriate for performance.

Both hands have figured out to damp all unsounded strings, both chords and melody lines - if I "freeze" my hands while playing anything, I can verify that only the strings to be sounded are undamped, so this has been learned as part of the left hand's fingering solution shared with the right hand. I didn't know they did this until someone pointed it out.

I think technique needs to be well up for performance, but the real gap in most's playing is more the hand in hand relationship between musical judgement and listening. I think the best "exercise" for developing both the ear and musical judgement is to just learn songs. Everything that you need to know how to play is inside all of the songs you want to perform!

How many songs did you learn? In my case I probably learned around 100 by ear but forgotten most of them, unless I listen again

[pauln]

How many songs did you learn? In my case I probably learned around 100 by ear but forgotten most of them, unless I listen again

I've played in over a dozen bands (about 12K hours of stage performance), most weren't jazz. I have always learned everything by ear, probably about 600 set songs.
But for twelve years I was the guitarist in the host band for an open mic where I played songs I'd never heard before with musicians I'd just met. That was a real ear builder and musical judgement developer like nothing I'd done before, was little scary at first, but then came confidence, then fearlessness in the face of the total unknown. I highly recommend it to anyone if they have the opportunity.

[jazznylon]

I've played in over a dozen bands (about 12K hours of stage performance), most weren't jazz. I have always learned everything by ear, probably about 600 set songs.
But for twelve years I was the guitarist in the host band for an open mic where I played songs I'd never heard before with musicians I'd just met. That was a real ear builder and musical judgement developer like nothing I'd done before, was little scary at first, but then came confidence, then fearlessness in the face of the total unknown. I highly recommend it to anyone if they have the opportunity.

Wow thats really cool. I wish I had that kind of experience. For simpler songs I can get by with one listen but for more complicated songs I had to do repeated listening for each phrase. I remember I was in a jazz ensemble back when I was first starting out playing, however I really sucked as I had no idea what I was doing. Not like it mattered much anyways since I just brought my classical guitar without an amp as nobody can hear me. But anyways I have a feeling if I were to go back I would be more prepared in general but the group disbanded a while ago so yeah

[pamosmusic]

So when you listen to a simpler song once, what do you know about it?

What constitutes “knowing” the song?

[jazznylon]

So when you listen to a simpler song once, what do you know about it?

What constitutes “knowing” the song?

I just learn the melody, sometimes I even play the chords by ear and improvise.

Edit: Though learning chords by ear takes multiple listens for me, or I just rely on the melody notes to play chords alongside it using theory, like chord melody

[pamosmusic]

I just learn the melody, sometimes I even play the chords by ear and improvise.

Edit: Though learning chords by ear takes multiple listens for me

The question isn’t how many tunes you’ve learned before, it’s how many do you know right now. I don’t even want to say how many times I’ve sat down to relearn Come Rain or Come Shine. People spend days and weeks in a tune they might keep returning to for years.

And I don’t think you can say you’ve learned a tune if you don’t know the changes.

Honestly, it’s a practical matter too:

These scales you’re learning have applications to harmony. They don’t tell you much at all if they aren’t interpreted relative to the tunes changes.

It seems like you’re really focused on accumulating vast quantities of knowledge but aren’t super focused on depth. I think a lot of musicians have found themselves in similar situations. I certainly have. Going out a limb, I’d wager every single one would say in hindsight that learning a few things (two tunes, one scale, a chorus of a solo) in depth paid off in ways they couldn’t account for and was worth way more than trying to tackle everything all at once.

[jazznylon]

The question isn’t how many tunes you’ve learned before, it’s how many do you know right now. I don’t even want to say how many times I’ve sat down to relearn Come Rain or Come Shine. People spend days and weeks in a tune they might keep returning to for years.

And I don’t think you can say you’ve learned a tune if you don’t know the changes.

Honestly, it’s a practical matter too:

These scales you’re learning have applications to harmony. They don’t tell you much at all if they aren’t interpreted relative to the tunes changes.

It seems like you’re really focused on accumulating vast quantities of knowledge but aren’t super focused on depth. I think a lot of musicians have found themselves in similar situations. I certainly have. Going out a limb, I’d wager every single one would say in hindsight that learning a few things (two tunes, one scale, a chorus of a solo) in depth paid off in ways they couldn’t account for and was worth way more than trying to tackle everything all at once.

