The Pros and Cons of the CAGED System

[StanG]

Do disrespect intended, but in my opinion, you guys are overthinking this in a big way. All the methods are helpful. None are bad, and none are the answer to everything.

But, if you know the notes on the fretboard, what the chord tones are of the chords, and how to construct chords, over time it all becomes obvious.

[Patrick2]

OK.

Disclaimers.
1. I admit to not looking at CAGED fingerings as being a “chord helper” or vice versa. I look at them as scale fingerings.

2. It might have been more constructive to list the advantages and disadvantages of CAGED relative to another approach, or two.

Advantages:

1. A simple way to learn and play major scale fingerings across all six strings, covering the fret board with only five fingering patterns. Two octave runs can be played in a single fingering or via two adjacent fingerings (ala Segovia’s C Major scale approach)

2. A framework that can be applied to other diatonic scales (Mel. Minor, Harm. Minor, Harm. Major). And for that matter, pentatonic and blues.

3. A framework for arpeggio fingerings

4. Does not involve stretches of the 1rst or 4th fingers, unless one is in the upper positions of the fret board, where stretches may be advantageous. (see Shearer, Leavitt fingerings)
- Stretching is hard on the finger joints, especially when one practices scales and arpeggios for extended periods of time, as jazz guitarists are wont to do
- Stretching can lead to one playing with the side of one’s finger, which can sacrifice both strength and tone.
- Most jazz greats don’t use these stretchy fingerings as their primary approach (just watch their hands)

5. Forces the guitarist to become a competent “shifter”, which is something that virtually every great jazz guitarist is.
- Watch Wes – heck he barely uses his 4th finger, much less stretch with it
- Watch Jimmy Raney in “that” video, shifting constantly


Disadvantages:

1. A couple of the fingerings have awkward shifts, one fingering in particular. However, this is mitigated by the fact that when one plays real music, one doesn’t need to play across all 6 strings very frequently, at least not in a single “run”.

2. Some of the minor scale fingerings aren’t so great – meaning, not all five of them are so great. (But this applies to other fingering “systems” as well)

3. Stretch fingerings can help with sight-reading unfamiliar music.

4. Not as friendly for super-fast, broad range lines, as opposed to say 3NPS.

Ya see . . that's what I've done in the past. I actually learned 8 diatonic scale patterns/fingerings in two octaves. First, second third and forth finger scales starting from the sixth and the fifth strings. I absolutely hated the third finger fingerings from either the sixth or the fifth strings. Love the first and second fingerings from either of the two bottom strings. Sometimes use the fourth finger from the sixth string .. (4-6) . . never use the 4-5. But, I've really embrased the Leavitt system with the concept of .. the second finger never moves out of position . . and utilizing the 1st finger stretch, or the 4th finger stretch to accommodate keeping the 2nd finger firmly in place. I seem to have no problem with speed using the finger stretches. I'm just trying to see if I'm missing something by not delving further into the CAGED system.

[fumblefingers]

Do disrespect intended, but in my opinion, you guys are overthinking this in a big way. All the methods are helpful. None are bad, and none are the answer to everything.

But, if you know the notes on the fretboard, what the chord tones are of the chords, and how to construct chords, over time it all becomes obvious.

no disrespect but i think stretch fingerings are indeed bad, especially below the 7th position or so, and i don't care how simplistic that sounds.

the Berklee Guitar Dept. web page had some clear warnings and disclaimers about practicing injuries some time ago (i haven't checked lately). i think i know why.

i was trained in those fingerings in 1980 i have hurt my hands several times over the years using them - and was training in the manner instructed. i have long hands and fingers too.

[fumblefingers]

Ya see . . that's what I've done in the past. I actually learned 8 diatonic scale patterns/fingerings in two octaves. First, second third and forth finger scales starting from the sixth and the fifth strings. I absolutely hated the third finger fingerings from either the sixth or the fifth strings. Love the first and second fingerings from either of the two bottom strings. Sometimes use the fourth finger from the sixth string .. (4-6) . . never use the 4-5. But, I've really embrased the Leavitt system with the concept of .. the second finger never moves out of position . . and utilizing the 1st finger stretch, or the 4th finger stretch to accommodate keeping the 2nd finger firmly in place. I seem to have no problem with speed using the finger stretches. I'm just trying to see if I'm missing something by not delving further into the CAGED system.

everybody is different, but i would advise against using the first finger stretches below the 8th position or so, at least as a matter of habit. and i would add special emphasis to the task of hard core scale practice - all positions all keys etc.

two of the Leavitt drills that we used to do are:
1. all 12 positions, one key at a time - starting in C in the second position and going around the circle of fourths. (takes about 8-10 minutes for all major keys).
2. all 12 keys, 1 position at a time - starting in C in the second position and going around the circle of fourths. (takes about 8-10 minutes).

We would apply these exercises to all diatonic and symmetric scales too.

I would advise against drill number two in the lower positions, using stretch fingerings. just. say. no.

