-
Originally Posted by jrkelley
I believe that this is CAGED
https://www.google.com/search?q=CAGE...55Hv3C8qcfQ%3D
and this - no stretches.
https://www.google.com/search?q=CAGE...55Hv3C8qcfQ%3DLast edited by fumblefingers; 01-09-2016 at 06:24 PM.
-
01-09-2016 06:22 PM
-
Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
Howard taught a lot. Howard Roberts Guitar Seminar, GIT, Guitar Player Magazine, the Guitar Compendium books, other books.
He certainly uses CAGED in his Compendium Volume 2 book.
-
The problem with caged is that actually for everyone it means something different. In Joe Pass guitar method, Joe gives prefereable fingerings which contain stretches beetwen 3rd ant 4th finger.
-
Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Two corrections, Reg uses the following from Leavitt;
2
1-A
1-C, or optionally 4-A
3
1
1-B
4
-
but did he call it CAGED? Originally Posted by katamaranos
-
There's no word "CAGED" written, but chord forms are shown. Originally Posted by fumblefingers
-
Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
Well if they were taught by two public teachers, then they sound like public domain. Can you share them?
I would say this,
IF
we are talking about major scales, five fingerings that cover 12 frets, cutting across all 6 strings, and no stretches used
THEN
the probability that they are not CAGED is just about zilch.
-
Right, and he indeed uses stretches, and provides alternate fingerings. Originally Posted by katamaranos
he also says that there are no "fixed fingerings" and "many different possibilities" and that "the fingerings are intended as suggestions". he also says that "those which best suit the player's hand should eventually be adopted".
no wonder Joe advocated stretches, he was flexible!
-
Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Whatever, but who said Jb's life's work is public domain?
lots of threads on this site on this matter, no need to repeat here.
-
Sheesh. Caged again. No one owns caged it's not copyrighted. It's not codified or standardized. Everybody has their different take on it. That's the main problem with it. Nobody knows where it came from. Bruno is caged. His fingerings just are. If you want to boil his entire method down to those five fingerings and said that's all he's about, you're insulting him.
You can't copyright the guitar's layout. Caged is an acronym which describes the way the instrument is laid out. It's not a method. It's like saying every good boy does fine is a method.
Caged is very generally and loosely used here , most of the time, to differentiate from stretch fingerings systems like William Leavitt. Most people assume that caged is shift oriented.
-
Yeah. 1-C... Originally Posted by fumblefingers
-
Milestones, the 4 positions you're using are exactly the same as those advocated by Barry Greene and Chuck Wayne so you're in good company! They're basically CAGED -1 so it's probably worth adding Matt's suggested missing fingering. There are many different approaches to conceptualising those forms but they're pretty universal. Supposedly first coined by L.A. studio player, Jack Marshall, CAGED offers a visual chord-based reference for navigating the fretboard that has been promoted by Joe Pass, Howard Roberts, Pat Martino, Jimmy Bruno and countless others in their lesson materials (even though their fingering patterns may vary slightly and the name CAGED is rarely employed).
As an indication of how each individual may get their own handle on these scale shapes, I took a similar approach to Matt when learning them to complete a cycle of 4ths although with the forms reordered correspondingly into EADGC. I also started out by applying vocabulary within those forms to the five most common jazz keys, G, C, F, Bb, Eb:
"E" form - G major, 6th string, 2nd finger root
"A" form - C major, 5th string, 2nd finger root
"D" form - F major, 3th string, 2nd finger root (extended form = 6th string, 1st finger root)
"G" form - Bb major, 6th string, 4th finger root
"C" form - Eb major, 6th string, 4th finger root
By moving everything up up one fret to start on Ab, the cycle can continue to cover every position in every key (5x12).
The caveat to all this, as Reg suggested is that these forms work best when playing material conceived in that manner. If you're interested in taking a more modally arranged approach to the fretboard with greater access to legato-style phrasing - think Holdsworth and Rosenwinkel - 7 positions, either fixed or utilising 3 notes-per-string from each scale note may be worth investigating.