The changes huh? I definitedly have trouble memorizing the changes, so I personally thought that was a natural thing and forego learning the changes, at least for the time being. So yeah I'm learning vast amounts of melody by ear to build some sort of intuitive sense of creating melodic lines while improv. I figured the more melodies I learned this way the easier it gets. I guess I can go more in depth when learning tunes from now on. But how much more in depth?

[pamosmusic]

The changes huh? I definitedly have trouble memorizing the changes, so I personally thought that was a natural thing and forego learning the changes, at least for the time being. So yeah I'm learning vast amounts of melody by ear to build some sort of intuitive sense of creating melodic lines while improv. I figured the more melodies I learned this way the easier it gets. I guess I can go more in depth when learning tunes from now on. But how much more in depth?

Man. Not really sure what to say on this one. As deep as you want to go, I guess.

There are articles on this website.

Theres the practical standards threads here, which are sometimes more interesting than other times.

Christian just posted this:

[video] - Decoding standards - course on common chord modules in standards

Dormant forum member Jordan Klemons has a course that’s really good.

Lots of resources out there.

To be super blunt: anyone telling you to spend 90% of your time on technique before you start trying to learn the changes to a simple standard is unequivocally wrong. Get in there and learn a tune. You will enjoy it. It is fun.

[jazznylon]

Ah okay thanks for the suggestions! I'll see what I can do from now on, hopefully things will turn out well

[pamosmusic]

The stakes are very low. Spend some time learning a tune. If you can play it in a way that a listener understands it as a tune, then things have turned out well.

[jazznylon]

The stakes are very low. Spend some time learning a tune. If you can play it in a way that a listener understands it as a tune, then things have turned out well.

Good advice. Thank you

[pauln]

You could think of knowing a song as a hierarchy, like this from the top down...

Sonata Form
A tune may be considered a movement within the set where the tune (in Jazz) typically follows the Sonata Form structure of exposition, development, and recapitulation. This just means the tunes generally will play the head, then solos of variation and improvisation (maybe some deconstruction), finishing with a return to the head. Some songs may have special intros, interludes, bridges, cadenzas, endings...

Song Form
This is the serial sequence shape of the song's primary part structures arraigned as AABA, ABAB, ABAC, AAAA, or "through composed" (one big long "A" like Stella By Starlight). This means knowing where you are in the song. It is common in AABA and ABAC for the two "A"s to be distinguished with slightly different endings:
For AABA - one sounds like "repeat" and the second sounds like "go to B" - this is formally indicated as ending 1 and ending 2. For ABAC - one sounds like "go to B" and the second sounds like "go to C" - these endings may be informal and signaled by distinct sounds from the drums or someone else.

Song Harmony
This is the serial sequence of "chords" in a schematic view (the tune may not have been composed as chords per se, but the chord schema images the harmony). Chord charts usually "de-rate" the song harmony, showing chord types with less extensions and alterations than one might usually apply, offering a basic view leaving the details to the musician.
The redundancy of song harmony in like song form parts is usually not perfect, so watch for where "A" the first time through is not the same as "A" the second time through (not just a difference in the endings). The "A" part after the "B" part is often not only different from either the preceding "A"s, but often a little longer as if to include a resolving turnaround or other "finishing up" feature.
The song harmony may be known as the song's progression chord types for a particular key, or more generally and abstractly as chords symbolized in the Roman numeral system applicable to any key.

Song Melody
Perhaps the old tunes tended to have composed vocal melodies, often the first thing composed, with the harmony developed after to enhance it. Maybe modern tunes were composed harmony first, as a progression sequence, and the melody applied after. Maybe part of the reason for this was that playing Jazz through your little radio in the old days one could really only hear the vocal lines and not so much the harmony. The electric bass guitar was introduced in the 50s which, in combination with HiFi, may have been a main driver in the change to composing harmony first - making the modern melodies seem to be more angular (like BeBop). Or maybe not.

Song Lyrics
Some find knowing the lyrics helpful in knowing the melody, hearing the harmony, locating their place in the song form... some may only know a few phrases of the lyrics to a few songs (the "important" moments of the tunes) as reminders of how they might want to express the mood there.

So, if you...

anticipate the song will manifest Sonata form
know the ABCs of the song's form
know the song's harmony schema
know the song's melody
maybe know the song's lyrics

...do you know the song yet?

I continue to be fascinated by the methods of others (especially those better than me).

[jazznylon]

You could think of knowing a song as a hierarchy, like this from the top down...

