The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Posts 26 to 50 of 76
  1. #26

    User Info Menu

    I agree totally that 'So What' type tunes are are best reduced to a modal analysis. Many times I have told students to play in the key of G major over 'So What' in A dorian. Not only has this helped students see how modes work, but it also illustrates how unimportant they can be.

    I absolutely LOVE music theory, but if I am playing from A to A with one sharp, I still call it G major. This is that same reason I don't call an Ab7b5 chord in the key of C minor a French Augmented 6th chord. (...even though it is.)

    -Scott

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #27

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by ScottM
    I agree totally that 'So What' type tunes are are best reduced to a modal analysis. Many times I have told students to play in the key of G major over 'So What' in A dorian. Not only has this helped students see how modes work, but it also illustrates how unimportant they can be.

    I absolutely LOVE music theory, but if I am playing from A to A with one sharp, I still call it G major. This is that same reason I don't call an Ab7b5 chord in the key of C minor a French Augmented 6th chord. (...even though it is.)

    -Scott
    Whatever approach works best for you and your students is definitely the best approach for you and your students.

    I like being aware of things like modes and other theory related concepts which is one of the reasons I never gelled with the JBGI (I signed up two different times). Bruno is a great player and it seems his approach resonates with a lot of people so must be something to it. Just didn't click with me for whatever reason.

    I do miss his cranky rants about people not following the curriculum right though lol. Always got a kick out of those!

  4. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzpunk
    Bruno's '5 Shapes' are simply a way of organizing the fingerings for the major scale across the entire fret board. He is not teaching them as modes as the underlying harmony is not changing every time you switch to a new 'shape'.

    In other words, if you're practicing the 5 shapes in the key of C, you are still playing in the key of C Major no matter what shape you are using.

    True, but they are still the same modes (minus Lydian and Ionian). If you use "shape five" for the V chord in a given key, starting shape five at the dominant chord's root, and move the shapes up and down the neck in succession, using your "five shape" as the starting point, you will be in Mixolydian throughout all the shapes in that particular succession (starting with shape five on the root of the V chord). If you are given a min7 chord and start at "shape two" (from root of the min7 chord), and connect the shapes up and down the neck, you'll be in Dorian throughout all successive shapes. With a Maj7 chord, the "six shape" is the relative minor (Aeolian) so playing "shape six" at the root of the relative minor, and connecting the shapes up and down the neck in successive order you will be playing all of the notes in the parent Ionian scale. You can also start with "shape seven" at the 7th degree with a Maj7 chord (one below the root) as well - or ANY relative degree of the scale (IF you can remember on the fly - which is easier said than done... for me anyway). Notice the shapes are simply modes (relatively speaking):

    • Shape 2 - b3; b7 = Dorian
    • Shape 3 - b2; b3; b6; b7 = Phrygian
    • Shape 5 - b7 = Mixolydian
    • Shape 6 - b3; b6; b7 = Aeolian
    • Shape 7 - b2; b3; b5; b6; b7 = Locrian


    Of course, everything is relative.... and modes can be played in ANY position.
    Last edited by BirdSong; 06-07-2013 at 09:12 PM.

  5. #29

    User Info Menu

    The question doesn't even make sense.

  6. #30

    User Info Menu

    noobs dig zombies

  7. #31

    User Info Menu

    Maybe it's me....I've been playing classical, country rock, and jazz guitar for nearly fifty years and when I'm playing songs, I never...ever...think of modes. Nor do I ever 'think' of which of five fingerings I'm going to use in the next few microseconds to play which scale over which chord. The horrible truth is revealed!

    Someone please tell me how, as they are improvising, they have time or presence of mind to think of modes?

    Now I'm not contrary to learning what modes are, or impressing your friends by witty quips like, "Just loved Joe Pass' solo in Myxolydian with just a hint of Locrian for spice...", but who really cares? I feel the same way about the "what scale do I play over a Cm7b5 - F7#5 (aug) chord progression?" type of question.

    As for trying to codify five different ways to finger scales or notes, I can't think of a better way to waste time. Learn your version of Segovia's Major and Minor Diatonic scales. Harmonize them. Study chord construction and extensions. Then learn to play the songs. I like to think my approach is simpler - I play the notes I hear in my mind. Basically the ones that sound good over the changes.

  8. #32

    User Info Menu

    Targuit-

    Your use of the one word phrase, 'think' sums it up nicely. There is a point in my own process of learning a tune where I will plan out what will work based on various key centers, but I do not label or categorize the positions, shapes, fingerings, ...or whatever. When I am actually 'just playing' I recognize the shapes as I play on or through them, but I don't waste any mental energy trying to analyze or label what I am doing.

