-
I think a big advantage of a key centered approach is that it is easier to play a line more horizontally, like the way you hear a melody in your head.
Last edited by srlank; 06-11-2013 at 11:41 AM.
-
06-11-2013 11:09 AM
-
All the basis of my playing comes from Jimmys system, but I use it more as an organizational approach than anything else because after having studied his system for years, I felt I needed to go in a different direction.
The shapes are visual patterns for me, because I have moved beyond the standardized fingerings. This is a personal choice because I have small hands, so I lean towards playing more diagonally on the neck, connecting shapes and find myself using more of a three finger Wes Montgomery approach to fingering. This is heavily influenced from studying gypsy jazz where you find they use predominantly the first three fingers. To me this was very liberating. It took away the tension from stretching, and allowed me to find solutions that are comfortable for my hands.
For comping and chord melody I have also had to find workarounds. Actually, weeding out the big clogged up voicings allows me to comp in a minimalistic manner in order not to step on the soloists toes. Initially, it was very demoralizing to me not to be able to grab huge altered chords, but I've found that through substitutions I can target these alterations. I cherry pick the most important intervals and create sort of a hybrid chord shape, sometimes they're more intervallic structures than chords.
Not really related to the topic, but it illustrates how you can develop a system that works for you by paying attention to your physical limitations and working with them instead of against them.
No fingering can ever be called a mode. A fingering is a bunch of notes whose intervallic function is dependent on the harmonic backdrop. You can take the "D dorian" shape, but if you play over a progression like F6 to G/F, the harmonic backdrop is going to make it sound lydian.
I resent the epidemic of guitar magazine columns where modes are taught like this. Modes are not shapes! Inside the parent scale, and any fingering configuration thereof reside all the modes that are respectively "activated" depending on the harmonic backdrop. Of course, note choice helps bring out the flavor of each mode, but harmony is the judge. This means the harmony will make YOUR playing sound weird and not vice versa. At least not in a modal context where the mode is established with a drone concept like slash chords to force the gravity to the root of the mode.
I never think in terms of modes for the major scale. It is for melodic minor that i have found it to be way more useful, because the harmony of melodic minor is easier to "activate" in a tonal context(chord progressions and resolving cadences).
-
Scenario - You're at a late night club, asked to sit in with some experienced jazzbos. You pick up the guitar. The sax player calls the tune - Georgia On My Mind. Your first thought is ...what group of notes am I allowed to use and which ones do I exclude? Are you kidding me?
I ask "What key?" Then I follow the piano player and bass player for the intro and settle into the song progression. I play blue notes when they sound good, extensions, flat and sharp fifths, ninths, elevenths, thirteenths as the voices require, chromatics in between, target tones along the way, slip and slide up and down the neck with nary a thought about which fingers to use or fingering patterns or modes or any of that. And yes, I know exactly where I am at each moment harmonically, but mostly I'm listening intently and riding the wave of the pulse and energy of the song. And if I'm comfortable, my eyes are mostly closed, opened here and there to make sure I don't step on someone else's solo and to check out the pretty blonde in the short skirt at the table in front of me. And if I'm asked to sing, I do that, too.
My fingerings essentially vary according to the key, because even if I play the same note intervals in a solo relative to the tonic, the fingering will vary according to the key. As for the eyes closed thing, I actually prefer playing solos in that way because it helps me focus on phrasing lyrically. Any analysis is that done over the past forty years of playing that song. When I'm playing, I'm into the flow of the music. And if I'm thinking of anything other than the pretty blonde, it's Ray Charles. But he wasn't as pretty....
Now I'm joking a bit, but that's how I play. Knowing where you are in the song harmonically is essential, of course, or you couldn't play with other children very well. But, if I had to think "Ok.... F - Em7b5 - A7aug - Dm7 - Dm7/C - G7/B - Bb7b5 - Am7 - D7/F# .....", that would be a problem. Or "what scale can I play over the Bb7b5??...oops! Too late...."
-
The organization of the fingerboard and learning its sounds are all woodshedded in advance in order to be able to do what you just described. At the point of improvisation, that stuff is all internalized and hopefully you are able to just be creative with your ear.
Originally Posted by targuit
Scenario - You're at a late night club, asked to sit in with some experienced jazzbos. You pick up the guitar. The sax player calls the tune - Georgia On My Mind. Your first thought is ...what group of notes am I allowed to use and which ones do I exclude? Are you kidding me?