Sonata Form
A tune may be considered a movement within the set where the tune (in Jazz) typically follows the Sonata Form structure of exposition, development, and recapitulation. This just means the tunes generally will play the head, then solos of variation and improvisation (maybe some deconstruction), finishing with a return to the head. Some songs may have special intros, interludes, bridges, cadenzas, endings...

Song Form
This is the serial sequence shape of the song's primary part structures arraigned as AABA, ABAB, ABAC, AAAA, or "through composed" (one big long "A" like Stella By Starlight). This means knowing where you are in the song. It is common in AABA and ABAC for the two "A"s to be distinguished with slightly different endings:
For AABA - one sounds like "repeat" and the second sounds like "go to B" - this is formally indicated as ending 1 and ending 2. For ABAC - one sounds like "go to B" and the second sounds like "go to C" - these endings may be informal and signaled by distinct sounds from the drums or someone else.

Song Harmony
This is the serial sequence of "chords" in a schematic view (the tune may not have been composed as chords per se, but the chord schema images the harmony). Chord charts usually "de-rate" the song harmony, showing chord types with less extensions and alterations than one might usually apply, offering a basic view leaving the details to the musician.
The redundancy of song harmony in like song form parts is usually not perfect, so watch for where "A" the first time through is not the same as "A" the second time through (not just a difference in the endings). The "A" part after the "B" part is often not only different from either the preceding "A"s, but often a little longer as if to include a resolving turnaround or other "finishing up" feature.
The song harmony may be known as the song's progression chord types for a particular key, or more generally and abstractly as chords symbolized in the Roman numeral system applicable to any key.

Song Melody
Perhaps the old tunes tended to have composed vocal melodies, often the first thing composed, with the harmony developed after to enhance it. Maybe modern tunes were composed harmony first, as a progression sequence, and the melody applied after. Maybe part of the reason for this was that playing Jazz through your little radio in the old days one could really only hear the vocal lines and not so much the harmony. The electric bass guitar was introduced in the 50s which, in combination with HiFi, may have been a main driver in the change to composing harmony first - making the modern melodies seem to be more angular (like BeBop). Or maybe not.

Song Lyrics
Some find knowing the lyrics helpful in knowing the melody, hearing the harmony, locating their place in the song form... some may only know a few phrases of the lyrics to a few songs (the "important" moments of the tunes) as reminders of how they might want to express the mood there.

So, if you...

anticipate the song will manifest Sonata form
know the ABCs of the song's form
know the song's harmony schema
know the song's melody
maybe know the song's lyrics

...do you know the song yet?

I continue to be fascinated by the methods of others (especially those better than me).

Thank you for the insightful comment. I've started over and went back to play 26-2 and try to figure out the changes. So many chords but thankfully there is some repetition due to the AABA form. I've managed to play the chords in tempo but its been real difficult. Also played the head but strictly alternate right hand fingers, it was very challenging at first since I have to slow way down but I sorta got the hang of it and played it in tempo later on. Now onto the memorizing changes part... I'm relying on playing through the chord tones first, then scales mostly up to the fourth since theres many chords in a short time frame. Then try to do it in tempo, maybe then I'll learn the changes finally since I've been at this for a while

[pamosmusic]

I feel it is incumbent upon me to mention that 26-2 is perhaps one of a handful of the most difficult tunes you could’ve chosen to start with.

The old chestnuts are old chestnuts because they’re good. Autumn Leaves, Another You, Freddie Freeloader, Blue Bossa.

[jazznylon]

I feel it is incumbent upon me to mention that 26-2 is perhaps one of a handful of the most difficult tunes you could’ve chosen to start with.

The old chestnuts are old chestnuts because they’re good. Autumn Leaves, Another You, Freddie Freeloader, Blue Bossa.

Yeah you're right. I tried to play eight note arpeggios for each chord but technically its way beyond me at the moment as its hard to keep up with so many chords. Maybe I should go for a blues first, straight no chaser for example

[pamosmusic]

Can’t go wrong with a blues.

