-
I never finished the entire book, but I always come back to it. I personally have gotten a lot out of it, beyond just the connecting game. Particularly, the melodic minor/altered arpeggio subs are really great material for us learner-level guys.
Anyway, I wonder if people get bogged down with basic connecting game and never get much beyond, as that's all I hear discussed. Seems like Elliot emphasized getting things together in a couple of positions and not obsessing with perfection of "basic" in EVERY position *at the expense of* covering more concepts/application.
Where's everyone at with this? Where did we get stuck and why?
For me, personally, the Maj7#11 subs (and melodic minor applications more generally) sent me back to the shed to get more fundamental fretboard stuff together. I basically chucked CAGED for the time being and picked up Reg's fingerings for everything. Anyway, really helped me with organization.....
At the very least, melodic minor applications demand that you organize more, and that's where the true genius of his diagrams come in. But that's basically where I ended up with the material (Maj 7#11) subs. It's be curious to know of other's experience....
Sent from my SPH-L710 using TapatalkLast edited by matt.guitarteacher; 12-30-2016 at 09:41 AM.
-
12-30-2016 09:37 AM
-
Just my personal observation, but I think the writing licks section (Chap 13) is where many got stuck. I think in order to do it one must have some basic understanding of writing notation, either by hand or via software.
I took a quick look at the thread for that chapter. Looks like a few people attempted to learn MuseScore and perhaps got lost in the weeds.
-
I was having fun with this book. I think that I really did not know how to get the best our of the connecting game. And also, my personal life got super-busy and I was pulled away with other musical pursuits that gave more instant gratification.
I am staring anew at this goal of fluent improvisation but I have scaled back to just using Zellon's fingerings and Mixolydian studies over the Blues.
I am sure that I will eventually revisit this once I get to other types of chord progressions.Last edited by AlsoRan; 01-01-2017 at 09:29 PM.
-
i was fairly serious with the book and learned a lot from it. Unfortunately, I also did not finish it. I guess one after the other colleague stopped posting back in the day around chapter 13. I did not have the discipline to continue and got sidetracked by gypsy Jazz, picking technique, gear and personal life.
Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
It had nothing to do with not being able to handle a notation program. I still suck badly at reading, but this part was not the problem really. I guess I was also not too succesful in making music out of what I had learned that far which was a bit frustrating. I also found the rule to only play eigth notes a bit too limiting.
I tried a bit this morning and found that my connecting game skills leave some to be desired. I still remember those arpeggios and can play them but was not fluent enough in connecting them correctly ... disapointing! With a little thinking I also remember the melodic minor scales over the fretboard, but not fluently.
I guess I would have to start over again with the book. It sounds like fun too. I'm game giving it another try.
-
Just to clarify, I said that in order to write licks one needs some basic understanding of writing notation, either by hand or via software. Or, in a more general sense, an ability to convey the licks they have written.
Since the examples on pages 45-46 are in standard music notation, I made the assumption that the author meant to write out the licks using music notation (he mentions using paper on page 46). Certainly other methods are possible, such as video or audio recording. Those methods would still (I think) require an understanding of rhythm, time, etc.
Hi Frank. I’m a little confused by this comment. To me, a similar analogy would be; “I still suck badly at reading English, but learning Microsoft Word is no problem.” Originally Posted by FrankLearns
I’m not trying to be snarky. I just find it hard to understand how one can learn a software program that communicates a language without having a handle on that language to begin with.Last edited by Dana; 01-02-2017 at 10:04 AM.
-
Hi Dana,
what I meant to say is that I have so many musical and technical limitations that being a bad reader is the smallest of my many limitations :-)
Since I am somewhat software savy (I program a lot for my day job), I managed to operate MuseScore just fine (but reading what I wrote took me much longer than writing it :-) - I understand musical notation, I am just very slow at reading it; makes sense?).
If I take it up again then I'll probably just tab it out and/or just record the earth-shattering, ground-breaking, world-changing licks that I come up with for reference.
cheers to everybody!