    This is not, however, the way I have always played, and I still struggle with the intellectual approach trying to rear its ugly head. I suppose it is a battle I will always fight, because I learned backwards. Unfortunately, I learned music theory then jazz. I wish I had been exposed to jazz and learned it the way I learned rock stuff 32 years ago, but I can't change it now.

    -Scott

  9. #33

    User Info Menu

    "Thinking" about the modes while playing was never the point to me. To me it is just another way of connecting the whole fretboard (knowing the horizontal intervals), which becomes second nature in time (like typing). The "typos" can be put to good use as passing tones . Whatever it takes, knowing AND understanding the relationships on the whole fretboard is key, especially when comping. Learning the modes (shapes, whatever) is an aid to seeing the whole fretboard IMO. Knowing all of the vertical intervalic relationships is also HUGE - even MORE important IMO.
    Last edited by BirdSong; 06-08-2013 at 02:15 PM.

  10. #34

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BirdSong
    True, but they are still the same modes (minus Lydian and Ionian). If you use "shape five" for the V chord in a given key, starting shape five at the dominant chord's root, and move the shapes up and down the neck in succession, using your "five shape" as the starting point, you will be in Mixolydian throughout all the shapes in that particular succession (starting with shape five on the root of the V chord). If you are given a min7 chord and start at "shape two" (from root of the min7 chord), and connect the shapes up and down the neck, you'll be in Dorian throughout all successive shapes. With a Maj7 chord, the "six shape" is the relative minor (Aeolian) so playing "shape six" at the root of the relative minor, and connecting the shapes up and down the neck in successive order you will be playing all of the notes in the parent Ionian scale. You can also start with "shape seven" at the 7th degree with a Maj7 chord (one below the root) as well - or ANY relative degree of the scale (IF you can remember on the fly - which is easier said than done... for me anyway). Notice the shapes are simply modes (relatively speaking):

    • Shape 2 - b3; b7 = Dorian
    • Shape 3 - b2; b3; b6; b7 = Phrygian
    • Shape 5 - b7 = Mixolydian
    • Shape 6 - b3; b6; b7 = Aeolian
    • Shape 7 - b2; b3; b5; b6; b7 = Locrian


    Of course, everything is relative.... and modes can be played in ANY position.
    I was responding specifically to the original post regarding how Bruno teaches his 5 shapes. Bruno seemed very anti this type of labeling when I was a member of his online school. Has he expanded his teachings on the 5 shapes or is this just your take on how you like to view them?

  11. #35

    User Info Menu

    I find Mark Levine's way of considering modes to be extended chords helpful. In C major:

    Ionian = chord of C triangle (don't know how to insert the triangle symbol, or if it's even possible. A triangle = maj7/9, including the 6 but NOT the 4, the "handle with care" note).
    Dorian = chord of D-7 (including 4, 6, 9)
    Phrygian = chord of E susb9 (which includes a minor 6 and minor 7).
    Lydian = chord of F triangle #4 (including a 6 and major 7).
    Mixolydian = chord of G7 (including the 6 and 9 but NOT the 4, the "handle with care" note).
    Aeolian = chord of Am b6 (including the 4th and minor 7).
    Locrian = chord of B half diminished (dunno how to insert a circle with a slash, either, this one includes 4 and 6 but NOT the b9, the "handle with care" note).

    That looks complicated, and I understand people not wanting to think like that, but what it actually comes down to is really simple - the so-called "avoid" notes. And then, when you consider the relative scarcity of half diminished chords in major keys, and the fact that you can usually raise the 4 in a V7 and it'll work as a b5, all you're actually left with to beware of is the 4th over the I. Easy peasy, in theory, though I don't claim to be able to actually use this stuff yet.

  12. #36

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    Maybe it's me....I've been playing classical, country rock, and jazz guitar for nearly fifty years and when I'm playing songs, I never...ever...think of modes. Nor do I ever 'think' of which of five fingerings I'm going to use in the next few microseconds to play which scale over which chord. The horrible truth is revealed!

    Someone please tell me how, as they are improvising, they have time or presence of mind to think of modes?

    Now I'm not contrary to learning what modes are, or impressing your friends by witty quips like, "Just loved Joe Pass' solo in Myxolydian with just a hint of Locrian for spice...", but who really cares? I feel the same way about the "what scale do I play over a Cm7b5 - F7#5 (aug) chord progression?" type of question.

