-
Originally Posted by FrankLearns
Ha. I don't just "feel" it sometimes -- I'm clinically diagnosed. "Technology-challenged" in the left lobe.
One of the young doctors, Japanese, whispered that he suspected I really just didn't care enough, that I was getting old and was just too immersed in literature and jazz and old stuff like that.
Hey, those Japanese.
-
05-20-2012 04:47 AM
-
Here is Situation 3:
||: IIm7b5 / / / | V7 / / / | Im7 / / / | / / / / :||
I did in Dm so:
||: Em7b5 / / / | A7 / / / | Dm7 / / / | / / / / :||
I attached the BIAB backing track mp3 to the bottom of this post.
At the end of the video, I went outside the lines of the exercise (and ran out of backing track). I was having a discussion with another forum member about this exercise and I wanted to try to show that these exercises don't limit you, rather they just add another tool to your work-shed.
Situation 3 Pattern II
Last edited by fep; 05-23-2012 at 07:19 PM.
-
Situation 4
||: IIm7b5 / V7 / | Im7 / / / :||
In Am:
||: Bm7b5 / E7 / | Am7 / / / :||
Backing Track mp3 attached.
I messed up a couple of notes but just played through it. It's not too noticeable. I need more work on this.
-
The goal for chapter 5 was:
Your goal should be to become proficient at the connecting game within four to six weeks in the following situations and patterns:
- Situation #1 in Pattern I major
- Situation #2 in Pattern I major
- Situation #3 in Pattern II minor
- Situation #4 in Pattern II minor
(Sorry Miguel, I made a mistake in my PM to you, it should be Pattern II for the minor situations)
The goal for chapter 6 is:
- Situation #1 in Pattern III major
- Situation #2 in Pattern III major
- Situation #3 in Pattern IV minor
- Situation #4 in Pattern IV minor
I wish I had included Chapter 6 in this thread. So I'm adding it here.
(I'll see if I can get Jeff to change the title.)
-
In other words, long & short ii-V-I progressions in patterns I/II and III/IV. That should keep me plenty busy for several weeks, I would think. :-)
-
Originally Posted by fep
Question about changing direction. I see three options:
- Change direction when we run out of strings
- Change direction when we change chords
- Change direction even within chords
Is there a best option - or is the goal to be able to do all three comfortably? I've been sticking with #1, which I'm thinking is the cause of my playing sounding repetitive.
In all honesty, when I play along with the backing tracks, I feel like a passenger on a runaway train. I'm just barely hanging on, and it's exhausting. I think this is the primary reason I've been stuck on #1 from above.
I've been working at 85bpm...while that's not fast, I think I'm gong to slow it down and try to get the train under control. Maybe that will help.
Thanks again for your input!
Brian
-
Originally Posted by fep
So the aforementioned activities should be taking up 40 minutes a day.
-
Originally Posted by FatJeff
Thanks for pointing this out Jeff.
-
Originally Posted by FatJeff
I'm going to interpret that differently. 4 situations times 5 minutes equals 20 minutes per day. Vary the patterns as I see fit within the session or even between days.
-
Originally Posted by onetruevibe
It can be exhausting, but with practice this has to get easier.
-
Originally Posted by fep
Cheers
Miguel
-
The dreaded Pattern III.
I mostly reached for the B note at the 4th string 9th fret as opposed to the 3rd string 4th fret. I think that's a better way to go about it.
I raised the tempo a little and it got a lot harder.
I'd have to practice the connecting exercise and situations for a couple of years to get them up to say 180 bpm. Just guessing.
Backing track mp3 attached.
Last edited by fep; 05-23-2012 at 08:48 PM.
-
Nice playing fep...although not as smooth as Pattern I! :-) I'm going to need some time to assimilate this stuff as well. As far as the B goes, I seem to either stretch or shift, depending on which way the wind is blowing. I'll try to post a video later in the week (maybe this weekend).
BTW I was disappointed you didn't look into the camera. Just doesn't seem like the old Frank we all know and love. :-)
-
Has anyone else noticed any personal preference among the first 4 situations? I find myself enjoying the sounds of situation 1 for major and 4 for minor. I'm a little curious about this, since situations 1/2 and 3/4 are just longer/shorter versions of the same progression.
It's not surprising that I prefer situation 1 to 2, it's a bit easier to play with more time on each chord, leading to smoother playing at a given tempo. Some of the lines I end up playing while doing the connecting game in situation 4 sound quite good to me, whereas they seem bland in situation 3 and don't even seem to outline the chord changes very well. I'm playing the same arpeggios in situations 3 and 4, so I'm not really sure what's going on.
Any thoughts on what might be causing this, especially the difference between situations 3 and 4? I know a recording would help, I'll try to do that this weekend if I can squeeze in some time.
-
One thing is that some fingerings are more conducive to imparting a swing articulation to certain phrases. In general, picking on the upbeats (the "ands" of each beat) and slurring into the downbeats sounds more "horn-like." This isn't always possible when you are adhering strictly to certain patterns, since you're forced to switch strings when you don't necessarily want to, and vice versa.
Initially I also thought that another thing might be that you are hearing certain phrases accenting extensions instead of lower chord tones. Because the connecting game forces you to strictly play the closest note in eighth notes only, there is no option to accentuate more important tones or alter your rhythm to make things line up right. But then I realized that all we're dealing with (for now, at least) is the lower chord tones anyway (1-3-5-7). So this wouldn't make sense, unless somehow the ear hears some lower chord tones as more "important" than others. Could this be the case?
-
Originally Posted by FatJeff
-
So maybe JazzReggie can pinpoint which of those patterns sounds better and which worse, and we can see if the data fits the model.
-
Originally Posted by JazzReggie
When I'm playing the minor situations, my ear really doesn't like landing on the 7th of the Im7 chord as the first note of that chord.
-
Originally Posted by JazzReggie
Yes, I'd be interested too to hear a recording that brings the point that you're making across and see whether I feel the same.
For some reason "nature created me in minor". I always had trouble to play something over major progressions that sounded interesting (still can't really do it) while minor feels much more natural to me. Don't know why?
-
When Elliott says "closest note" - does he mean that literally, as when the two notes on either side of where you are belong to the next arpeggio, but one is a half step, the other's a whole step... surely we don't have to take the half-step, do we?
===========
And: am I the only one troubled a bit by the fact that this connecting game (we're drilling, drilling, drilling) is going to become a permanent part of our autonomic nervous systems - our muscle memory - our reflexes - of the very ways we think and react when we hear one of these situations -- from now on, to some degree, for better or worse???
For an example of what bugs me: I want my "ear" to guide my fingers. I want my fingers to be slaves to the melodies I first create in my head. Elliott's stated goal for the book has nothing whatever to do with playing what you hear. It's playing "licks" over "situations." (Bottom of p. 12)
I'm not bailing out - just a little jittery. Comments anybody?
kj
-
Originally Posted by Kojo27
I'm not concerned about the ear. We are finding new pathways for our fingers and our ears.
I'm more concerned that I can't more easily do these exercises. They seem elementary to me. Elementary in that every jazz musician should easily be able to do these exercises early in their 'jazz life'. Running arpeggios over chords, that's pretty basic I would think.Last edited by fep; 05-24-2012 at 03:59 PM.
-
Originally Posted by Kojo27
I think you're being a bit too nervous. Up to this point (3+ years at it now), I've played almost entirely by ear. That's good to a certain degree, but there are times when a song modulates to a remote key or to some unusual place where your ear may not take you. In cases like that, you have to have a definite place to go to that's already ingrained in your mind. Think of it as a safety net. And remember...the key to finding your own voice is to "imitate, then assimilate, then innovate." Drill these until you can play them in the dark, upside down, blindfolded. They will start coming out in your playing in unexpected (and great-sounding) ways.
-
I am also a bit liberal with "closest note". I think the purpose of the exersize is that we learn not to grab the note of an arpeggio first that we are most used to but a not that connects most readily with the previous arpeggio. It will give us self confidence to break out of habits. For me that is definitely necessary and i do recognize how playing these arpeggios helps me gain more "freedom" on the fretboard (long way to go though ...).
Sure, i'd love to be able to just play what is in my mind and don't watch my fingers anymore and think so hard all the time. But i've tried to go by ear long enough and without too much success that I know that I don't have the talent to do that (admire those who do!). I feel these exersizes teach my ears how a chord tone really sounds. It gives a solid frame that hopefully later we'll be able to "decorate" nicely with colour tones and all sorts of things. But i feel what we are learning now and getting into our fingers and muscle memory is a framework around which we'll be able to grow. So i have no hard feelings against the mechanical drill.
I just wish there would be an equally rigid training on timing and phrasing. Without that the greatest notes and scales don't sound right and jazzy. Practicing with backing track or metronome helps, but Elliot has us playing straight eight notes pretty much all through the book and that bothers me a bit.
More recordings soon! (i finally figured out today how to not have it mirror imaged and hence don't look like a lefty). Thanks all for doing this study group and sharing your experience and thanks to fep again for taking the lead!
-
Hi Frank,i have to agree with most of what you say about the elliot book,it certainly is not a complete method.But i have always taken information from many different sources and never just one.I think it was Hal Galper who said if you get one good idea from a book it is a good book,if you get two its a great book.While i am a compulsive jazz book reader,i do not believe jazz can be learnt from books alone.They are merely a helping hand along the way, in my opinion of course.I often use a book as one module of my practice session,the other modules being taken up with ear training ,site reading,improvising,repetoire,scale,chord and arpeggio studies,picking exercises to name just a few.Oh yes and of course lots of listening and transcribing.Where did the day go again.
-
Originally Posted by gingerjazz
However, writing -- and improvising -- can be *coached.* I think. And I think the first step in coaching either of these would be to understand that not everyone is going to learn it the same way.
kjLast edited by Kojo27; 05-27-2012 at 05:13 PM.
RIP Nick Gravenites
Today, 05:48 PM in The Players