-
Zellon's name popped into my head while practicing this morning. Someone gave me Leavitt's book (3 vols b/w 2 covers) for Christmas and I was starting in it yesterday. Didn't Zellon go to Berklee (where Leavitt was a big wheel)? I'm guessing that Zellon's scale fingerings are the ones Leavitt taught. Right? (Leavitt uses some chord diagrams but not, at least as far as I've gotten, any scale diagrams, so I can't tell at a glance.) Originally Posted by AlsoRan
I have looked back at Elliott's book a few times lately. A current project is to play the seven diatonic arpeggios of a major key (-change the key daily) out of three different fingerings / patterns. Then do ii-V-I and ii-vi-ii-V arps, etc.) It's a great exercise. Helps me know my way the fretboard in more than just one or two positions, which was all I really knew for a long time.
I'm not sure why Elliott named the patterns the way he did. His pattern 3 is the same as Jimmy Bruno's fingering 3 but Jimmy's 3 refers to the degree of the major scale pattern starts on on the low E string. (For the key of C, fingering 3 would start on the note E, for example.) Does Elliott ever explain why the patterns are named the way they are?
-
I am in the same boat! I usually enter a rough guess and then have the software play it back, then adjust durations until it sounds reasonable. That's pretty tedious. Plus, I also get hung up on which software to use, and end up flipping back and forth between them, or spending hours figuring out how to get it to display jazz chord symbols in my favorite font :-)
As a fellow coder, do you care about being able to enter notes in a text editor, as opposed to clicking around on a GUI? Being an old school emacs user, I much prefer being able to type things in as text in some markup language, and then have the software render it nicely. But I've tried plenty of GUI-driven ones too. Ironically, more often than not, I just write it out on paper :-)
I've fiddled around with all of these
- musescore
- lilypond
- frescobaldi (front end to lilypond)
- vextab (here's an example using its google docs add-in)
- impro-visor
- tabledit
- tuxguitar
-
Leavitt's five fingerings, used throughout most of his books are based around 1st finger stretches, whereas much of zellon's is 4th finger stretches. Zellon's basic organization for fingerings is slightly different from Leavitt/Reg-type organization. Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Thanks, Matt. I'm just getting into Leavitt's book and don't know them all yet. I should dig out Zellon's book of scale fingerings and refresh my memory. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
-
Hi all! I started with this book a while ago and Im just about to start with situation 7 but I have a hard time understanding it. I think its a minor turnaround and that the chords in D minor are: Dmi7 - Bmi7b5 - Emi7b5 - A7 - Dmi7. Are these the right chords? and can someone help me understand what the Bmi7b5 is doing there?
Skickat från min SM-G920F via Tapatalk
-
Not familiar with the book, but to me the bmin7b5 is a Dmin 6
-
Yes, it's a minor turnaround, and it's the equivalent (or at least the parallel) of the major I - vi - ii - V. Originally Posted by Desm0nd
-
The bass notes follow the cycle (B E A D) and Bm7b5* sounds much better than Dm7 - Dm6 with root D played twice :-)
* Bm7b5 is an inversion of Dm6. Same notes, different order.
-
Just pretend the Bm7b5 doesn't exist... It's a bass thing...
-
thanks all for your answers. Really greatful for it. thanks!
Skickat från min SM-G920F via Tapatalk
-
Specifically to that book, it's about applying Locrian#2 over two different chords. So, that's the real context for naming them that way. That book is based around applying melodic minor over any chord type basically. Originally Posted by christianm77
Regardless of one's "theological/doctrinal positions" on such things :-)... , applying melodic minor over all chord types, for a period of time, is a good way of getting that scale under the fingers.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
-
This is a book described as 'an Introduction.' Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
I have no theological/doctrinal position, not really.
I have 25 years of personal experience, and I am the player I am (FWIW). Getting all involved with micromanaging scale choices on individual chords was last thing I should have been concentrating on as a beginning jazz player. It is, however, what I concentrated on far too much.
I should have listened to Dave Cliff. Learn the song, embellish the melody, target the chord tones, play melodies you can sing, sing and play the lines of your favourite players, etc etc.