Bear in mind that whatever approach you take, it can offer equal parts entrapment and liberation (it's not called CAGED for nothing!). That is why eventually, I'd check out as many methods as possible. Here's a provisional list:
1) Unitar. Mick Goodrick's term for playing scales up each individual string.
2) CAGED
3) 7 positions
4) 3 n.p.s
5) Chuck Wayne primary and secondary "intermediate" forms (you're already using these)
6) 3-octave symmetrical fingerings (see Sid Jacobs "Jazz Guitar Improvisation" for an explanation)
7) 12 positions
The truth of the matter is that no size fits all. Compromises and solutions are always being made in terms of fingering and positions whether it's searching for an ideal solution to articulating a line or finding a workable solution to getting around super-fast tempos. Even on the piano where each note is fixed in place, standard fingerings often break down in real world musical situations.
Ideally, you want to reach the situation best expressed by Charlie Parker: "Master your instrument, master the music, then forget all that shit and just play!".Last edited by PMB; 01-10-2016 at 12:58 AM.
-
Yeah. That's cool. That's basically Leavitt volume 1. There are only so many possibilities. It kills me when people talk about certain fingerings belonging to certain people. Originally Posted by PMB
At least Leavitt kind of codified it and detailed how to evolve fingerings through the cycle etc. The thing is, at least his philosophy had kind of a creation date, and it's his. Meanwhile, it seems like there are so many MORE people butt-hurt about who's stealing what from whom in regards to CAGED, which doesn't belong to anybody.
That's it. From today forward, I'm suing anyone who uses the phrase, "all cows eat grass" for bass cleft. I invented it.
We need a sticky thread on CAGED disambiguation. "Who stole CAGED from whom?" is the zombie thread topic that just won't die.
-
Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
i have to agree with Matt, if we're just talking 5 fingerings, and as you say Howard Roberts used them too, then they aren't JB's "life work". Unless he taught them to Howard, which seems highly unlikely, for historical reasons.
anyway, if you see my post #26, the question would be "are those what Jimmy teaches?" My recollection is yes, per the time I subscribed. Anyway, those are used in Howard Roberts Compendium book. People call them CAGED.
-
I've always felt like I should learn to play things every way possible and eventually gravitate toward fingering patterns that feel and sound good to me.
Last edited by Mr. Pocket; 01-10-2016 at 07:14 AM. Reason: misunderstood thread
-
Originally Posted by fumblefingers
Fumblefingers, no offense meant, just that I don't think it right for me to post JB's Five Fingerings sheet from his site. Others have, and one can find that on their own. I merely pointed out that they are the same fingerings as HR, nothing more.
The mastering of some fingering system is essential for progress, and takes meaningful time to learn and really master. So, pick one and stick with it... call it what you want, but for me JB's system gets the job done.
Now, I need to get back to practice!Last edited by boatheelmusic; 01-10-2016 at 07:20 AM.
-
I guess I use JBs 5 positions too, I just haven't thought about it in a while. I use the ones from no nonsense jazz guitar DVD I bought 4 or 5 years ago.
-
I don't either, but I must have missed that post... Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
-
i never asked you to do that. no need to over complicate. you could simply look at the public domain links that i have posted and say "yep, same" or "nope, different". Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
again, when it comes to the "Howard Roberts fingerings" (which are allegedly the same as JB's) the answer is "yep". they are EXACTLY the same as I linked to in post #26. people starting calling these CAGED at some point.
BTW - two of the so-called CAGED patterns are found in Carcassi's method, dated to the early 1800s. i believe that a third is found somewhere in the old classical methods too. ALL FIVE are in Aaron Shearer's old scale book.
so, big whoop regarding the proprietary nature and intellectual property of CAGED.
-
Not to prolong this, but to correct your record.....
"Well if they were taught by two public teachers, then they sound like public domain. Can you share them?"
I'm out.
-
Maybe he's since locked everything down, but as of 3-4 years ago when CAGED discussions were running hot and heavy, Jimmy Bruno had enough free and public video and written material out there on his own sites to show the basics of his fingerings. Maybe that has changed. I don't know. As far as I remember it was absolutely what most people consider CAGED.
I'm not a lawyer, but I don't think things like the major scale or the layout of the guitar are proprietary. FACE, EGBDF, CAGED, drop2.... All of these are determined by the laws of physics and music theory. In standard tuning, the notes are always going to be in the same arrangements. There are only so many ways to go about things. The fact that PMB arrived at exactly the same five fingerings as William Leavitt isn't indicative of their phychic connection. Neither is Reg's arriving at the same things before arriving at Berklee. It's honestly just pure science. Nobody owns that, and nobody's stealing anything there.
Now, you can't print Bruno's words (not beyond a certain quote length), diagrams, or images from his books or share his private videos. That's his. But saying that he uses CAGED-type fingerings is like saying he uses the major scale and its arps and chords as a basis for his beginning material. That information is available in his promo material. He wants you to know that. Besides which, you can absolutely talk about and review books or other written material. It's actually what sells books. Bruno appreciates that part.
His saying that his material isn't "just CAGED" is largely philisophical, but it's also true in that sense. It's his approach to not thinking about each position modally or whatever, but here, in this thread, we're talking about where the fingers go. The fact that he's doing a lot of the basics like Joe Pass and the classical cats before all of them isn't a knock against any of them. I imagine Jimmy would tell you to save your money if you think the only valuable information in his course is a fingering. Honestly, that detracts from the value of what he has tried to do for many years.
Again, I would discourage anyone from saying what CAGED is and isn't, because there is no final answer on this. It isn't codified. There's no CAGED certification, no CAGED convention or CAGED governing body. There is no inventor of CAGED. It's the order of the chord shapes as you go up the neck, like EGBDF is the order of notes on the lines of the treble clef. (If someone had copyrighted the "CAGED method" back in the day, I suppose it would be proprietary, but it's a common 5-letter noun as well.... Anyway....
Honestly, how the scale fingerings fit on top of those chord shapes is different everywhere. When I was learning them the first time, the "2nd finger-6th string-mixolydian pattern had a stretch for the b7 on the 1st (and 6th) string. It wasn't called CAGED, and it doesn't matter. If I had to guess I'd say that the tradition of saying, "CAGED is shift-based, not stretch-based" has more to do with the traditions of the past than anything. Players maybe didn't do the stretch thing back in the day when this CAGED thing started??? I don't know, because there isn't a final answer.
If you want proof that there's no universal standard for CAGED, start doing some research on Melodic Minor fingerings based on CAGED. Honestly, the whole thing falls apart. There's no consensus, and everybody is all over the place with their own variations of where the shifts should be. Oh, and a lot of people who are CAGED players use all kinds of stretches once they get to melodic minor!! IMO examination of melodic minor and trying to get your head around it with CAGED is where it really jumps the shark.
I'm sure Roberts, Pass et al. have good approaches for it. Just be careful saying that you "know" what CAGED is and what it isn't because you'll look like Fox Mulder trying to convince someone of the Mothman or something. You don't know. You just don't. Everybody plays different fingerings over those chords. The chords themselves are the only constant (and they're not either).Last edited by matt.guitarteacher; 01-10-2016 at 02:55 PM.
-
you probably misconstrued what I meant. Originally Posted by boatheelmusic
i meant if one didn't have to acknowledge the other, then they are/were probably both using public domain material, which I will continue to believe. i already established that Roberts did.Last edited by fumblefingers; 01-11-2016 at 09:42 AM.
-
OK, peace!
-
True on the first point, although specific fingerings may have been deemed eligible for intellectual property - if - the classical guys hadn't detailed them first. but probably not, even then. Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
On the second point, yeah the minor scales present some choices on shifts and fingerings if avoiding stretches is the goal.
i have my favorites, which align pretty closely with some published treatises on the topic. no big deal. admittedly they're a bit of a challenge, just like stretches are in the lower area of the fret board.
-
Jimmy Brunno denies the existance of melodic and harmonic minors if I'm right. So there's no problem Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
Reply With Quote
How is the Steve Howe 175?
Today, 05:54 PM in Guitar, Amps & Gizmos