    As for trying to codify five different ways to finger scales or notes, I can't think of a better way to waste time. Learn your version of Segovia's Major and Minor Diatonic scales. Harmonize them. Study chord construction and extensions. Then learn to play the songs. I like to think my approach is simpler - I play the notes I hear in my mind. Basically the ones that sound good over the changes.

    Are you really playing the notes you hear in your mind? Or, are you playing what you know will work. Sorry folks, I believe that 99.999% of musicians cannot play what they "hear." Those that can are very few and far between, and have focused on it intensely for years.

  13. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by GAN
    Are you really playing the notes you hear in your mind? Or, are you playing what you know will work. Sorry folks, I believe that 99.999% of musicians cannot play what they "hear." Those that can are very few and far between, and have focused on it intensely for years.

    Sorry, I know it's off topic. Just a pet peeve.

    Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, etc. are all derived from the major scale. One could noodle around in the parent major scale and sound OK. But the focus should be on the notes that fit most strongly with the chord of the moment. I look for chord tones and passing tones.

  14. #38
    dortmundjazzguitar Guest
    deleted
    Last edited by dortmundjazzguitar; 08-16-2013 at 02:55 PM.

  15. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by BirdSong
    True, but they are still the same modes (minus Lydian and Ionian). If you use "shape five" for the V chord in a given key, starting shape five at the dominant chord's root, and move the shapes up and down the neck in succession, using your "five shape" as the starting point, you will be in Mixolydian throughout all the shapes in that particular succession (starting with shape five on the root of the V chord). If you are given a min7 chord and start at "shape two" (from root of the min7 chord), and connect the shapes up and down the neck, you'll be in Dorian throughout all successive shapes. With a Maj7 chord, the "six shape" is the relative minor (Aeolian) so playing "shape six" at the root of the relative minor, and connecting the shapes up and down the neck in successive order you will be playing all of the notes in the parent Ionian scale. You can also start with "shape seven" at the 7th degree with a Maj7 chord (one below the root) as well - or ANY relative degree of the scale (IF you can remember on the fly - which is easier said than done... for me anyway). Notice the shapes are simply modes (relatively speaking):

    • Shape 2 - b3; b7 = Dorian
    • Shape 3 - b2; b3; b6; b7 = Phrygian
    • Shape 5 - b7 = Mixolydian
    • Shape 6 - b3; b6; b7 = Aeolian
    • Shape 7 - b2; b3; b5; b6; b7 = Locrian


    Of course, everything is relative.... and modes can be played in ANY position.

    Except Shape 2 is not the Dorian mode or the Dorian scale, nor is shape 3 the Phrygian, etc. Note that there is no shape 1 or shape 4! It is just a way of organizing all the diatonic notes in a key that are available in a four or five fret span. This is true for all the shapes in Jimmy's fingering system. Coincidentally the shapes sort of look like fingerings for the modes but it's not what they are. For one thing, shape 2 in G goes from A to C, whereas the mode goes from A to A.

    if anyone here is old enough to remember Arnie Berle's column in Guitar Player about 30 years ago, he laid out all of these shapes that Jimmy's system uses in one of his columns.


    the 5 shapes aren't all a guitarist needs to know to play jazz- they just help the player to learn to find the diatonic notes and to simplify the cognitive-motor aspect of playing. "Hey, I can find all the notes in all the keys all over the neck!" This is a very handy discovery and is the prerequisite to the rest. The real meat of playing jazz comes later in Jimmy's system (admittedly not a system I found perfect or complete, but it is efficient at developing facility on the fingerboard and with one's ears).

  16. #40

    User Info Menu

    Exactly. For me, Jimmy's method is a great system for organizing the fretboard and beginning to get through changes to play standards. And even now when I play outside of those shapes/fingerings, they are always in the back of my mind as a foundation.....along with the drop 2/3 voicings.

    But yeah those fingerings are hardly unique, though I must admit that I was surprised when I saw a copy of Pat Martino's 'Linear Expressions' with the exact same ones. Then I found out Howard Roberts' were those fingerings as well. And I am sure there are others.

    But the point of Jimmy's method is to help you connect your ear to those shapes with their symmetrical fingerings. For me, it was a God-send. I had given up on playing jazz, and had reconciled to playing stuff I didn't like near as much, or perhaps chord solos with no real improvisation. Though it wasn't a complete system for me either, and I hit a wall after a time. But because it initially had such a profound impact, and because I thought it was a comprehensive means for playing; I sat there for a long time before reconciling that I needed to take a break and try something else. But that happens with most things after awhile.