[jazznylon]

So uh, how often do you guys revise songs? I'm up to my 18th song but I already forgotten some of the chord changes its just too many chords to keep track of in totality. What I do is play arpeggios and scales for each chord and then I try to memorize and play the chords
without looking at the chord chart. Once I'm able to do that I move on to the next song (of course I also improvise and learn the melody and stuff). I guess I just don't understand people who learn 1000 songs.. How?! Lol

[James W]

So uh, how often do you guys revise songs? I'm up to my 18th song but I already forgotten some of the chord changes its just too many chords to keep track of in totality. What I do is play arpeggios and scales for each chord and then I try to memorize and play the chords
without looking at the chord chart. Once I'm able to do that I move on to the next song (of course I also improvise and learn the melody and stuff). I guess I just don't understand people who learn 1000 songs.. How?! Lol

Figure out a way of what I believe is called 'chunking' - that is, a way of grouping together the changes that comprise a song, conceiving of them in an abbreviated fashion if that makes sense. This might be done in terms of songs' key centres, then you can think of the particular kinks and idiosyncrasies of a song, if they have them... (speaking as a person who is yet to learn that many songs!)...

[pamosmusic]

So uh, how often do you guys revise songs? I'm up to my 18th song but I already forgotten some of the chord changes its just too many chords to keep track of in totality. What I do is play arpeggios and scales for each chord and then I try to memorize and play the chords
without looking at the chord chart. Once I'm able to do that I move on to the next song (of course I also improvise and learn the melody and stuff). I guess I just don't understand people who learn 1000 songs.. How?! Lol

Amazing.

Boss. You have to slow down. Play Straight No Chaser for a week. Learn the melody in a bunch of positions. Learn it on pairs of strings. Play it in different keys. Learn the changes in shell voicings. Learn to play guide tone lines through the changes. Play those Barry harris scales you were mentioning. Improvise over it using just triads. Improvise over it using just scales. Add chromatic approach notes to either of those things. Do those things in different positions. Do those things on two or three strings of a single position. Do all the stuff listed here in two or three other keys.

It should take you a week of real practice to learn a reasonably simple tune. It should take revisiting it a few times before you’re really in it.

How do people learn 1000 tunes?

1. Almost no one does. I know about a hundred and that’s more than most people I know, and about 25 of those need constant revisiting, so I probably shouldn’t even say I know them. I had some friends in New York who had more like two hundred. Christian and djg seem like they know a ton of tunes but that might be closer to two hundred? Maybe three? Vanishingly few people know more than that—maybe a few dozen in the world—and they’re the people we’re all transcribing and listening to on records and paying $40 to go see at Birdland.

2. It’s basic math. If it takes you a week to learn a pretty simple tune, it should take 7000 days to learn 1000 simple tunes. Considering my “week per tune” estimate is pretty crude, that you’d need to be revisiting a lot of them, and that a lot of them wouldn’t be simple, we’re probably talking about a lot more time than that. But 7000 days is a little shy of twenty years. That seems about right to me. Twenty years of focused practice every single day to learn a truly huge number of tunes. Probably a good deal more.

The great news: ten or fifteen well-chosen tunes will get you through a jam session in most places. Fifty get you through a jam session almost anywhere. A hundred and you probably never need a real book again.

Slow. Down.

[jazznylon]

Figure out a way of what I believe is called 'chunking' - that is, a way of grouping together the changes that comprise a song, conceiving of them in an abbreviated fashion if that makes sense. This might be done in terms of songs' key centres, then you can think of the particular kinks and idiosyncrasies of a song, if they have them... (speaking as a person who is yet to learn that many songs!)...

Hmmm I see.. I do recognize some patterns (lots of ii-V's for instance and playing the same chord again but changing the chord type possibly starting another ii-V). But yeah, I guess I have to be more patient when it comes to this kind of stuff.. thanks for the help though!

[pamosmusic]

Figure out a way of what I believe is called 'chunking' - that is, a way of grouping together the changes that comprise a song, conceiving of them in an abbreviated fashion if that makes sense. This might be done in terms of songs' key centres, then you can think of the particular kinks and idiosyncrasies of a song, if they have them... (speaking as a person who is yet to learn that many songs!)...

This is also good. Those videos Christian posted (referenced above) are a great and really substantive way of doing this.

[James W]

Hmmm I see.. I do recognize some patterns (lots of ii-V's for instance and playing the same chord again but changing the chord type possibly starting another ii-V). But yeah, I guess I have to be more patient when it comes to this kind of stuff.. thanks for the help though!

At an early stage I would value quality over quantity. Learn thoroughly some basic songs that appeal to you ...

[Christian Miller]

Nah, quantity every time. Learn a ton of stuff. You'll have to relearn all the early stuff anyway.

[pamosmusic]

Nah, quantity every time. Learn a ton of stuff. You'll have to relearn all the early stuff anyway.

You’re a sociopath.