Now I see the same things in many young students. Some are college students. Some are even post graduates. They know all the chord scales theoretically. They may even have done some transcription. But can they improvise a simple line on chord tones through a chord progression of one of the 4 jazz standards they have half learned (let alone play convincing, swinging, jazz language)? No.
Anyway - the reason why this stuff is in books is cos it is the stuff that's easy to put in books. That's why you shouldn't learn jazz from a book.
The thing is people think that's what jazz is now. Melodic minor modes.
Listen - you could never learn the Locrian #2 and you could end up playing great jazz. I actually know some terrific players like this. That's not to say Locrian #2 isn't a cool sound and knowing it is a bad thing. But it is not a FUNDAMENTAL. And people present it as if it is. It's a real problem.
-
"theological" part was me trying to be funny. Ha. :-) Originally Posted by christianm77
To be fair, this is stuff Elliot used in actual classes/ labs, with a lot of students. I'm not going to advocate for it necessarily, but I got a lot out of this book at one point. There's also been a lot of activity on the forum in years previous, through study groups etc., and a lot of people got value out of it.
Anyway, it's mostly arp- based. Very little in the way of straight scale playing. Like, none I think. Melodic minor arps for different chords later on as subs. Of course, it doesn't necessarily BEGIN with melodic minor on everything. Straightahead diatonic arps for the starting point.
-
I don't know this educator or his work. I also can't really dismiss a book without having read it. (Not that that will stop me haha.) Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
Anyway, Locrian #2, who has time for that bollocks? (Berklee students who practice 25 hours a day perhaps?)
See the m7b5 chord for the inverted m6 it really is and play the melodic minor or dorian.
Anyone who has specific m7b5 licks they play is wasting their time.
-
So,
Dm7 - D dorian
Bm7b5 - D melodic minor (1 note different)
Em7b5 - G melodic minor
A7b5 - Bb melodic minor
This is an rather work intensive approach on a minor turnaround, and not the 'default' option for me. I kind of think of this sort of thing in outline m6 arps.
Anyway, the move Gm --> Bbm, the minor third move. Practice the **** out of this. This is a movement that happens A LOT in the most unexpected places.
I also dislike Dm7 as a minor tonic sound unless the melody demands it - I find it kind of weak and watery - I like either a minor/major seventh or in most situations, no seventh. (If the chord must have a b7, a m9 is a good choice.)
So I would probably have D melodic minor for the first two chords.
-
I feel like this conversation always goes toward "labeling". As if the people who call it Locrian#2 are stopping with a slide rule to calculate it or something. You have to shed regardless. I think most of this is about 98% semantics.There's a lot of Barry Harris that I like, but there is some very contrived terminology as well. Originally Posted by christianm77
In the end, it's not really about the terminology . You still have to do the work. Ashtray, Locrian#2 just sounds like lower neighbor targeting the third. It's ugly looking InTEXT, but so is every other substitutionary term for equating it with minor6.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
-
No it's not a labelling thing. Locrian #2 is not a sound that really exists within the Barry Harris stuff. He doesn't have a direct analogue of the melodic minor modes, because he doesn't use the melodic minor. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
-
This book would basically have straight Arps , like you're talking about basically, as a starting point. Later in the book, it's subs melodic minor Arps for all. Min/maj7 and maj7#5's. Originally Posted by christianm77
So, for half diminished, basically just chromatic lower neighbor. For altered , you're just getting a couple of altered tones. b9 #5 for one, and #5 and #9 for the other.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
-
Sorry, I was just talking more generally about labels. Some of the terms can get more contrived, while others seem simpler. You usually have to compromise one way or another. Originally Posted by christianm77
If you use a "easy" spelling, but which has to reference a relative relationship. You're trading one thing for another, In that case, the degree of separation in return for " easier". If you label it based on the ROOT of the chord, it's contrived in a different way, maybe with less of a degree of separation from the root relationship .
At some point, it's kind of potayto Patahto. But I do understand that the scales are different.
Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk
Reply With Quote
Has anyone played or had a Supro Amulet ?
Today, 04:44 AM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos