-
Originally Posted by tbone
-
02-05-2017 06:16 PM
-
Here's a take of chorus two using a BIAB track via cheap laptop speakers. Can't say I dig that sound. Think I'll use Aebersold play-alongs in the future.
-
Here is a quick take of chorus number 3 of Herb's "Blues in C." No backing track. I was recording something else---a Frank Vignola etude for that study group--and thought it might be about time to add another chorus here, so...
-
Here is my take on the first 24. Of course the rehearsals were better than the actual take but here it is at approximately 107 bpm.
Herb Ellis #2
AALast edited by Doublea A; 03-04-2017 at 08:27 PM. Reason: Movie did not attach
-
Sounds good - first few bars not as played by herb...(timing more than notes) but your version works so it's all good....I'm starting to get his chord shapes idea, probably because I've stopped consciously thinking about them while I'm playing his lines - I occasionally notice the shapes going by which (I hope ) means I'm getting it at some level...
AND
"MarkRhodes
I think I found a way over the weekend. Will give it a go later this week. Stay tuned!"
any news?
-
Originally Posted by Doublea A
The rehearsals are always better, aren't they? ;o) I think the main reason we think that is that we don't record them and so we don't hear them again and notice flaws; also, we are less anxious when rehearsing.
-
Here's chorus number four of Herb's "Blues In C."
Tried to find a better recording set up but failed. I think I'll do the rest of these without any backing at all. (Perhaps a metronome.)
-
Me too....hope to get something down by the weekend - distracted by other stuff...
-
Originally Posted by tbone
-
Short 'n' sweet (I hope).
-
I hope you guys don't mind a quick "shape" question that isn't directly related to "Swing Blues".
I was looking through my copy of the "Rhythm Shapes" book. I had what is a fundamental question on how to read the book. In the first pages Ellis describes his "Shape 1". It's a familiar shape. "Long A" or "G", whatever works. The root on the 6th with all the action down towards the nut from there.
So then I look at the first melodic example on page 10. We start with the Bb6 and you can clearly see the Shape 1 in that opening two measures. But, of course, the tune then goes to Bo in the next. But we have only learned that one shape. Obviously I can see he is playing essentially a Bo arpeggio with a G passing tone. That is not the "Shape", is it? Then we get a Cm7 with more arpeggios of the chord, C#o, etc. No more of that shape that I can tell.
The point is that only the first two measures seem to relate to the Shape we just learned, the rest of the example does not. It feels like the tail wagging the dog. Am I missing something? Is there some way that the shape relates to the rest of the measures that I don't get? Am I supposed to see the shape for the first two measures and then two measure of the seventh and four of the eighth, and the rest is just in there to make the example musical?
As I say, really fundamental question about how the book is organized and what the pedagogy is here.
Thanks!
-
Originally Posted by rlrhett
-
Here's that example rlrhett was talking about above. In the book it is called "Example 2" but it is the first 8-bar phrase Herb gives for the A section of rhythm changes, based on shape one. (It is played twice and better "the second time around.") The whole thing is out of Shape 1.
-
It may be a good time to see where we are as a group and where we want to go.
This group was slow to get rolling. (I accept full responsibility for that.) Now it's moving along. Is everyone okay with the pace and direction? (I guess we'll move on to "Bounce Blues" as more of us work through "Blues In C.")
-
Originally Posted by rlrhett
Good Question. I am going to take a closer look at the book and try to say something intelligent later.
-
Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
-
Thanks Mark. I guess I just don't understand what is meant by "Shape". It seems like the only thing happening is that all the improvisation is happening in one basic position on the neck (3rd to 6th fret). It still seems like he is playing "endless...arpeggios," to use his words. Nearly every other bar has notes that don't fall in either his Major Arpeggio, Major Scale, or Dominant Scale for Bb, but do make sense if you are arpeggiating each chord described in the harmony.
I won't highjack this thread, but I still don't understand what the Bb "shape" has to do with what is played in this example. I'll work through a few more and see if it clicks with me. Thanks for your help.
-
Originally Posted by rlrhett
When there is a chord progression like Bb to Bdim you can alter the "shape" to accentuate the harmony but the majority of the progression remains within the original scale/arpeggio/shape.
I hope that answers your question.
-
Originally Posted by tbone
-
Originally Posted by rlrhett
My understanding of this is that the melodic ideas are to be associated with the shapes. That's how you can move the ideas around. If you wanted to play that line in, say, Eb or G, it would be easy to move because you know where that shape would be for those keys (or any other ones).
-
To me the shape concept mostly represents not necessarily a different mode of playing, but a more of a geometric visualization of the fingerboard and concentrating more on the feel and shape of a line than having to carry in one's head all of the underlying theory. You see C7 and visualize the shape outline to correspond and build off that, rather than spelling out the notes of the chord and then porting that theory onto the fretboard. You learn the feel and outline of a dominant arpeggio and visualize shifts that lead to the next shape instead of contextualizing them. If that makes sense. I would venture that most guitarists in practice employ "shapes" whether they think of it that way or not. It's kind of one of the traits of the instrument. Especially when considered relative to say a trumpet or saxophone (even piano, though there are more "port-able" shapes there) where you have no option but to choose notes from a linear set.
Thoughts? Comments? Maybe I'm way off base, but that's sort of my view on the overarching thought process.
-
Originally Posted by Doublea A
-
Coming from a blues/rock/folk background the concept of "shapes" as I think Mark is describing is not new to me. I always had the CAGED system in mind (although I didn't know what it was called and usually thought of C/D as one shape and G/A as one shape). Later in my playing life I had the 7 note major scale broken down into five two string patterns. What has been a real struggle transitioning to jazz has been to shift those patterns for each chord that rushed by. I can lock into a major scale and move it anywhere up and down the neck, but when I have to change it up every two beats I get quickly lost.
I guess I was hoping for a way to visualize those changes quickly and intuitively. When Ellis speaks of "no more endless arpeggios", I got excited. As I am understanding Mark's explanation, it is more about learning to find all those endless arpeggios as the chords race by WITHIN the larger major/dominant scale shape. So still a different arpeggio (let's call it an arpeggio "plus") every couple of beats, just visualized within a larger shape.
-
Originally Posted by rlrhett
-
Originally Posted by pants
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Neural DSP plugin 50% sale... Tone King Imperial...
Yesterday, 11:03 PM in For Sale