The Pros and Cons of the CAGED System

[Patrick2]

[QUOTE=bako;491254]Major and minor 2nds are the building blocks of basic ascending/descending scale play.
The single string tab can represent any string.
The string pair tab indicates which strings are represented.
The numbers indicate frets.
The fret number was random lower neck, but the intervallic distance is not.
There are several fingering possibilities for most of the intervals presented.
Hope that's clearer.

Interval awareness increases understanding and adds flexibility to craft alternative fingerings to suit the moment.

This is in my opinion critical. It's what I focus most on. I studied for a while with Bob Ferry, a Berkelee grad . . studied under Leavitt. He would always stress that I should say the intervals aloud when playing any form of scale or arp. Said that he believed that while knowing the names of the notes was important . . it was even more important to know and understand the interval. The notes will change in different positions with the same fingerings. But, the intervals will always be the same. The fingerings can be altered and or adjusted on the fly . . if we are aware of the distance from a m3 to a P5, to a m7. He would also stress understanding geometrical locations of intervals . . on the same string, adjacent strings and skipped strings. These understandings really helped to open up the fret board to me.

[Flyin' Brian]

Major and minor 2nds are the building blocks of basic ascending/descending scale play.
The single string tab can represent any string.
The string pair tab indicates which strings are represented.
The numbers indicate frets.
The fret number was random lower neck, but the intervallic distance is not.
There are several fingering possibilities for most of the intervals presented.
Hope that's clearer.

Interval awareness increases understanding and adds flexibility to craft alternative fingerings to suit the moment.

I understand intervals, but your tabs aren't reaching me at all. Forgive me but there might be a typo there somewhere. No matter. Thanks for the answer.

[fumblefingers]

Bako, I think Brian could be referring to the last grid where you marked it as a whole step
between the 3rd and 2nd string, but would be a half step.

I'd like to express my thanks to Bako for being a clear thinker and writer.
Skills I lack somewhat alas.

Really enjoyed being reminded of the Wm Fowler articles which appeared in Downbeat for
years and subsequently in Keyboard magazine.
I collected all of those as clippings and have them in a compendium of 4 scrapbooks.
What an educator he was!

I learned what's now known as the drop tone chord system from a 1 or 2 page article.
He didn't get into deep theory space....just here are 3 string sets....here are the inversions
now go and have fun figuring all the rest out.....brilliant stuff.
I see books galore written on this topic alone.

The tetrachord system of scale construction I remember him discussing in his brief, clear way
but it failed to "stick" for me.

You were fortunate to have access to teachers who knew about the Berklee books etc etc.
In the Antipodes it was necessary to keep your eyes and ears open for any such materials.
In the end it's all the same process, just that it can take longer.

Re your great line "scale fingerings are logical and organized...music is messy"
I laughed out loud, and when my wife asked what was so funny I told her and she added
a similar observation in her job as a technical editor/writer which goes:

"In theory there's theory and practice....but in practice there is only practice"

Thanks for your contributions, I always know I'm gonna learn something when I see a post headed "Bako"

in theory, theory and practice are the same, in practice they're not. A. Einstein.

[pamosmusic]

It's important when trying conceptualize how to improvise, especially over complex chord changes. And I agree, the Segovia scales are very important for classical guitar. Not jazz though.

Interesting thing about those scales ... they're sort of falling out of vogue with a few classical guitar teachers. Going the way of the whole strict rest stroke, free stroke thing. When a classical guitarist practices scales they are practicing TONE not really fingerings so much. Any piece will have fingering very carefully worked, reworked, taken apart, put back together, perfected, and practiced relentlessly ... so practicing scales in the warmup or practice routine is not really the same thing in classical guitar.

It does, however, teach an interesting concept. They have bizarre awkward position shifts that - if you can execute them - are super handy for the oh so elusive horizontal playing. I played classical guitar for a long time so when I'd put the classical guitar up for the night and grabbed the electric guitar I'd start working on my own "segovia" fingerings playing major scales with prescribed position shifts. One per scale all the way up to a shift on every single string so a single "pattern" would take you the entire range of the instrument more or less. I spent about the same time with those that I did with four note per string patterns. I spent quite a bit more time with Henry's three note patterns. Loads more time than that with playing across single strings and sets of two or three strings. And even more time than that on the so called "CAGED" patterns.

I'm a spaghetti practicer myself ... throw the whole mess against the wall see what sticks. Ideally at the end of the day the fretboard is just a bunch of notes you can play with.

Just thought I'd toss a little experience I had with "segovia scales" in there.

[pamosmusic]

50 times done is great. Is that 50 times IN A ROW without making a mistake. My method definitely gets you in to that number and beyond. But you practice as you need. But the three times done is for repeated daily practice.

For Emilio Pujol ... I'm going to guess 50 times in a row without making a mistake

[bako]

Flyin' Brian, Yes, there was a typo in the last tab as Moonray pointed out, now corrected.
Sorry for the confusion and thanks for the proofread.

"In theory there's theory and practice....but in practice there is only practice"

Great line.

[Reg]

So yea get the fingering thing together... again it's just a method to help you know your fretboard. Basically somewhere down the line, you should be able to use any fingering. Because you become aware of the fretboard, you get past the fingerings.

You use the fingerings.... they don't use you. Yea... you play what you want or hear... not what your able to play because of different fingerings.

I like Henry's fingerings... except for some of the use of 2nd and 3rd fingers for same fret notes... but it feels natural and I GET THE LOGIC OF THE ORGANIZATION... works well. I just have a different reference.... but I do have to sight read at most of my gigs, I like staying in position better. But within a few min. I could use the fingering.

Getting back to using term mode for starting degree of scales.... I don't really care, and I don't teach, so really don't have the expertise... but if I was reading a chart and B phrygian was notated, I better know what modal characteristics were implied.
It's definitely not Gmaj scale. Modal concepts are not just old school jam one chord for two hours. Modal concepts are used and implied just as tonal concepts are implied and used.

Any tune, one chord, a chord pattern, a four bar set of changes etc... can be performed tonally and modally and there are big differences. You hear the terms vanilla, straight and a few more. Obviously this understanding and skill set is not for beginners... but if you want to become a jazz player as compared to one who plays jazz tunes... it's something to think about. There's nothing right or wrong with either approach... but very different.

And yes being aware of modal concepts as a reference is what using the modal terms for fingerings should imply. But it's obviously moved on because.... I would guess most teacher don't understand what their teaching.

But it does seem easier to use the mode terms as labels for different positions or fingering of different scale degrees...
OK lets really get into how different fingering work...

What do you teachers use when you move on to different scales... pattern 4A, caged 3B. Saying Dorian b9 or Dorian b5 is fairly easy to see and hear the fingering.... and understand the reference.... where the note collection is from.

[henryrobinett]

Yeah Reg. As I said elsewhere, the purpose of the scale patterns, any system of scale patterns, is to give you a comprehensive look at, understanding of and access to, the entire neck in one fell swoop. It doesn't so much matter which system you use, as long as it's complete, comprehensive and understood with total confidence. The fingering is less important. In my case I have made a complete system of these patterns -- all of the arpeggios, modes, chords -- everything comes directly out of these patterns. Years and years of work -- since the early 80s, of going over this. They form a complete system.

What I find confusing is applying disjointed scales/modes and arpeggios and chords, gotten from various places. Or worse a little bit of this and a little bit of that. Eventually you can start seeing connections, but they don't form a system.

The WHOLE DEAL with playing any instrument, but especially guitar because it's so convoluted, is getting a clear concept of the neck and music so one can THINK on the guitar. One needs to SEE the neck to be able to easily find solutions under you fingertips. And I believe it starts right here, at the beginning, with the scale patterns. And for me they're the 7 Major Scale Patterns. There are 7 notes in the scale. 5 patterns just isn't complete enough for me. But if it works for others, go with what works, make your system and learn to think clearly with it.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I think a lot of the confusion with using mode names to describe fingerings or pitch collections (regardless of whether you're actually using a modal approach) comes from rock players/teachers. When I was a kid, I read the guitar magazines, and they talked about "modes" as a way of describing pitch collections played over a given chord. G minor pentatonic or G mixo over the G7 chord. I certainly don't think they were talking about modal "implications" or playing with a "modal concept". It was really just CST, chord-by-chord, but just note collections and not usually in a jazz context at all. D dorian, G mixo to C Ionian to match the chords, even if it was just all basic C major.

The fact that we're generally uneducated as guitarists doesn't help either, but through the internet and the term's uses in non-jazz contexts, the term "mode" has come to mean:

1) pitch collections, spelled as a mode, from the root of the chord-of the-moment
2) scale fingering positions, referencing the lowest note, (esp. from the 6th string)
3) playing the major scale, but beginning and ending on a different scale degree. (Honestly, it's described that way in a lot of conventional educational material without any reference to cadence, harmony or whatever.)

and..

4) the way jazzers or classical players/teachers use it in talking about playing with modal concepts.

The whole thing often feels like when people get really irritated on facebook or whatever with some modern misuse of grammar which has become "accepted" because of its pervasiveness (even if incorrect) in popular culture. At some point we may have to admit that the term has just been bastardized and no longer means what it used to, but it's a serious area of confusion, because all four of these areas are heavily discussed among jazz guitarists.

[henryrobinett]

True Matt. For ME words and accurate nomenclature are EXTREMELY important to understand, and obviously teach ANY concept clearly. There are a lot of words that have become bastardized. In their wake confusion ensues. I understand some reputable dictionary finally gave up and included the definition of literally as also "figuratively." Silly people. So if you KNOW the definition of literally and someone uses it incorrectly, as so often happens, it can cause confusion. Same with the incorrect term MODES.

[Takemitsu]

then make a facial expression indicating that's exactly what I was going for.

[Patrick2]

Not quite the facial expression I was thinking about . . . . lolol

[Vladan]

notes99, his choice of words could be better at times, you're not the only one who had something to say on that (me included) and yes, he does not know who you are.
I do not either. Does anybody on the forum know about "note99"?
On the other hand he's here under full name,all the linkss to his web site, with pictures ...., so we all know who he is. I think that deserves some credit.
"You don't know who you are talking to." sounds overly provocaative, IMO.

Sorry if I missunderstood.

[Reg]

We should get into arpeggios and chords all based on the same fingerings, like Henry was saying, a complete system. Which gives you the ability to play any scale, arpeggio, chord.... whatever.... all with reference to the fingering and position. Which leads to being able to play basically anything in any position... You can jump around the fretboard.... or you can also stay in one position.... your playing the guitar... the guitar isn't playing you, at least you have the choice.

And then of course the fingerings also apply with Melodic Minor, scales, arpeggios, chords etc... and onto the rest of the scales etc...

If your looking for new ideas for old tunes... play the tune in different positions, you can mechanically bump into different relationships to develop, which become what your able to hear and play as compared to playing and hearing.

I generally don't push trial and error... but at least the approach can be organized.

If you eventually get through MM... you'll be amazed how many Blue notes can be organized, as compared to random ornamentation.

[MarkRhodes]

For moonray -- please realize I never said my way or the highway. I distinctly said "to each his own" and each method will work. You just need to apply yourself to the one. But clearly I have my biases. AND I'd warn against getting bogged down in too many methods. One will do.

I agree. What is the term now, "paralyzed by choice"? I'm glad I didn't face that as a kid. (Though I wish I had found some better advice on right hand technique then...)

[fumblefingers]

We should get into arpeggios and chords all based on the same fingerings, like Henry was saying, a complete system. Which gives you the ability to play any scale, arpeggio, chord.... whatever.... all with reference to the fingering and position. Which leads to being able to play basically anything in any position... You can jump around the fretboard.... or you can also stay in one position.... your playing the guitar... the guitar isn't playing you, at least you have the choice.

And then of course the fingerings also apply with Melodic Minor, scales, arpeggios, chords etc... and onto the rest of the scales etc...

If your looking for new ideas for old tunes... play the tune in different positions, you can mechanically bump into different relationships to develop, which become what your able to hear and play as compared to playing and hearing.

I generally don't push trial and error... but at least the approach can be organized.

If you eventually get through MM... you'll be amazed how many Blue notes can be organized, as compared to random ornamentation.

that would be a great thread Reg - fire it up!


As for me, i like "CAGED plus" where the plus is a few stretch fingerings in the higher positions - as options:
- Leavitt's Types 1 and 4, and
- Henry's "I pattern" (3NPS)

For arpeggios ( a huge topic) i think that there are 4-7 useful fingerings for one-octave, root position, seventh chord arpeggios, depending on the chord quality. That is, 1-2 one octave root position fingerings from each of the starting strings 6-5-4-3. Of course then you apply the same principle to inversions. To get to two-octave forms you may have some options in the same position/fingering pattern, or you may have to shift up for the second octave - it depends on the chord quality and starting string.

I only concern myself with "high percentage" fingerings and don't worry about low percentage fingerings. In other words, I don't worry about awkward fingerings from every starting finger and string coming out of Leavitt's 12 fingerings. I think one can/should be more economical than that. (FWIW - if you want to see an economy of arpeggio and scale fingerings look at the Johnny Smith "complete" method for guitar. too few options? you be the judge). To expand a little. I don't think its a math game where we have to concern ourselves with every combination and permutation of fingerings. When I was under the influence of the Leavitt 12 pattern system I thought that way. I have decided - for me - that that is a boondoggle.

By definition, with "single note soloing" you only play one note at a time. I would extend that to say that you are either playing an arpeggio or scale, or pattern or lick. You can only do one thing at a time. So I think that you should use the best fingerings for each - for you, and you must have facility with all of them.

If you have a challenging adjustment to bridge the gap between one fingering to the other to express an idea - take "a breath" like a horn player, and make it sound musical. One thing that jazz guitarists often fall into is playing like a perpetual motion machine. Sounds like shit (pardon my French).

See any holes here? Or rather, how many holes do you see here?

[DaveWoods]

The "Caged" system is the worst possible name for this approach. I'ts better to call it the chain link system. I call them "The Five Key Shapes". In the same key, they all connect and overlap each other by two Frets, like an interlocking chain. The order they always connect in is invariable, the same in all twelve possible Keys. When the song changes keys, no matter where you are on the fret board, one of the five "shapes" will always be within one fret of your left hand. When your left hand is moving up and down the neck, you're moving through the shapes. Anywhere you're left hand stops, you'll always be in one of the Five Key Shapes. Dave Woods

[matt.guitarteacher]

The "Caged" system is the worst possible name for this approach.

I don't think it was ever a marketing decision. My understanding is that it just evolved among players. Not really codified.

The order they always connect in is invariable, the same in all twelve possible Keys.

And that order, starting from C, is C-A-G-E-D. It's i just a memorable acronym. "AGE-DC" just want quite as catchy, I guess.

[henryrobinett]

I love seeing the methods other guitar players use.

[MarkRhodes]

I don't think it was ever a marketing decision. My understanding is that it just evolved among players. Not really codified.

And that order, starting from C, is C-A-G-E-D. It's i just a memorable acronym. "AGE-DC" just want quite as catchy, I guess.

That was my assumption to. I use "FAD" for the earlier 'system' of organizing the fretboard. It's handy, but that's not the order the shapes come in. (That order would be F D A, or D A F, or A F D, depending on your starting point.) Herb Ellis called them 'shape 1,' 'shape 2' and 'shape 3.'

What I like about the "FAD" approach (-which is what Fred Sokolow is using for his "Fretboard Roadmaps") is that it is based on triads and shows you where the root (and 3rd and 5th) for each one is on the high E, B, and G strings. That's where we use them most when soloing or playing fills. When you use all three, moving up the neck, they repeat in a new octave. Who could ask for anything more?

[Reg]

Getting back to a comment by fumble fingers... you only play one note at a time... or something like that, he has a system that works for him... that is the goal, right. Your fretboard system works for you, not for someone else, not me etc...

It can become more complicated than need be, but in the end, you have a fretboard system that works for YOU.

Personally I have always needed a very complete system... I perform with all types of musicians, all over the place and in every context and setting. I generally don't get rehearsals or time to figure things out before I perform. I need to be able to perform the music right the first time, and that's usually on stage. And fake like I've been playin the tune for years.

So I have a complete fretboard system, and I'm also aware of other fingering that help create different feels... Generally more for looks than articulations. When you have "Your" fingering system down... you can accent anyway you need to.
(and I can read anything, which also requires a very complete fingering system)Generally most guitarist don't really need to read that much... just cover the changes etc.

Anyway... again personally, all those single notes imply a harmony, a chord, I always have a harmonic or chordal reference for each note I play. Even melodically derived or organized lines have a reference harmony or chord, that's how I play and hear music. A simple example... I'm playing in Bb with blues reference....in 5th position... when I play... a triplet of F G Bb, to dotted 8th Db to a 16th tied... Bb Each note could imply a chord...
D-7b5 F-7 Ab13....F7b13#9... Bb13... or some other harmonic movement.
X 5 6 5 6 X
X 8 6 8 9 X
X 9 10 10 11 X
X 8 7 8 9 X
X X 5 6 7 5

The use of D-7b5 opens F melodic minor Blue note.. #11 or b5
The use of Ab13 open Eb melodic minor Blue notes.. b7 (and b13 if you want)
The use of F7alt opens Gb melodic minor..Blue notes...b9, #9 or b3, b7 and again b13 if you choose
The fairly standard use those harmonic subs give access to BLUE NOTES...

The other standard melodic minor access chord for use of blue notes is VI7 altered, in Bb that would be G7altered. When you play bebop that VI7 altered chord for harmonic reference to blue notes is close to being Rock like when using pentatonics.

So I chose a fingering system that reflects the way I hear and play. I need to be able to play any scale or arpeggio from any chord anywhere on the fretboard, I need all positions, the caged system doesn't work for me.... except when I want to use it for effect. But it obviously works. Just not for me.

Anyway long story for why you need to make a choice for what fingering system YOUR going to use and get it together, the sooner you don't need to think about fingering the sooner your going to be able to actually play your guitar as compared to the guitar playing you, at least you'll be aware of when the guitar is playing you.