    But as far as his system having anything to with modes? No. That was never, ever the point; and in fact in complete opposition to Jimmy's method.
    Last edited by srlank; 06-10-2013 at 08:35 AM.

  17. #41

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by GAN
    Are you really playing the notes you hear in your mind? Or, are you playing what you know will work. Sorry folks, I believe that 99.999% of musicians cannot play what they "hear." Those that can are very few and far between, and have focused on it intensely for years.
    Gan - Hi! No, I really play what I hear in my mind. Actually, it can work on different levels.

    As one matures musically as a guitarist, pianist, or other instrumentalist, the connection between the mind and the hands becomes so ingrained that the hands execute what the mind projects without much effort of coordination. It is like scatting vocally and playing the notes on the guitar, like George Benson. At a certain point that is how seamless the connection becomes. That is not to say that one's every musical thought is inspired or worthy of winning a Grammy.

    I find there are different ways I can improvise over a song I know well. I'm not talking about playing a scripted part, but playing freely over well known changes and a familiar melody of a song like The Shadow of Your Smile. On the one hand, I can mentally scat the melody line as I am playing, but that is somewhat mentally intensive. Or I can listen to the music and respond emotionally in an almost reflexive or subconscious way. Both states in some way are a kind of meditative focus, or as I like to put it, a surrendering of the critical conscious oversight to the subconscious which knows where to go melodically. But "thinking" the musical line as actual musical phrases is more purposeful, whereas listening and reacting is more like riding the wave of emotion, which is less mentally intensive. But I find that both ways work.

    I've always felt that the real work begins after you achieve that ability to play what you hear in your mind, because then it is about the quality of the musical thought or inspiration. To give a very concrete example - I was listening to a post by pkirk, I believe, on the thread regarding the June 'song of the month', Here's That Rainy Day. He just slayed it. It was not about the difficulty of playing the notes, but about the seamless beauty of the musical thought. Check his post out.

  18. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    Gan - Hi! No, I really play what I hear in my mind. Actually, it can work on different levels.

    As one matures musically as a guitarist, pianist, or other instrumentalist, the connection between the mind and the hands becomes so ingrained that the hands execute what the mind projects without much effort of coordination. It is like scatting vocally and playing the notes on the guitar, like George Benson. At a certain point that is how seamless the connection becomes. That is not to say that one's every musical thought is inspired or worthy of winning a Grammy.

    I find there are different ways I can improvise over a song I know well. I'm not talking about playing a scripted part, but playing freely over well known changes and a familiar melody of a song like The Shadow of Your Smile. On the one hand, I can mentally scat the melody line as I am playing, but that is somewhat mentally intensive. Or I can listen to the music and respond emotionally in an almost reflexive or subconscious way. Both states in some way are a kind of meditative focus, or as I like to put it, a surrendering of the critical conscious oversight to the subconscious which knows where to go melodically. But "thinking" the musical line as actual musical phrases is more purposeful, whereas listening and reacting is more like riding the wave of emotion, which is less mentally intensive. But I find that both ways work.

    I've always felt that the real work begins after you achieve that ability to play what you hear in your mind, because then it is about the quality of the musical thought or inspiration. To give a very concrete example - I was listening to a post by pkirk, I believe, on the thread regarding the June 'song of the month', Here's That Rainy Day. He just slayed it. It was not about the difficulty of playing the notes, but about the seamless beauty of the musical thought. Check his post out.

    Thanks for the thoughtful response, targuit. Good stuff.

  19. #43

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by targuit
    I play the notes I hear in my mind. Basically the ones that sound good over the changes.
    Me too, targuit. I spent many years resisting the "by ear" approach to playing. I learned the major, natural minor, harmonic minor and melodic minor scales in 7 forms and likewise the arps & intervals for the harmonized chords from those scales in a similar process. I finally realized after many years, that for me the "by ear" approach allowed me to play more melodic and interesting music. The process of playing by ear along with a lot of listening and transcribing solos from the jazz masters allowed me to compare the concepts I learned with the concepts I picked up by listening. Now I play mostly by ear and am usually very comfortable with that approach.

    wiz

  20. #44

    User Info Menu

    I know the subjects been beat and hung out to dry... but maybe a few new points..