I ask "What key?" Then I follow the piano player and bass player for the intro and settle into the song progression. I play blue notes when they sound good, extensions, flat and sharp fifths, ninths, elevenths, thirteenths as the voices require, chromatics in between, target tones along the way, slip and slide up and down the neck with nary a thought about which fingers to use or fingering patterns or modes or any of that. And yes, I know exactly where I am at each moment harmonically, but mostly I'm listening intently and riding the wave of the pulse and energy of the song. And if I'm comfortable, my eyes are mostly closed, opened here and there to make sure I don't step on someone else's solo and to check out the pretty blonde in the short skirt at the table in front of me. And if I'm asked to sing, I do that, too.
My fingerings essentially vary according to the key, because even if I play the same note intervals in a solo relative to the tonic, the fingering will vary according to the key. As for the eyes closed thing, I actually prefer playing solos in that way because it helps me focus on phrasing lyrically. Any analysis is that done over the past forty years of playing that song. When I'm playing, I'm into the flow of the music. And if I'm thinking of anything other than the pretty blonde, it's Ray Charles. But he wasn't as pretty....
Now I'm joking a bit, but that's how I play. Knowing where you are in the song harmonically is essential, of course, or you couldn't play with other children very well. But, if I had to think "Ok.... F - Em7b5 - A7aug - Dm7 - Dm7/C - G7/B - Bb7b5 - Am7 - D7/F# .....", that would be a problem. Or "what scale can I play over the Bb7b5??...oops! Too late...."
-
Thanks for replies... I think.
So Jasaco... lets skip the learning curve lesson, thanks for the analogy anyway, I like it.
Obviously not many musicians understand Modal concepts... I'm trying to help. (I don't think anyone really cares). I'm also just trying to find out what we're trying to talk about... really. I understand most musical concepts very well... can also play most of them well enough. I'm just trying to eliminate or remove the vagueness... try and clear up the meanings and the applications.
So is it possible to talk about fingerings to perform applications of musical concepts. I'm not trying to make little Jimmy quit playing guitar. But this is not that complicated. I'm probably wrong... but I thought that was the POINT of the Thread. The mechanical differences between JB's fingerings and (slang use), modal fingerings.
I've posted what I use as my base fingerings based on 7 positions. They're different for MM etc...
srlank... thanks for response, ever think that key-centered as an organizational concept is modal. The mode is Ionian which has it's modal guidelines. The rules for Maj/min functional harmony are Ionian... the minor being relative version of with same guidelines. You can have a Key-centered organization based on a different Mode.
The key-center could be from Melodic Min. or whatever. So with that new Key-center...You have a choice to use guidelines from Maj/min functional harmonic concepts, (Ionian) or you could apply different functional guidelines, from a different mode. Different guidelines for different notes and interval... or as most do, have both functional guidelines going on simultaneously.
My question about b13 could be any note... we're talking harmonically with different applications of possible harmonic concepts to create guidelines for using that added note,(b13 or whatever), within an organized method of use.
Or the added note could simple be an embellishment, or result of unorganized usage. Generally there are patterns or common usage when notes from outside the key-center approach are used. Those repetitive usages usually develop from Melodic or Harmonic concepts.
My point about playing blues version of any tune... you change many basic functional guidelines. Where chords want to go. Which open different applications for creating relationships. Create organized usage of different harmonies... chords that might not have made sense with original version of tune. In a somewhat loose use of the word... your using a Blues Modal Harmonic application. An organized application of adding blue notes and harmonies from adding those blue notes to existing chord patterns.
This same harmonic concept... Modal harmonic concepts can be applied with Minor etc... My reference of playing a Major key-centered tune changed to a Minor key-centered version of.
So when I'm talking fingering of any of those applications of harmonic concepts... the fingering has nothing to do with the tonal or modal concept of what I'm playing except the performance.
Amund Lauritzen... thanks for post... great example of why you used different fingerings.
Targuit... nice story... I'm one of those Jazzbos... that's what I do. I know all the tunes and can get through the new ones I don't... read well enough to not sound like I'm reading a chart. Usually know the tune before finishing 1st time through. As do most of the musicians I gig with...
But we're trying to verbalize technical issues which help musicians get to that level of performance. Having a strong basic reference for fingering really helps performance...
A basic or starting fingering approach doesn't mean that's what you use all the time, the fingerings are just steps to becoming aware of your fretboard and how to technically move around with out having problems.
