Joe Elliott - Introduction to Jazz Guitar Soloing

[Helgo]

Hi everybody.

In the neighbouring thread "recommend a lesson book for me" we came up with the idea of starting an own thread for people who are working with this book of Joe Elliott: Introduction to Jazz Guitar Soloing.

I have been working with that book for a while and I will write some of my experiences later on (right now I don´t have enough time). But since I really like the idea of discussing this book I thought I´d set up this thread.

So let´s hear it, guys How far are you? What do you think of the book? What do you like/dislike? What stuff don´t you understand.... etc...


Cheers,
H.

[gingerjazz]

Count me in,i love his book and use the principles he describes in it.The only thing i do different is i use the berklee fingerings these days rather than the 5 caged system he uses but the ideas still work the same.

[frankiemachine]

Count me in,i love his book and use the principles he describes in it.The only thing i do different is i use the berklee fingerings these days rather than the 5 caged system he uses but the ideas still work the same.

Oddly I'm in the process of doing the opposite, moving from Berklee to CAGED.

[fep]

Count me in also... I also love the book.

What I like, I'm at Ch. 14 and so far I think he's meeting his most excellent objective of "To acquire a vocabulary". And since it's about writing your own licks, it will be your own vocabulary.

It's hard to find something I don't like about the book. But like gingerjazz I already know fingerings up and down the neck. I use the CAGED system as does the author, but I'm going to stick to thinking of them as the "C Form", "A Form" etc. The author names them Patterns 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. No biggy, I just use my own names, so I have a translation issue.

Also I don't like the word "Introduction" in the title. This is not a beginners book as the title might imply... perhaps that word was a marketing thing.

Here's the gist of the book; write licks over common jazz chord progressions using:

Arpeggios
Altered Scale
Locrian #2 scale
Harmonizng the Melodic Minor Scale for Altered Dominants
Harmonizng the Melodic Minor Scale for Minor 7b5 Chords
The Lydian b7 scale
Harmonizng the Melodic Minor Scale for Non-Functioning dominants
Non-Resolving II-V Progressions
Chromatic Connections
Etc. etc.

Not exactly beginner stuff.

[Helgo]

Jeez, now I´m spending all my time reading the jazzguitarforums after all...

This caught my eye:

berklee fingerings these days rather than the 5 caged system

I am currently changing my position playing fingerings, too from the caged system to another thing (which I don´t know the name of).

Can anyone please post a link to an explanation of the Berklee system?
It´s just pure interest....

Cheers,
H.

[gingerjazz]

Hi Helgo,i might get pulled up on this one but i will tell you how i view things.To me there are three main types of fingering systems,obviously all are just different fingerings of the same note collections.So here goes there is caged which has five shapes and is great for visualizing the hole neck.There is the three note per string system loved by speed players due to its great legato possibilities this one has seven shapes.Now here goes with what i am currently studying it is used in the bill leavit modern method books and also is mentioned in the advancing guitarist.The idea is a simple on in that each finger as allocated a fret from finger one to finger four ,that covers four frets if you want to play a note one fret lower you stretch the first finger,and if you want to go one fret higher you stretch the fourth finger.The second and third finger remain anchored to their respective frets.This gives you access to the entire musical spectrum anywhere on the fretboard without having to move position.Coool eh,however the drawback is that some of the 12 shapes this system generates are a little less finger frendly and it takes a while to build up strentgh in that pinky.Check out Jake Hanlons site,he has a great video of this system,in fact he introduced me to this idea in the first place,thanks for he added worKload Jake(only joking).There is also pebber browns 14 position system which i believe is just a variation on the Berklee method with a few fingering changes that he says are more finger friendly.I reckon i should have all these fingerings mastered in a little under 500 years if i stick at it.Hope this does not give you too many sleepless nights.The good news is i do now believe that you can play some perfectly decent jazz guitar while only knowing some of the fingerings,in fact as joe says in his book you can probably play for years knowing only two.So i guess its a case of how far do you want to go.OH! OH! Got to go a nurse is on her way with my medication.

[Helgo]

Hi ginger.

Thanks for your answer.