    So if your talking about different fingerings, not theory, harmony or implications from different fingering, what are the goals or end results after you have the fingerings down. They become internal, you don't have to think about them.

    (I personally don't have problems thinking while I'm playing... generally I am aware of what I'm doing and what the rest of the ensemble is doing. I believe it useful to be aware of what's going on harmonically etc... and what could be going on, but that's my personal choice.)

    So back to fingerings, what are the main reasons for using different fingerings,

    1) technically most efficient, maximum production with least amount of wasted effort. Fluent, effortless movement between position changes. Your able to not stare at your neck in amazement...If your not thinking ... why do you need to stare at your neck? It it a default neck position.

    Long story short... your able to realize what your hearing, what you think your hearing, what you would like to hear, whatever... as long as the fingering doesn't get in the way.

    2) the fingering helps create the sound or style you want to play. Pretty straight ahead right. Articulations and phrasing reflect some fingerings, or at least make much easier and natural sounding to the style.

    I have my personal style of playing... depending on gig, why I'm hired...sometimes I play my personal playing style as compared to the standard cover implied by music. My style reflects fingering I like because of phrasing... rhythmic articulations resulting from fingerings and picking. I choose to use these.

    We as guitar players use the term Modes to refer to playing the same collection of notes in a pattern... starting on different degrees of that scale or what ever pattern or organization of notes we start with.

    C maj.....Ionian
    D min.....Dorian
    E min.....Phrygian
    etc...

    C melodic min...jazz min
    D min....Dorian b9 (or b2)
    Eb maj...Lydian Aug
    F dom....Lydian Dom or (lyd b7)
    etc... the further you get away from Maj Ionian the more choices for names for each degree of scales.

    So these modes may also imply fingerings... 7 fingerings based on each degree of maj scale.

    JB used, as Birdsong posted, 5 of those shapes. He doesn't use the 3rd degree of Maj. or phrygian, He uses pattern from 4th degree, lydian to cover. And he uses Ionian to cover the 7th degree of maj. locrian.

    Any fingering can work... if your good enough, have enough technique. But generally you'll advance further, not hit as many technical walls if you develop a strong base reference... your default fingerings and go from there.

    So the other aspect of mode is... modal concepts. Very different usage.

    Most use and hear as their basic reference for tonality..... maj/min functional tonal system. A tonal system, in simple terms is the organization of function. Function being how, why and where notes and intervals want to go in relationships.

    Who cares, right... but when we use modal concepts, or let modal concepts influence our playing.... we're changing the guidelines of tonality.

    Generally.... tonality refers to the relationships of and between notes. Modality refers to the choice of notes between which those relationships exist.

    Playing with modal implications as a reference is pretty standard jazz practice. This has nothing to do with fingering... but has much to do with what your playing.

    So using the term mode, as fingering patterns...like Ionian, dorian etc...doesn't explain anything, except as possible names for what to play over chords in different harmonic settings, (tunes). But it's a very fast method of learning plug and play patterns. No work required, easy to verbalize.... and bottom line, You Don't Need To Understand Or Hear Anything.

    Of course with time and work, just as with any method of learning through memorization... you'll hear something.

    Personally fingerings are generally just methods of becoming aware of your fretboard... they're a means to an end.

  21. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by JohnRoss
    I find Mark Levine's way of considering modes to be extended chords helpful. In C major:

    Ionian = chord of C triangle (don't know how to insert the triangle symbol, or if it's even possible. A triangle = maj7/9, including the 6 but NOT the 4, the "handle with care" note).
    Dorian = chord of D-7 (including 4, 6, 9)
    Phrygian = chord of E susb9 (which includes a minor 6 and minor 7).
    Lydian = chord of F triangle #4 (including a 6 and major 7).
    Mixolydian = chord of G7 (including the 6 and 9 but NOT the 4, the "handle with care" note).
    Aeolian = chord of Am b6 (including the 4th and minor 7).
    Locrian = chord of B half diminished (dunno how to insert a circle with a slash, either, this one includes 4 and 6 but NOT the b9, the "handle with care" note).

    That looks complicated, and I understand people not wanting to think like that, but what it actually comes down to is really simple - the so-called "avoid" notes. And then, when you consider the relative scarcity of half diminished chords in major keys, and the fact that you can usually raise the 4 in a V7 and it'll work as a b5, all you're actually left with to beware of is the 4th over the I. Easy peasy, in theory, though I don't claim to be able to actually use this stuff yet.

    I didn't know there was even any other useful way of understanding modes. e.g. Dorian is just a synonym for minor 7th with a 9th, 11th and 13th in my mind.

  22. #46

    User Info Menu

    "Dorian is just a synonym for minor 7th with a 9th, 11th and 13th in my mind."

    Yes, exactly. And if I want to add a flat13 sound for example, go ahead and add it. It doesn't mean I have to alter all my fingerings. I've just altered one note.

  23. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Jazzpunk
    I was responding specifically to the original post regarding how Bruno teaches his 5 shapes. Bruno seemed very anti this type of labeling when I was a member of his online school. Has he expanded his teachings on the 5 shapes or is this just your take on how you like to view them?
    This is apparently Birdsong's take on it; Jimmy still does not translate his 5 positions into modal terms and discourages his students from heading in that direction.

  24. #48

    User Info Menu

    So are we talking about fingerings or what the notes from the fingering imply harmonically.

    Fingerings are a mechanical technique for performing note collections. You can develop mechanical concepts, but
    generally harmonic and melodic usages... are derived from organizational methods of Tonal and modal concepts.

    If b13 is added to Dorian version of Min. What does that relationship imply?

    When you play blues version of any tune... what does that mean?

    When you play a Minor version of tune originally in Major... what does that mean.

    Are there any organizational concepts being used... or is it random, no real change.

  25. #49

    User Info Menu

    I'm not sure if you're directing that question specifically about Jimmy's approach, or just more generally to the Forum. In any case, I can't presume to speak for Jimmy (though I have studied with him for about 4 years). But I think my own view might be consistent with his to some degree. Here is my view:

    Nobody learns to speak English (or any other mother tongue) by first studying grammar. They learn by listening, copying, developing their ear for what works and doesn't work in communicating their ideas to other people, with loads of reading, writing and speaking.

    Only after one has developed a basic fluency in the language does one become exposed to the formal concepts of grammar in school, and all the rules pertaining thereto -- even though (and here's the important point) one has already been using most of these "rules" correctly for years. But the formal study of them afterwards can bring some insights and refinements that the person may have overlooked over the years ("Oh, so that's what they call that -- a gerund! Well, I already know how to use gerunds; use them every day, all day long...")

    So Jimmy works on systematically conditioning your ear, not your ability to memorize the 4th degree of the such-and-such mode. With his approach, in the end you actually are playing the 4th degree of the such-and-such mode, but you're doing it more organically, and less intellectually-driven, than if you actually tried to learn to play in the first place by coming through the vastly more complex modal arena.

    If little Johnny had to learn grammar before he could speak, I suspect he would have given up a long time ago. (As surely have many musicians, by the way, who just can't digest all the modal stuff.)

    Once again, I'll say that I do not presume to speak for Jimmy. This is my own perspective, but I think he'd probably generally agree -- and then he'd launch into an hour long rant that would leave us all rolling on the floor laughing. Then we'd go play some music...

  26. #50

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=Reg;335244]So are we talking about fingerings or what the notes from the fingering imply harmonically.

    I think people look at this differently. For myself, the 5 fingerings (or whatever system of fingering you use such as Leavitt, 7 fingerings, etc.) represent a pitch collection. So if you are in Key of C, all 5 of those fingerings represent C pitch collection. When a 251 is played, that's the general pool of notes from which I draw.

    Fingerings are a mechanical technique for performing note collections. You can develop mechanical concepts, but
    generally harmonic and melodic usages... are derived from organizational methods of Tonal and modal concepts.


    If b13 is added to Dorian version of Min. What does that relationship imply?

    The organizational concept is a key-centered rather than modal method. The fingering system you use should cover the whole neck and represent a key-center. structure. This keeps things nice and simple organization-wise, even if the note brings in new harmonic color for a moment. So actually I would not think at all: Dorian with a b13....more likely I might call it a b13 on th 2 chord.
    But I'm really just seeing an Aflat in the middle of a C pitch collection.
    And just to be clear .....Aflat was just an example note I gave. I could have said any of the 5 notes outside of the C pitch collection.


    When you play blues version of any tune... what does that mean?

    I don't know. I've added blues notes such as b3 and b5 to tunes if that's what you mean.

    When you play a Minor version of tune originally in Major... what does that mean.

    Not sure, except I notice Rainy Day can start on major or minor chord.

    Are there any organizational concepts being used... or is it random, no real change.

    The organizational concept is a key-centered rather than modal method. The fingering system you use should cover the whole neck and represent a key-center.
    Last edited by srlank; 06-11-2013 at 10:52 AM.