-
Sorry if my post sounded patronizing, Reg. Obviously you didn't need to read it, but maybe it might have helped someone else along the way. If not, oh well... Originally Posted by Reg
Last edited by jasaco; 06-11-2013 at 07:12 PM.
-
... Originally Posted by Reg
Last edited by srlank; 06-12-2013 at 05:26 AM.
-
Maybe I'm missing something, perhaps because I've never 'studied' some mysterious set of fingering patterns that unlock the keys to the musical Universe. My original training is as a classical guitarist. I think much of my conventional harmonic training and hands- on musical theory originated in playing and studying Bach - not a bad teacher. I learned the fret board playing Segovia's Diatonic Major and Minor scales in all keys, and although that teaches you a suggested method of fingering the scale in any position, a player's approach to playing melodies and other lines certainly does not follow some pattern writ in stone.
Just a couple of thoughts. I see a lot of commentary about "visual patterns" on the fret board. I assume that is in reference to how you get from note A to Z (metaphorically) in a phrase or perhaps how you finger chords. I am not a 'visual' player. I play what I hear or in response to what I hear. I don't think about how I get there. As a poster noted, that is all internalized after years of playing. I like the quote that someone has from Bill Evans about how the intellectual work of playing happens in the practice room, but how that falls away when you play. Well, it doesn't fall away, but the moment of performing is not the time to resolve your questions about modes or harmonic implications of the note you just played against the Bb7b5.
I am not contrary to studying in depth musical theory, though I am not a graduate of Berklee or Julliard. I understand modal concepts and have studied composition, including a worn copy of Techniques of Twentieth Century Composition, by Leon Dallin and other tomes. But I don't think that modal concepts are much help learning to play most contemporary jazz music. I see a lot of emphasis on harmonic analysis and the dreaded "which scale do I play over this chord" discussions. I think the latter "scale over chord" approach is a hideous way to think about harmony. I am so tempted to reply simply "play the notes that sound good and leave out the ones that don't". Theory is an explanation of why music sounds good, not a substitute for the music itself.
If this discussion is actually about how to play scales, that is one thing. If it about how to play a note-for-note transcription of Joe Pass' solo version of When You Wish Upon a Star, how we actually finger the notes will vary slightly from player to player within certain limits based primarily upon which fret position the player chooses to execute the notes and chords. But if it is about improvising a unique solo over chord changes to a jazz tune, the fingering choices will vary with the players' imaginations, experience, and personal style. If the discussion is about harmonic analysis, that's ok as well and might gain you insight into the composition and style.
JayLast edited by targuit; 06-12-2013 at 04:33 AM.
-
I actually just reread this whole thread, so I have to amend something. Having never looked at Jimmy Bruno's teaching videos or lessons, I don't really know what these fingerings are. But as relates to modes and modal compositions, I have to admit that my classical training predisposes me to the harmonic conceptions of the great body of music from Gregorian chants through Bach and into the twentieth century including the great American songbook type of composers. Harold Arlen, Jerome Kern, etc. I realize that incorporating modes into more modern harmonic conceptions is a way to expand the harmonic vocabulary that is present in the works of Ravel and Bartok among others. The use of modes may be conscious or more like an influence, providing a more varied type of tension and resolution. But I am not too familiar with works that are strictly modal in conception, and I admit that while those type of harmonic influences can be a nice spice in the broth, I don't really like it as the main meal. If someone wants me to play a phrase with a minor second or other alteration of a diatonic scale, I prefer they tell me to alter that interval rather than thinking in terms of modes - which just gives me a headache. So maybe the limitation is mine. And I like some Miles Davis, though I'm more Kind of Blue type of guy.
-
Hey Srlank...
As an example...Autumn Leaves, When I improvise or comp during someone's solo. I'm creating relationships.
If I use...Emin/Gmaj as a tonal reference, when I add natural 6th and 7th to that reference, I'm creating new relationship. Where I take those relationships, development has many options.
I can simply call them melodic embellishments and develop from that reference. My development still uses as base reference... the Emin/Gmaj reference. When I improvise I keep creating relationships from the developments. If I keep Emin/Gmaj as my tonal reference... any new harmonic relationship I use during my improve would still be functioning within the maj/min guidelines. Standard approach, subs or chord patterns I hear and use during my improve.
If I chose to use modal concepts and decide to make Nat. 6th and 7th from Melodic Minor and also decide to use functional guidelines from MM. I'm adding a new set of possibilities for where relationships may go. A simple example is to be able to pull from any chordal structure from E melodic min. and create new relationships from that harmonic reference.