[Patrick2]

no disrespect but i think stretch fingerings are indeed bad, especially below the 7th position or so, and i don't care how simplistic that sounds.

the Berklee Guitar Dept. web page had some clear warnings and disclaimers about practicing injuries some time ago (i haven't checked lately). i think i know why.

i was trained in those fingerings in 1980 i have hurt my hands several times over the years using them - and was training in the manner instructed. i have long hands and fingers too.

fumble . . here's why it seems to work for me without any potential for injury; on either the FS1 or the FS4, if I'm *down stream* . . where the frets are a little more spaced, I just shift a slight bit without over extending. The other reason it's not a problem, I have not intention, or no desire to play tunes such as Oleo, Cherokee, Donna Lee . . at 280 bpm. If I did, I'd stay away from the lower fretboard . . no prob. But, I have a sense of knowing where I am, when I'm withing a specific fingering pattern. That seems to work well, horizontally. I'm still working on connecting the dots to melodically take it vertically into adjacent fingerings.

But, when I'm in the 1st-6th fingering . . I just love what's available to me in terms of scales, arps, chords, tensions . . . etc., without having to move until I want to, or need to.

[fep]

For those that use CAGED just for scale fingerings, check out this (an excerpt I got from my instructor back in the 1970s). This kind of stuff is so handy for chord tone soloing approach. And, so handy for understanding the fretboard, intervals and chord construction. This is why I've always liked the 'derivitive' approach of finding chords.

As I said previously, I don't see CAGED as a scale fingering method (so many ways to finger all the notes especially when you start combining CAGED positions).

[fumblefingers]

fumble . . here's why it seems to work for me without any potential for injury; on either the FS1 or the FS4, if I'm *down stream* . . where the frets are a little more spaced, I just shift a slight bit without over extending. The other reason it's not a problem, I have not intention, or no desire to play tunes such as Oleo, Cherokee, Donna Lee . . at 280 bpm. If I did, I'd stay away from the lower fretboard . . no prob. But, I have a sense of knowing where I am, when I'm withing a specific fingering pattern. That seems to work well, horizontally. I'm still working on connecting the dots to melodically take it vertically into adjacent fingerings.

But, when I'm in the 1st-6th fingering . . I just love what's available to me in terms of scales, arps, chords, tensions . . . etc., without having to move until I want to, or need to.

Understood, a shift is not a stretch. If you lift your hand to move up or down its a shift.

[Vladan]

Reading this thread, seems to me CAGED is, or at least it's original purpose was, just a tool for practicing and teaching basic sight reading.

I say this because once I've heard someone say about the way to sight read (beginner's simple stuff, like pop tune's melodies) on guitar:
"You determine the key, from accidentals next to the clef, you grab that chord, in a most convenient form/ fingering and all the notes will be there, with some stretching. If you have to stretch too far, change the position, ie. the chord form/ fingering". Also, there was a notion about alternate picking being the way to count, each down stroke being a "Number", each upstroke being "And".

Later, it all developed into "guitar methods (for dummies)" business ploy.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I'm just trying to see if I'm missing something by not delving further into the CAGED system.

I wouldn't think you're missing anything. All things being equal, the only advantage of CAGED that I see would be that of comfort/injury prevention.

[Takemitsu]

Maybe an other point: The 5 position idea makes total sense if you want to stay in position. There is 1 root on the 6th string in the left of your 5/6 fret "box", 1 on the right, 1 on the left 5th string, one on the right, one on the left 4rthstring and thats it ...right 4rth string would be the same as left 6th string.

So there is something logical about having 5 forms on the guitar.

[fumblefingers]

Maybe an other point: The 5 position idea makes total sense if you want to stay in position. There is 1 root on the 6th string in the left of your 5/6 fret "box", 1 on the right, 1 on the left 5th string, one on the right, one on the left 4rthstring and thats it ...right 4rth string would be the same as left 6th string.

So there is something logical about having 5 forms on the guitar.

relative to Leavitt's 12 fingerings it's just the opposite. The more fingerings, the less shifting required, which is Leavitt's point.

[fumblefingers]

For those that use CAGED just for scale fingerings, check out this (an excerpt I got from my instructor back in the 1970s). This kind of stuff is so handy for chord tone soloing approach. And, so handy for understanding the fretboard, intervals and chord construction. This is why I've always liked the 'derivitive' approach of finding chords.

As I said previously, I don't see CAGED as a scale fingering method (so many ways to finger all the notes especially when you start combining CAGED positions).

well, that's one way to look at the guitar. i can see that it would help a person if they wanted to think of things that way.

some of its more extended ramifications may be a bit of a stretch though.

[fumblefingers]

Reading this thread, seems to me CAGED is, or at least it's original purpose was, just a tool for practicing and teaching basic sight reading.

I say this because once I've heard someone say about the way to sight read (beginner's simple stuff, like pop tune's melodies) on guitar:
"You determine the key, from accidentals next to the clef, you grab that chord, in a most convenient form/ fingering and all the notes will be there, with some stretching. If you have to stretch too far, change the position, ie. the chord form/ fingering". Also, there was a notion about alternate picking being the way to count, each down stroke being a "Number", each upstroke being "And".

Later, it all developed into "guitar methods (for dummies)" business ploy.

i wonder what the first mention of the phrase "CAGED" is. Maybe Fep knows.

My guess is that it came LATER than Shearing's treatise on the scale fingerings, without any such labeling.

[Patrick2]

Understood, a shift is not a stretch. If you lift your hand to move up or down its a shift.

True, but the fingering stays the same. If I'm playing 1st-6th and going from the root to the 3rd on the 6th string . . or from the P5th to the 7th on the 2nd string, that's gonna require a FS4 to stay in position . . whether I'm running a diatonic scale or a M7 arp. Sometimes, I'll just hit the m3 or the m7 with my 4th finger and slide/slur it up to the target note. Sometimes, I'll nail the m3 or the m7 by sliding my 3rd finger up two semi-tones from the 2nd or the 6th.

But, I guess what I'm saying is that I can use my own descretion as to how I stay within a fingering. I can do shifts if I'm enclosing the target note, then revert back to the proper position. Knowing the fingering pattern at *what-ever* position is a fundamental. I just deviate at my own descretion and revert back. This way, I'm never at a loss for where I am, as it relates to the intervals and the available tensions. I guess it's like ecj said in post #16;

"Now I'm trying to figure out how to distill it down into my own system, which is what I think everyone eventually has to do. Learn it all, then adapt."

I do appreciate all of the responses. I think I've found my answers. :-)

[MarkRhodes]

I think the CAGED scale fingerings are the ones I learned when young, though I didn't hear the term "CAGED" until much later.

My first exposure to "CAGED" was in a book called "Fretboard Logic" that I used to look at in a music store. I don't believe I ever bought a copy....

[henryrobinett]

I never used the CAGED system, until a student pointed out to me my method for categorizing chords was very similar to CAGED. But I don't group my scales or arpeggios that way, only my chords, which seem naturally built from those five chord shapes. But there's too much space between the shapes for the scales/arpeggios to be useful for me as a teacher or player.

[PMB]

i wonder what the first mention of the phrase "CAGED" is. Maybe Fep knows.

My guess is that it came LATER than Shearing's treatise on the scale fingerings, without any such labeling.

From most accounts, Jack Marshall, a Hollywood studio-based jazz guitarist coined the phrase:

http://utstat.utoronto.ca/mikevans/h.../marshall.html

[MarkRhodes]

From most accounts, Jack Marshall, a Hollywood studio-based jazz guitarist coined the phrase:

http://utstat.utoronto.ca/mikevans/h.../marshall.html

Thanks for that link. I was unfamiliar with Jack Marshall. By name, anyway. I heard the theme from "The Munsters" a lot as a kid but never thought about who came up with it!

[Kiefer.Wolfowitz]

CAGED is like growing up in in New York, knowing the city like the back of your hand and then someone tells you the system for how the streets are organized. It was already organized informally in your mind, someone just came along after the fact and gave it a name and a formal structure for describing what you've learned.

Avenue of the Americas

[fumblefingers]

From most accounts, Jack Marshall, a Hollywood studio-based jazz guitarist coined the phrase:

http://utstat.utoronto.ca/mikevans/h.../marshall.html

Thanks for that.

Regarding CAGED scale fingerings I don't know what the earliest historical appearances were, but I can say the following:

1. Carcassi documented the movable scale fingering that CAGED refers to as form "C" before 1853, in addition to numerous open position fingerings.

2. Taregga documented the scale fingerings that CAGED refers to as forms "C,A,G,E" before 1909, in addition to many other two- and three-octave fingerings with lots of shifts.


A lot of jazzers find CAGED forms "G" and "D" (especially) to be awkward. Fingerings that Leavitt termed Type 4 and Type 1a are popular substitutes, among others. These involve stretches of the 4th and 1rst fingers respectively.

[princeplanet]

A lot of jazzers find CAGED forms "G" and "D" (especially) to be awkward. Fingerings that Leavitt termed Type 4 and Type 1a are popular substitutes, among others. These involve stretches of the 4th and 1rst fingers respectively.

Really? What is so awkward about the G position?

[fumblefingers]

the backward shift. relatively speaking backward shifts kinda suck, don't they?

[princeplanet]

the backward shift. relatively speaking backward shifts kinda suck, don't they?

Sure, but if you're playing chromatic enclosures or embellishments for arp tones, pentatonic tones or even scale tones, then awkward stretches and shifts are inevitable. So yeah, if you're learning Jazz, then novices should get used to the idea, without being overwhelmed of course!

[Takemitsu]

It all depends if you move your hand or stretch your finger.

[docbop]

the backward shift. relatively speaking backward shifts kinda suck, don't they?

I first learning the patterns with shifts then learned the Berklee ones with stretching. Stretching was tough at first, but now I prefer them. I got into stretching patterns from sightreading and trying not to look at the neck with stretch I could sub-consciously keep track of my position better. When shifting I found myself looking at neck more to check where I was.

Bottom line whatever system you use don't just learn them as a group of dots on a grid, learn what scale tone each dot is are so you understand/control what you're playing.