I see...

So here goes there is caged which has five shapes and is great for visualizing the hole neck.

Yes. I really got the whole idea of the CAGED system when I studied with Elliotts book last summer. In fact, I really understood the whole idea of position playing thanks to this book.

There is the three note per string system loved by speed players due to its great legato possibilities this one has seven shapes.

Oh yes, that´s what I am converting to right now. I have a new teacher who recommended that I try this out and use it, if it feels comfortable to me.
So I tried it and found some things about this system very convenient:
- In the arpeggios you always play the note in the arpeggio with the same finger as if playing the scale
- This 7-shapes-system makes it easier for me to use the whole fretboard instead of jumping from one "box" to another

I dislike that I have to change position within one fingering but I hope I will get used to that (I am learning and practicing the new system since about a week and I hope to really have it in my system around easter 2012...at least that´s the plan).

I am, by the way, by no means a "speed player". I tried to develop speed chops for quite a while about 10-12 years ago when I was still a teenager and deeply in love with Dream Theater´s John Petrucci´s playing. But I don´t seem to have talent for playing fast...I don´t care anymore, I play slowly and try to express myself this way...

I reckon i should have all these fingerings mastered in a little under 500 years if i stick at it.

I wish you all the best for that journey. And, hey, maybe you´ll even make it in just a little under 430 years if you work really hard
Let us know about your progress...

Hope this does not give you too many sleepless nights.

These things tend to do.... but not in a bad way! Jazz and guitar are often times the things I think about when lying awake. But I cherish these thoughts, it´s better than to lay awake pondering about sorrows and worries, isn´t it?

The good news is i do now believe that you can play some perfectly decent jazz guitar while only knowing some of the fingerings,in fact as joe says in his book you can probably play for years knowing only two.

This is true.

Still, now that I spent about a year playing with only two fingerings (the ones Joe recommends) and exploring this other method just now, I feel that only using the two fingerings limited my playing a lot. Especially when playing through modulating changes. With the two fingerings I was forced to change position for almost every modulation, which gave my lines a kinda corny sound. My phrases never began or ended where I wanted them to, but where the key changed. That´s one of my main focusses for improvement for the next couple of months!

But on the other hand I really have to give Joe´s book credit for making me understand the concept of position playing, of organizig arpeggios, of writing and using licks and of playing in" situations" rather than keys.
Plus, having played for about a year with only two fingerings gave me the freedom to really exploit those two fingerings and concentrate on other things, like melody, phrasing and timing.

So I guess the "using only two positions for years" is a drastic simplification which bears some inherent problems. But this simplification really gave me room to understand the whole concept behind jazz soloing and if I wouldn´t have gone through that I probably would be intimidated and scared away from the things I am learning now....



I get carried away....what were we talking about again....???




Oh, right! That´s why I think Joe Elliott´s book is so great and that´s why I keep recommending it to any beginner of jazz improvisation.... (who, of course, has a grasp of basic theoretical and guitaristic concepts...this is no book for beginners of guitar. This is a book for guitarists who begin to play jazz...)


Cheers,
H.

[0zoro]

This book sounds very interesting. I havent found it on Amazon UK but will look further.

[gingerjazz]

Hi Ozoro the full title of the book is ,An Introduction to Jazz Guitar Soloing: A Comprehensive Improvisation Method and is by Joe elliot ,i typed it into Amazon UK and it came straight up .I dont know if that is any help where you are though,but i think you can still order from other countries.

[frankiemachine]

OK, I'll cite some of my reservations:

1. Elliot encourages you to concentrate on, in effect, developing 2 positions per key. Using more than 2 he sees as a long term goal, with 2 possibly sufficient for "several years". He is laudably trying to keep the sheer amount of information you need to assimilate manageable, but lets say you're playing Autumn Leaves in the usual key of Am. One of Elliot's positions would fall naturally at the 7th fret; the lower position would involve open strings which won't appeal to most jazz soloists; the next position up is at the 12th fret. So in effect you have two positions and are not using the fingerboard below the 7th fret.