The difference is not so much the 1st relationship... the added nat 6th and 7th, but where the next layer of relationships and the relationships from those may go. This is if I choose to do so. I can just keep my basic beginning tonal reference and develop from that reference. But the results and possibilities are different.
Here's an example of taking or how one might apply Blues concepts over a standard. The tune is "You'd be so nice to come home to".. I don't know where or why I made the Vid. It's just one from hundreds on my youtube site. It's the 1st one that came up. If anything looks or sound interesting... make a note and we can go from there.
If you want to get into any of these approaches, might be better to do so on new thread, or my thread in the theory section.
-
I'm afraid you're mixing two different things, Jay. The use of modes to facilitate choice of a scale or note collection to use over a particular chord or in another context in a "conventional" tune is one thing, and it is what we have been discussing in this thread. Modal music, jazz or of any other kind, is another thing, not really touched upon until you brought it up (unless I missed it). It's quite unsurprising that you confuse the two, lots of people do, particularly but not only (jazz) "beginners" like the OP, because the terminology is often identical, but they're chalk and cheese. It's like confusing French and English with Fortran and C+ because they're all languages. Originally Posted by targuit
-
Well, to tell you the truth, I've only seen parts of Jimmy Bruno's original "No Nonsense" video, which was before he used the "5 shapes." One of my guitar students mentioned these 5 shapes to me a while back, so I looked into them online. All I've ever found regarding these 5 shapes is a poster with a picture of the five shapes on an illustrated guitar neck. When I saw the shapes, I realized they were PRECISELY, to a T, the same patters used to play the modes of a key (listed in my post you quoted). Jimmy Bruno is a gifted teacher so my theory is that he is psychologically removing the all-too-common subconscious mental block musicians seem to have when they hear the word "MODES." He has a straight up, New York approach (like Howard Morgan) which cuts through the pedantic "musical snob" techno-babble and gets to the heart of the matter - which is actually very simple in its essence - hence, the "Five Shapes." His "No Nonsense" video, along with Howard Morgan's "Fingerboard Breakthrough" video were probably the best investments I've ever made - not just to help me PLAY - but help me TEACH. Originally Posted by Jazzpunk
Even though I believe that knowing the modes is good for "learning the guitar fingerboard," I personally believe knowing your chords - not as "forms" - but the how's and why's of their construction, is the key to EVERYTHING. I knew every scale and mode in the book for decades, and could blaze through them like Malmsteen, but I could never understand why I couldn't play and comprehend "Bebop." Once I started understanding all of the chord embellishments (9's, sharp 9's, flat 9's, sharp 5's, flat 5's, etc.) and learning progressions using those embellishments, I realized I was starting to bebop automatically when I simply based my lines on some of the 'embellishments' of the chords (which are melodic lines in and of themselves). It wasn't until I analyzed my lines much later that I realized I was playing little "chunks" of those same modes (shapes) I had been playing for years and years - right in the very place they should be. Real eye opener (the 'Chicken Or The Egg' scenario). I think every jazz great (Pass, Montgomery, etc.) plays these modes (shapes) fluently - but they have never thought about modes themselves. Those with an "academic, teaching" personality sit back and "write musical theories" based on their analyzation of the unusually gifted natural talents. Kind of like Isaac Newton. He didn't "invent" the theory of Universal Gravitation, or "invent" Calculus. They were ALWAYS there, woven into nature itself... and Newton simply explained the best he could, and "put into words" the physical laws and numerical relationships that have ALWAYS been there as part of nature itself for billions of years.
-
... Originally Posted by Reg
Last edited by srlank; 06-13-2013 at 12:47 AM.
-
So we're just talking about fingerings to help become aware of the fretboard.
And JB's.. 5 shapes, or the slang usage of modes to imply 7 shapes, of which JB uses 5. And I'm sure we can list a few others. But the point is simply fretboard awareness. A teaching tool to help develop that awareness of the guitar fretboard.
Eventually the fingerings may become instinctive and just a basic reference for playing what we hear, or whatever other method one uses to realize music. In this case Jazz... performance of sight reading, improve or whatever other method one uses or chooses to play.
And if we're going to get into the "pedantic "musical snob" techno-babble". That would be a different subject. Chord tone and alteration organizational approach to playing... modal concepts as organizational approach to playing or key-center approach to playing etc... all being the techno-babble.
But we're keeping fingerings... (mechanical technique used to perform any of these techno-babble approaches), as a technique, not a source or method for organizing your playing.
And I'm sure we could all add our personal opinions from what we've been told or figured out ourselves etc... but without references as to what we're techno babbling about, it's difficult to have these snobbish discussions.
We could create a different relationship to those fingerings and talk about arpeggios fingerings. Based on any or the scale-ular fingerings. Or we could move on in the fingerings of scales... Melodic and Harmonic min fingering. Use Maj fingerings as reference for the new scales... or just call them embellishments of the major scale fingerings.
If your going to play jazz... how many major based fingerings do you actually use?
Or we could get into those snobbish discussions of different approaches of playing jazz
srlank... I'll post an example based on your post above.
Reg
-
Hey srlank...
I found an older Video I made for somewhere on this forum... But it's about modal approach to Autumn Leaves. The example is in Gmin/Bb. Check it out and then we can get into details.
Reg
-
Hey Reg, Originally Posted by Reg
That's a great video. I can hear all the different sub/colors. I'll check it out further to get a better grasp of what you're doing and address it on another thread.
Just to be clear....My intent is never to be pedantic in any way, shape or form on how somebody should create music....kind of like the very opposite of my personality-type. Just simply clarifying the original OP question and the questions that resulted.Last edited by srlank; 06-13-2013 at 12:30 PM.
-
Hey srlank...
I think we're all searching for clarity... I'm just trying to help. (also have some fun, we're only talking about music...)
I believe Jazz Fanatik had already checked out of the thread before I joined the discussion... hopefully with questions answered.
-
You're right for sure about that Reg....it is just music. Thx for the healthy reminder. And since a lot of what gets written on a forum can easily be misinterpreted (on many levels), clips such as the ones you posted are optimal. Originally Posted by Reg
And I like the discussion of fingerings, mostly because different ones offer different possibilities for phrasing and articulation.....a relatively new area for me (as far as consciously looking for new possibilities).
Thx again for the video references. It is much appreciated.Last edited by srlank; 06-13-2013 at 11:14 PM.
-
Reg - Very nice playing on the Autumn Leaves variations. I'm still unsure whether you consider the variations to be more around the concept of a tonal center that may shift or change versus modal thinking. I find the modal approach intellectually interesting but taxing mentally. And while I like Miles, I'm more of a Kind of Blue guy, which sounds like shifting tone centers to me but some call it heavily modal influenced.
Do you like the style of Kenny Burrell or do you find him too straightforward or perhaps restrictive in his playing? I'm kind of going through a phase of listening to a series of players lately, and I'm enjoying his work.
JayLast edited by targuit; 06-14-2013 at 02:08 PM.
-
Hey srlark and targuit,,, thanks for kind words. Really.
I, as I do most of the time... have many playing approaches going on simultaneously. I have macro and micro applications.
But what I did for that quick Modal autumn leaves take was to have target tonal areas and then apply modal concepts to those target areas. I'm sure I just made that Vid on the spot off the top of my hear... I don't remember for where, but I never have enough time, that's just the way it is. I apologize for the roughness and unorganized presentation.
Anyway... I can then apply different relationships to those targets... individually or how ever I decide to organize.
As with almost anything... with use, becomes fairly simple to the point of instinctive.
Modal is just how you organize the notes your using, or in tonal center approach, how you organize the notes around the tonal center.
Harmonic, theory etc... concepts are very second nature for me... I've composed and arranged for years, and play way to much.
Yea.. I always dig Kenny's playing. Love his blue modal style.
Reg
-
That's a good video. Bruno is showing his preferred fingerings for the c maj scale and the idea is to get the major scale down all over the fretboard. Then you can play all the same notes but start to see it as "D dorian". So D becomes the root, F minor third, A is the 5th, C is b7, E is the 9th, G is the 11th, B is the maj 6. Then the outside notes, C# is maj 7 and so on.
Then learn the whole thing as G mixo starting with the G7 arpeggio in every position then all the inside/outside tensions.
Then A aeolian, F lydian, B locrian, E phrygian. The order in which you practice that stuff is up to you.
I found it helpful to also work on all the basic 7th arpeggios in every position. From there I slowly began to see all the other scale tones around the arpeggios.
-
[QUOTE=targuit;335290]Scenario - You're at a late night club, asked to sit in with some experienced jazzbos. You pick up the guitar. The sax player calls the tune - Georgia On My Mind. Your first thought is ...what group of notes am I allowed to use and which ones do I exclude? Are you kidding me?