Maybe this is a necessary compromise to keep the sheer quantity of material manageable to starting jazz soloists, but a lot of the fret board is unused, and it will be difficult not to seem jerky and unnatural if you want to interpolate, for example, solo runs with chords played further down the neck.

2. So far, in playing 2-5-1s, maj or min, Elliot seems to envisage playing only arpeggios on M7 and m7 chords (with possible substitution of same-function arpeggios). Again I understand the thought process, let's get away from noodling major scale modes against diatonic chords, but it doesn't correspond to most of what I hear accomplished soloists actually do, which tends to be a mixture of horizontal as well as vertical playing. I'm not sure he suggests how or when you should start integrating a more horizontal approach to vary his basic concept.

These are not all my thoughts, but enough typing for the time being. I'd stress I'm not being negative - using Elliot's approach I'm starting to play some nice riffs using harmonic concepts that I knew theoretically but was struggling to apply practically - although I'm still at some distance from being able to incorporate the approach systematically when improvising in real time. I'm still overall positive about his approach.

[fep]

1. Elliot encourages you to concentrate on, in effect, developing 2 positions per key. Using more than 2 he sees as a long term goal, with 2 possibly sufficient for "several years". He is laudably trying to keep the sheer amount of information you need to assimilate manageable, but lets say you're playing Autumn Leaves in the usual key of Am. One of Elliot's positions would fall naturally at the 7th fret; the lower position would involve open strings which won't appeal to most jazz soloists; the next position up is at the 12th fret. So in effect you have two positions and are not using the fingerboard below the 7th fret.

Maybe this is a necessary compromise to keep the sheer quantity of material manageable to starting jazz soloists, but a lot of the fret board is unused, and it will be difficult not to seem jerky and unnatural if you want to interpolate, for example, solo runs with chords played further down the neck.

You make a good point. I think Elliot's approach does enable one to move on to applying the concepts without having to master the whole neck. So in a classroom setting, the class doesn't have to spend too much time learning all the positions and all seven arpeggios in each position.

I already know the whole neck, can play all seven of the arpeggios in my five positions and have been using the CAGED system so long that I don't even have to think about it anymore... So I'm taking Elliot's instruction of initially working in just two positions with a grain of salt or two. From the very beginning I was doing the exercises over the whole neck in all of my positions.

2. So far, in playing 2-5-1s, maj or min, Elliot seems to envisage playing only arpeggios on M7 and m7 chords (with possible substitution of same-function arpeggios). Again I understand the thought process, let's get away from noodling major scale modes against diatonic chords, but it doesn't correspond to most of what I hear accomplished soloists actually do, which tends to be a mixture of horizontal as well as vertical playing. I'm not sure he suggests how or when you should start integrating a more horizontal approach to vary his basic concept.

Another good and valid point.

I think you hit it on the head when you conjectured that the reason for this may be: " let's get away from noodling major scale modes against diatonic chords".

Also, I'm thinking the author has made the assumption that you can already play scalar ideas, so that's not what you need to work on. I think this book is about teaching one to be a chord tone soloist.

In the introduction Elliot lists the Prerquisites, here is one of them.

5. You'll need to be a key center soloist or at least have a good grasp of the concept.

I'd say there is nothing wrong with adding some of your own ideas and overlapping them with what Elliot is teaching. My approach is: After I've first done the exercises exactly as he instructs, then I'm free to venture out on my own.

These are not all my thoughts, but enough typing for the time being. I'd stress I'm not being negative - using Elliot's approach I'm starting to play some nice riffs using harmonic concepts that I knew theoretically but was struggling to apply practically - although I'm still at some distance from being able to incorporate the approach systematically when improvising in real time. I'm still overall positive about his approach.

For me, this book is really teaching me how to practice chord tone soloing in an efficient manner. I believe it has changed my playing for the better and has definitely changed the way I practice and what I practice.

I believe one of the main strengths of this book is that the chapters include exercises that really enable you to get the concepts under your fingers.

[frankiemachine]

Double post, sorry

[frankiemachine]

Just to respond to some of your points, fep:

Like you I'm reasonably comfortable playing major scales in 5 positions (Berkelee or my own somewhat informal system which I developed before I'd heard of CAGED but turns out to be pretty similar to it). I'm comfortable playing at least the 4 main arpeggios in 5 positions and melodic minor scale in 5 positions.

I still think its a biggish jump from that to having the ability make the connections Elliot wants me to make in each individual position. If one early goal is to be able to play the "connections game" using steady 8th notes at a decent tempo in two positions covering long and short maj and min 2-5-1s using the basic arpeggios/substitute arpeggios/and 2 melodic minor modes, then I still have some work to do to get there after a couple of months putting in quite a bit more work than the 5-10 minutes daily Elliot suggests.

So developing even 2 positions will take a lot of work and developing a 3rd won't be an easy upgrade even if you know the neck well already.

Again I take the point that a facility for key centre soloing is a given, but what I don't want to do is play a bit of Elliot style chord tone soloing and alternate that with the key centre soloing I've been mainly playing until now. Surely the goal is to integrate the two concepts so that you can interpolate scalar ideas with a much sharper sense of the underlying harmony. I think that kind of integration will require a specific practical approach and that seems to be missing from Elliot's book.

Another concern I have is the licks idea. Elliot suggests as a goal 2 licks for each situation in each position - 16 licks. He acknowledges it will take a lot of work to get to this point but suggests this will take you way beyond a mere key centre soloist.

Fine. So lets say you play in a band that kicks off with, say, Autumn Leaves. You have 4 "long" major 2-5-1 licks and 4 minor in your repertoire. You won't get through one chorus of this single song without some repetition of your licks. I know Elliot shows some ideas for disguising licks, but nevertheless you are going to be conscious that you haven't been able to play a single song from start to finish without repeating the same musical ideas.

So the next song gets called. Are you going to play the same slightly disguised licks in your next solo? I suspect you might resort to "key centre" soloing to prove you have more than a few licks in your armoury.

My point is that even after all the work you've put in to get to this point - many many hours - you've not got much more than enough material for a single solo, and even that is reheated prepared licks rather than real improvisation.

The obvious response will be, yes, but this is still a relatively early stage in the journey, and things really start to speed up from here. Creating riffs will become easier, and you will eventually get to the point where you are comfortable enough to start 'real' improvisation.

And that, of course, is the nub of the thing. If those last two sentences turn out to be true, then all the work you've put in will pay off handsomely and it will have been time well spent. If not.......

I'd be very interested to hear from someone who's been working with the ideas in this book for say a year or longer - ideally an intermediate player but relatively inexperienced jazzer. There's a real sense of promise about Elliot's approach but it's going to take a lot of work and time to really know if the promise is delivered on.

[fep]

Just to respond to some of your points, fep:

Like you I'm reasonably comfortable playing major scales in 5 positions (Berkelee or my own somewhat informal system which I developed before I'd heard of CAGED but turns out to be pretty similar to it). I'm comfortable playing at least the 4 main arpeggios in 5 positions and melodic minor scale in 5 positions.

I still think its a biggish jump from that to having the ability make the connections Elliot wants me to make in each individual position. If one early goal is to be able to play the "connections game" using steady 8th notes at a decent tempo in two positions covering long and short maj and min 2-5-1s using the basic arpeggios/substitute arpeggios/and 2 melodic minor modes, then I still have some work to do to get there after a couple of months putting in quite a bit more work than the 5-10 minutes daily Elliot suggests.

So developing even 2 positions will take a lot of work and developing a 3rd won't be an easy upgrade even if you know the neck well already.

Yes, it can be a lot of work depending on where you're at with your fretboard, scale and arpeggio knowledge. Like I said earlier, I don't consider this a book for beginners.

I do remember the 5-10 minutes a day for the connecting game. But wasn't that later in the book. I'm thinking that you have to spend much more than that early on. Do you know what page where he said that.

Yes lots of work, but it's definitely something you should know. What's the alternative.

Again I take the point that a facility for key centre soloing is a given, but what I don't want to do is play a bit of Elliot style chord tone soloing and alternate that with the key centre soloing I've been mainly playing until now. Surely the goal is to integrate the two concepts so that you can interpolate scalar ideas with a much sharper sense of the underlying harmony. I think that kind of integration will require a specific practical approach and that seems to be missing from Elliot's book.

He doesn't cover using the blues scale in jazz either. This book covers a lot of material but it doesn't cover everything.

BTW, I am able to incorporate scalar ideas with Elliot's ideas already.

I have a lot of books, but I don't think I've made it all the way thru any of them. I'm determined to get all the way through this book.

So I'm glad he doesn't cover more than he does.

After this book, I plan to go after a jazz-blues book I have.

Another concern I have is the licks idea. Elliot suggests as a goal 2 licks for each situation in each position - 16 licks. He acknowledges it will take a lot of work to get to this point but suggests this will take you way beyond a mere key centre soloist.

Fine. So lets say you play in a band that kicks off with, say, Autumn Leaves. You have 4 "long" major 2-5-1 licks and 4 minor in your repertoire. You won't get through one chorus of this single song without some repetition of your licks. I know Elliot shows some ideas for disguising licks, but nevertheless you are going to be conscious that you haven't been able to play a single song from start to finish without repeating the same musical ideas.

So the next song gets called. Are you going to play the same slightly disguised licks in your next solo? I suspect you might resort to "key centre" soloing to prove you have more than a few licks in your armoury.

My point is that even after all the work you've put in to get to this point - many many hours - you've not got much more than enough material for a single solo, and even that is reheated prepared licks rather than real improvisation.

The obvious response will be, yes, but this is still a relatively early stage in the journey, and things really start to speed up from here. Creating riffs will become easier, and you will eventually get to the point where you are comfortable enough to start 'real' improvisation.

And that, of course, is the nub of the thing. If those last two sentences turn out to be true, then all the work you've put in will pay off handsomely and it will have been time well spent. If not.......

I'd be very interested to hear from someone who's been working with the ideas in this book for say a year or longer - ideally an intermediate player but relatively inexperienced jazzer. There's a real sense of promise about Elliot's approach but it's going to take a lot of work and time to really know if the promise is delivered on.

I can't find where Elliot says you can get by with just two licks for each situation. In his inserting licks section he says "Let's assume you've written two licks each for situations 1-4." This is just to illustrate his inserting licks example. Can you refer me to a page where he says that you only need two licks for each situation?

I'd shoot for at least 20 for each situation.

Re: your Autumn Leaves example... I just did a video of a lick I wrote for situation 4, and I tried to get some mileage from it by turning it upside down, changing the rhythms, using just pieces of it etc.

[gingerjazz]

Frankie,i cannot argue with any of your reservations,this book certainly does not cover all aspects of jazz guitar soloing which i dont think it ever claims to.However i discovered this book some years ago just at the time when i had learned plenty of major scale shapes and arpeggios,but was struggling to apply them in a real music making situation.I am a massiive book reader and own a massive collection of jazz guitar study books,but have yet to find one that seems to have it all.So i tend never to use one book from start to finish,instead i tend to take whatever i think i can use from each and kind of add each new concept i learn to other previously learned ones.I think this book is one of those you need to look at just at the right time in our musical progress.Also i think as you said it is geat that he doesnt go too much deeper,so we dont become overwhelmed with information overload like some other books.I guess its just horses for coarses ,depending on what type of learner you are some people find books a great help others prefer to just play and learn by listening.I also agree two licks per situation is a very limited repetoire but when i found this book i was struggling to play anything even resembling harmonically specific lines so i was quite happy to finally be playing something that sounded like jazz lines,even if it was a bit limited.As i said in another post i now apply many of elliots concepts to the 12 berklee fingerings,but thats still a work in progress.Oh ,nearly forgot this was also the book that got me starting touse the harmonic minor modes too,so all in all i think i benefitted a lot from this book.But further study is required to suppliment this book i think.

[frankiemachine]

Interesting thoughts feb and gingerjazz. I'm not trying to argue that my response to the book is more valid than other peoples' - quite the opposite, I already know my own thoughts and I'm more interested in what other users have to say - using this book conscientiously will be a big commitment of time and it's useful to know how other people have fared with it.

fep some clarification. on page 16 Elliot says "I recommend that you practice the connecting game for five minutes per situation per day". That's 4 situations, 20 minutes per day; or 4 situations, 2 positions, 2.5 minutes per situation in each position. Given the mathematically large range of options available in each situation as things develop I think it will take a very long time to be able to play each situation fluently at a reasonable tempo. That's one of my reservations.

On page 51 he says you should "make a commitment" to write two licks per situation (4 situations) in each of two positions; ie, 16 licks. He argues that "limited as you may be with only these sixteen licks, you are miles ahead of only being a key centre player". As I argue above, on a bandstand with only these 16 licks and two 90 minute sets to play you would indeed be VERY limited. I take the point that you nicely demonstrate that variety can be got out of the same licks, but I suspect you'd still be resorting to old "key centre" habits for 90% of the gig. And that's after spending many hours on this method.

Of course he goes on to say that "by successfully writing licks, inserting ......them in one song, you have learned a process that can be repeated in countless more songs". I don't doubt the truth of this: my reservation is that it's taken rather a lot of time to get here and in practical terms on the bandstand you've not made huge progress. How much longer is it going to to take before you have enough licks to apply Elliot's methods to a whole gig, even at a fairly rudimentary level?

Of course to some extent I confess I'm being devil's advocate here - if I didn't still believe in the method I wouldn't be sticking with it, or contributing to this thread.

[Reg]

It's a process to get you to the point of being able to create licks at will... at some point you won't be playing memorized licks... you'll be able to hear or improvise licks at will . Of course at that point I don't believe you'll be thinking of what you play as licks.
There are a few different methods or approaches to soloing... one being... ( where this method leads)
If you think of what you play through one chorus or section as a improvised lick... usually what you play/ hear or say through your instrument doesn't always come off as you want the first time. So you take a few times through to get it right or at least how you hear it. It's a fairly natural Shape... or form... method of giving your creative imagination a framework, structure.
Or if you do get it right the first time ...or you pull from melody or part of melody... then you develop the Lick... what your playing really isn't a lick any more, right.... anyway this concept of soloing using an idea, (lick), either trying to get it right or developing from an already acceptable idea... is pretty standard practice. There are many more approaches... but you need to start somewhere.
Once you somewhat have a handle on the use of developing single ideas... and even more important... how to give that idea... a shape or form... you can begin to add layers... through use of multiple ideas and concepts. Again one you get a handle on one method of soloing... you'll have reference to begin trying other methods or approaches...Reg

[fep]

@ Frankie

There's a book that is really highly regarded on the forum, "The Advancing Guitarist" by Mick Goodrick. There are individual pages in that book that would take longer to master than getting through the entire Elliott book. Imo and by comparison to many other books I have, the Elliot book is very well organized in that it takes one from point A to point B in an efficient and logical manner and it doesn't try to do too much. On this point I'm just willing to agree to disagree with you.

At this point I use what I've learned from practicing the connecting game more than what I've learned from writing licks. And, I'll practice the connecting game as much as I want, as much as I think I need to. I use it as one of my first steps to learning a tune, I do the connecting game over the entire song; following the chords and harmonic rhythm.

I haven't gotten to page 51, I'm on chapter 14. But I've already written more than 2 licks per those first 4 situations.

I don't think you should take this book or any book as gospel. Adjust the lessons to what you think is best.

I was hoping to get a study group together and work through this book together. I think we could encourage each other and motivate each other and learn more than if we did it alone. But I'd only be interested if it was a positive vibe.

You are painting a very negative image of this book and I wonder if that has chased folks away.

[jmstritt]

@everybody.

I was first exposed to the material presented in this book at GIT in Joe Elliot's Jazz Workshop class. Let me clarify a few points about this system.

1. Joe Elliot would be the first person to tell you that if you are going to do nothing but play memorized licks, that will in no way make a compelling solo. Although this book is about learning and creating licks, Joe is by no means a, "Licks player," if you listen to him improvise it is very natural and flowing.

2. This information is designed to be a primer for the player who may already be an intermediate/ advanced rock player, but is new to jazz. Joe referred to it several times as a tool box. You can be a great mechanic, but without the right tools you won't be able to do an oil change.

3. The goal of the information presented in this book is to get the player familiar with the process that goes into soloing over common chord progessions so that by the time you have worked out the exercises and licks over a variety of progressions, you will be able to do it on the fly and WON'T have to resort to player memorized licks. By working on this material you should get comfortable targeting chord tones and altered notes. Making the changes doesn't by a long shot make you a licks player! ;-)

I would highly reccomend this book for players that want to get a better handle on using guide tones and different applications for melodic minor.

[Helgo]

Very interesting discussion, guys!

Maybe this is a necessary compromise to keep the sheer quantity of material manageable to starting jazz soloists, but a lot of the fret board is unused, and it will be difficult not to seem jerky and unnatural if you want to interpolate, for example, solo runs with chords played further down the neck.

frankie, I think the thing is exactly what you wrote in the first sentence. A "necessary compromise". As long as a player isn´t abled to outline the changes to a tune he probably shouldn´t hassle with things like "solo runs with chords played further down the neck".

That said, I personally prefer an approach to practicing and developing where I spend a considerable amount of time for technique excercises, like arpeggio playing, etc and I mix that with a lot of time where I just "play"....

Like, for example, if you play "Autumn Leaves" you should look for a situation, like in a band or in a session or just jamming with buddies, where you just have to play.
I believe that after a given time, the things you practiced as mere technique exercise will magically appear in your playing and make it more sophisticated.

I know Elliot shows some ideas for disguising licks, but nevertheless you are going to be conscious that you haven't been able to play a single song from start to finish without repeating the same musical ideas.

That´s true but knowing some licks and being abled to play the arpeggios even in ONE position will allow you to play more sophisticated and more creatively than before.


To me it sounds a little like you want too much too quickly. But I don´t know you personally and I don´t want to judge or offend you. I just want to offer my point of view. What you write reminds me a lot of myself, actually. My knowledge about jazz is about three times as big as my ability to play it which makes me painfully aware of my limitations. But I understood at one point that knowing about the hippest substitutions, runs, licks, patterns etc. won´t make me a better guitarist, at least not until I am not abled to play Autumn Leaves just outlining the arpeggios in even one position....

Aside from that I want to mention that I think that your criticism of Elliott´s book has some valuable points.


Cheers,
H.

[Helgo]

Re: your Autumn Leaves example... I just did a video of a lick I wrote for situation 4, and I tried to get some mileage from it by turning it upside down, changing the rhythms, using just pieces of it etc.

fep, I think that is an exceptionally good piece of advice and I think you made your point even clearer posting this beautiful video demonstrating what you mean.

Thank you!

Cheers,
H.

[frankiemachine]

Fep, I don't agree I'm being negative. A careful reading of my posts will show that my stance is "I have these reservations but overall remain positive about Elliot's book." I have a company to run and many demands on my time and I wouldn't have spent many hours on this book unless I believed it was worthwhile.

In any case:

1. Even if I had been on balance negative (which I haven't at all) I'd be a single dissenting voice in an overwhelmingly positive thread. I don't believe anyone reading the thread will be discouraged from using the book.

2. I'm seeking to give an honest response - which is also what I'd hope for from other posters. If I thought people felt under an obligation to be cheerleaders for the book I'd be a lot less interested in what they had to say.

[Hernandinho]

Hi everybody, this books seems very interesting. Do you think it's useful for learning to solo over Great American Songbook-type standards?

[jmstritt]

Hi everybody, this books seems very interesting. Do you think it's useful for learning to solo over Great American Songbook-type standards?

Yes, the concepts in this book are absolutely essential for really ANY type of jazz soloing, but especially over standards. In Joe's class at GIT the first tunes we used these concepts on were All the Things You Are, and Have You Met Miss Jones?

[Hernandinho]

Yes, the concepts in this book are absolutely essential for really ANY type of jazz soloing, but especially over standards. In Joe's class at GIT the first tunes we used these concepts on were All the Things You Are, and Have You Met Miss Jones?

Thanks, will look into getting this book later on then.