I ask "What key?" Then I follow the piano player and bass player for the intro and settle into the song progression. I play blue notes when they sound good, extensions, flat and sharp fifths, ninths, elevenths, thirteenths as the voices require, chromatics in between, target tones along the way, slip and slide up and down the neck with nary a thought about which fingers to use or fingering patterns or modes or any of that. And yes, I know exactly where I am at each moment harmonically, but mostly I'm listening intently and riding the wave of the pulse and energy of the song. And if I'm comfortable, my eyes are mostly closed, opened here and there to make sure I don't step on someone else's solo and to check out the pretty blonde in the short skirt at the table in front of me. And if I'm asked to sing, I do that, too.
My fingerings essentially vary according to the key, because even if I play the same note intervals in a solo relative to the tonic, the fingering will vary according to the key. As for the eyes closed thing, I actually prefer playing solos in that way because it helps me focus on phrasing lyrically. Any analysis is that done over the past forty years of playing that song. When I'm playing, I'm into the flow of the music. And if I'm thinking of anything other than the pretty blonde, it's Ray Charles. But he wasn't as pretty....
Now I'm joking a bit, but that's how I play. Knowing where you are in the song harmonically is essential, of course, or you couldn't play with other children very well. But, if I had to think "Ok.... F - Em7b5 - A7aug - Dm7 - Dm7/C - G7/B - Bb7b5 - Am7 - D7/F# .....", that would be a problem. Or "what scale can I play over the Bb7b5??...oops! Too late...."[/QU,OTE]
you sound like a player that is really plugged in!! great!
(i am NOT in your bracket by any means.)
django,and perhaps, many other jazz musicians of the past,could not read or write,so,theoretically todays players,with vast amounts of technical info at their fingertips SHOULD be way, way better.(as should I).but are they? I dont think so. I have stuggled for a very long time,tho i'm still trying.
at a gig recently i saw a dude wearing a BB King 'T'.obviously a fan, on saying to him that technically there were 20 million guitarists better,he looked horrified,till i added that "then he play's one note and blows 'em all away".so what does this mean? you dont need to play @a million miles an hour with all the modes,scales,etc etc. to create music. these are the vehicles to achieve the goal. learning to use them in differing ways with subtly,feelin
and musicallity and technique are all important.
-
This discussion so far has been a bit of a mess. Players are rampantly confusing modes with positions on the fretboard, and then are citing Jimmy Bruno's "no-nonsense approach" as reason for condemning modes to the land of pedantic musical jargon.
Modes are a sound, they're not a position on the fretboard. As others have mentioned, "So What," is a modal tune. It really harps on that dorian sound. In other music, a lot of the soundtrack for Wall-E is written with a strongly lydian sound.
Try messing around over a progression of just D-7, G7/D. Play only natural notes. You'll soon hear how each note fits and how that 13 sounds in a minor scale. It's gorgeous, and it's not just a guitar related fretboard term. It's a real, and beautiful, musical sound. That sound is dorian. Not the major scale from the 2nd degree, but the sound of the dorian mode.
-
I totally agree that we have a very silly argument here. I hope I am not perceived as promoting a 'dumber is better' or 'intellectual players have no soul' attitude. As a theory nerd, I love all things theoretical. As a player or listener, would I rather hear Miles say the word, 'Dorian' into a mic for 2 beats or have him put the horn on his face and play a b natural half note against a Dm7 chord?
I agree that It's all about the sound. If labeling helps you find those sounds, that's fantastic! If it is hindering your creativity or ability to make music, then stop thinking and just listen. The sounds came before the labels.Last edited by ScottM; 06-25-2013 at 05:02 PM.
-
I'm fairly sure common jazz practice of what makes different modal sounds and possible guidelines for creating those modal sounds has been explained.
I'm hoping that the slang usage of mode as degrees of a reference or parent scales is understood as slang usage. But is useful for verbally talking about pitch organization and fingerings... even if the slang usage has no reference to modal concepts, simply mechanical labels for degrees of scales and fingerings.
I would guess very few understand the difference between tonal and modal, and even fewer would be able to play or compose examples. Who cares... eventually terminology, technical skills and ears will develop from trial and error, understanding or hopefully both.
I'm sure Julie647 understands...
Reg
Reply With Quote
D'Addario Eclipse Rechargeable Headstock Tuner
Today, 01:55 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos