-
I had always being a CAGED user and still , but i have to admit it kinda forces my mind to always relate the whole shape in the six strings , which is a lot of information to deal with when improvising , also it makes it "okay" if you just locate the roots in String low E and A , major problem right there as when improvising i think picking up the next root to visualise from should no be dictated from a shape but mayebe voice leading or a range of sound you will like to express yourself In !
I watched tom quayle's fretboard visualisation (great lesson) no legato stuff , just pure fretboard visualisation !
he highlighted the fact CAGED doesn't help too much when playing the changes and that it's mandatory to know all roots , all intervals both ascending descending , and each time a root should visualized (doesn't mean it should be played) ! i think this is a great aproach to fretboard , as it also encourages me to mix intervals all up not always play R 3 5..in this order .
This lesson was an eye openner to me realy recommand it , as it's only dealing with the Basis of fretboard knowledge !
-
11-26-2016 08:00 AM
-
When you get used to it, you don't have to think much about it. Like you don't have to think of the root names on the low E and A strings---you just know them. Or your favorite chord grips---you don't have to think about them, you just play them.
One thing that helped me with this was to play up and down the arpeggio of each chord in the key in each position.
Say you're starting on G major, 3rd fret. Play up GM7, down A-7, up B-7 and so on. Then come back down. Next, you start with A- (the ii chord in the key) and do the same thing. Then start from B- (the iii chord).
There are 7 chords in a major key but only 5 CAGED positions, so there is some overlap. It comes in two places, first is the m7b5 (the vii chord) and the I chord. Those both come from the same scale pattern. Ditto the iii and IV chord.
As you do that, say the names of the notes. When you do this for awhile, you get really good at knowing the names of all the notes, you also learning the relation of chord tone to chord tone for different kinds of chords on different string sets. After awhile, you don't have to think about it much at all.
-
I think while it's important to know the pitches , while playing the only important pitch to know is the R , then everything else relating to it is an interval ! so knowing all pitches of what you are playing becomes just a burden not very usefull ,As you do that, say the names of the notes. When you do this for awhile, you get really good at knowing the names of all the notes, you also learning the relation of chord tone to chord tone for different kinds of chords on different string sets. After awhile, you don't have to think about it much at all.
while it's vital to any given point you know what pitch you just played and what interval it is related to the root (in any area , any string not just E and A ) .
So my whole point is while CAGED is cool , the ultimate goal is playing voice led arpegios in any direction wanted , any area .. also the habit of always playign 2 octaves arpegios is not musical IMHO , thus the important of visualizing small arpeggios and scales relating to any Root ! If not able to locate all R in the whole fretboard you are in trouble !
I don't think the great used CAGED TBH , they just seem to flow easily all over the fretboard (wes for instance) !
-
I know the fingerboard well which means that I can visualize multiple options of where notes are to be found and how they can be organized to create whatever harmonic/melodic structure I need. This is very helpful on many levels.
Alas there remains the not so small tasks of having the technique to execute various articulations and rhythms to the given note collection and that lifelong challenge for any improvisor, finding something personal and meaningful to say.
I never learned CAGED systems, but I like the basic idea of generating material in reference to something else.
The basic open major chords in relation to major scales sounds like a good starting point.
I'm not sure how well these shapes serve as a skeleton key reference for more divergent structures though.
Ultimately, whether we can access what we want to play is far more important than the organizational approach
we used to get there.
1. Visualizing each string as an independent instrument with the chromatic scale as a basic reference
2. Tactile knowledge of how the guitar mirrors itself string to string
3. Pure note location recognition
4. Every interval has 2 viable melodic shapes and at least one viable harmonic shape (within limitations of range)
5. Knowledge of the intervallic content of scale and chordal structures
6. Knowledge of different fingering maneuvers: finger per fret, extensions, contractions, barres,
multiple fingers/same fret, slides, bends (if stylistically applicable), etc.
7. Awareness of positional and string group perspectives on organizing a note collection
8. Using a comparative approach to know different chord types in the same inversion or modes from a
common reference note
9. Like building from an erector set, knowing how to combine 2,3 and 4 note scale fragments to craft multiple
fingering options.
These describe what I consider to be foundational elements of fingerboard knowledge.
Like many of us, the path I traversed to get to where I am was not the most direct route to the destination.
I'm not familiar with Tom Quayle. I'm curious in what ways his approach is similar or different from what I presented.
-
I think whatever you practice with fretboard mapping, practice it for a good long while. But choose something that makes sense to you.
-
Tom Quayle is an absolutely fantastic modern legato fusion player who to my ears has a whole heap of musicality and grounding in jazz. However, he seems to be largely going down the clinics, demonstrations and backing tracks career direction, which is a shame.
Originally Posted by bako
This guy needs to get playing in a proper band. But it's difficult, not much out there for fusion guys I suspect. Straight-ahead and even contemporary guys have it easier in many ways I think.
-
When I started taking lessons, I was told it takes about 5 years of dedicated practice to have a decent functional understanding of the fingerboard, where you don't wind up stumbling and fumbling and guessing and have a decent command and functional fluency and control of intervals, the fingerboard, shapes, fingerings, etc.
I think that is very true. I am, for myself, on the verge of actually finally creating music spontaneously that comes out naturally and doesn't sound forced, fumbling and stumbling. FINALLY.
I think that having a baseline wherein you practice scales with your 1st, 2nd and 4th finger is crucial. I don't know if it was Chuck Wayne who pioneered this, but that's what I got from his scale and arp books.
In significant part because those three fingerings help you map out the fingerboard such that you can see and understand it as a unified whole. When you start the scale/line with the 4th finger, you can see applicable note choices DOWN and across the fingerboard. When you start the scale/line with the 2nd finger, you can see the applicable note choices immediately available, in position. When you start the scale/line with the 1st finger, you can see the applicable note choices UP and across the fingerboard. UP, DOWN and ACROSS the fingerboard become a unified whole, a single entity.
-
5 years sounds very reasonable , but i'd imagine it can take longer if the the practice isn't well structured !When I started taking lessons, I was told it takes about 5 years of dedicated practice to have a decent functional understanding of the fingerboard, where you don't wind up stumbling and fumbling and guessing and have a decent command and functional fluency and control of intervals, the fingerboard, shapes, fingerings, etc.
I'm very interrested in your take , what are the things that helped map the fretboard better ? (transcribing/transposing lines , playing standards in different keys in all areas ? ,books ? lessons ?) i imagine all of that !
would be great if you can go a bit deeper into that to help me and other people in the stage as me
-
I don't know man, all of it, I suppose. What I try to do is when working on a song: Originally Posted by mooncef
5 years sounds very reasonable , but i'd imagine it can take longer if the the practice isn't well structured !
I'm very interrested in your take , what are the things that helped map the fretboard better ? (transcribing/transposing lines , playing standards in different keys in all areas ? ,books ? lessons ?) i imagine all of that !
would be great if you can go a bit deeper into that to help me and other people in the stage as me
Stay in one position, more or less. Learn All the chords associated with that tune more or less in that position. You will have to integrate your knowledge of drop 2s and drop 3s and inversions. Learn all of the arpeggios and scales associated with those chords/harmonies in that position. Practice all of these scales with the three referenced fingerings (1,2, and 4) associated with the 7 ways to practice and find a scale. Practice all of the arpeggios for each chord not only from the root, but from all the chord tones and also not only from the root, but the lowest possible note on the 6th string to the highest possible note on the 1st string. Practice the shit out of all this more or less in that position, so all the notes and possibilities for notes become so familiar that they become second nature.
Find another position (maybe an octave up) and repeat the process.
-
It's about 35 years now that I own a guitar and I still can not play sh*** , not even a simple major scale without some fuss, however, I don't have a problem with naming notes on the neck, or intervals.
The time it takes is relative in terms of perceived length.
In their own words,...
Steve Vai ... was very "slow on guitar" he thinks anybody who'd put in as much effort and time as he have would become nuch more advanced player than he is.
Paul Gilbert ... it took him 8 years to come even close to playing his "infamous" lick .
Jaco Pastorius .. it took 9 years for him to "really" learn Donna Lee ...
... and so on ...
How long is too long before we give up on coming close to AM greats of guitar, even if of 4 strings only?
As for CAGED, only recently I learned there is such a system, but long time ago I found out if I grab a chord all the notes from corresponding scale are just a fret away. Intervals you learn while tuning, from simple melodies and chords, unless you go to music school where they teach you the other way around (I don't know really how they teach), but they do so expecting you've already figured it in your own way, just help you put some order into piles of empirical knowledge (that's what I'd expect them to do)...
VladanMovies BlogSpot
-
Use everything at your disposal. CAGED is good. Intervals are good. Knowledge = good. The more of the fretboard you have memorized via CAGED, scales, arpeggios, chord forms, intervals, etc...the better you will play. It's rarely ever X versus Y. It's usually X + Y that we want.
-
Tom Quayle, like myself, is a P4 tuner. The CAGED system doesn't apply to our instruments so by necessity, we have to think differently.
-
Fully agree!Use everything at your disposal. CAGED is good. Intervals are good. Knowledge = good. The more of the fretboard you have memorized via CAGED, scales, arpeggios, chord forms, intervals, etc...the better you will play. It's rarely ever X versus Y. It's usually X + Y that we want.
-
Here we just disagree. Playing voice-led arpeggios in any direction wanted is not musical IMHO. It's preparatory. It's a great skill to have but if one did that on the bandstand, it would sound like a musical exercise, not (good) music. Originally Posted by mooncef
As for greats using CAGED, here is the video Ron Eschete (a great, IMO) made for us here describing his take on it. He got it off a Joe Pass record. (Figured out what Joe was doing and later met Joe and Joe told Ron that he--Ron--had "got it right" about how Joe organized the fretboard.)
-
Ron Eschete's The Jazz Guitar Soloist was where I first came across the CAGED concept. An excellent primer although it makes more sense to me to run the five common major keys in a cycle of 4ths - G, C, F, Bb, Eb - rather than in the order presented by Ron - C, F, Bb, Eb, G. Practising the cycle in this fashion, by simply moving up one fret after completing the group (Ab, Db, Gb, B, E) and continuing the process up the the 14th position, you can cover all twelve keys in all five positions (5x12=60).
-
That makes more sense to me too! Originally Posted by PMB
Thanks for the chart!
-
Would you please post a link to this lesson? I could not find it on YouTube. Originally Posted by mooncef
Thank you.
-
I could only find a link to his website to purchase the lesson. Lessons Originally Posted by jasaco
-
I daresay what you do use is adaptable to regular tuning, although a little more tricky. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
-
? I'm not sure what you're getting at. I was only talked about the CAGED system which is specific to standard tuning. Originally Posted by christianm77
-
I'd like to offer what may be another way.
1. Know every note on the fingerboard without having to think about it.
2. Know every note of the scales you use in all 12 keys, without having to think about it, any more than you know the notes of C major. This is thinking about a scale as a pool of notes, in no particular order.
3. Be able to hear a melody in your head and play it with very few mistakes. Try this: pick a random fret and finger. Starting there, see if you can play Happy Birthday, perfectly. If you can't, start working on being able to play melodies you know, any fret, any finger.
If you can do those three things, it seems to me that you're in pretty good shape. #3 will get you through a tune you know without thinking.
If you're looking for new sounds, you can pick a chord/scale juxtaposition and play it. You know the notes you want and you know where they are.
This is a lot of work. It takes a good deal of drill to know multiple scales in 12 keys -- cold -- including enharmonic equivalents (you do not have time to think, oh, F# is Gb - each one has to be automatic).
But, I don't think it's any more work than learning several (5? 7?) patterns for every scale -- and maybe more than that if you start thinking about modes within scales.
Personally, I'm intimidated by the idea that I should learn 7 positions for a major scale and then 7 modes for each so that I'm not thinking Cionian when I really want Blocrian. And, a similar set of "tables" in my head for melodic minor, harmonic minor, diminished, whole tone, pentatonic harmonic major etc.
From Ron's video, which confirmed what I'd heard somewhere else, Joe Pass really thought about the chord grips when he soloed. It makes sense. You already know need to know the grips, so why not attach your single note knowledge to them?
I'm not suggesting my approach is better -- it has its flaws. Just different. One thing I know for certain about guitar is that there's always a great player with an approach that isn't like yours.
-
I'm at a slight tangent, but basically, whatever you use in 4ths tuning as an organising principle ought to be available in a modified form in standard, although you may well ask 'why not just tune to 4ths' - anyway I'm interested to learn more about your approach and Quayle's. Originally Posted by 4thstuning
I take it that in 4ths, the CAGED system is no longer require because the grips for A E and D are now identical only on different strings and the C and G shapes the same. If I were using 4ths I would probably base my fretboard mapping on scales built around the two octave shapes, and the same with arpeggios, triads and so on.
You can in fact do this in standard, but you always have to bear in mind that lost fret between strings G and B.
Incidentally have experimented with 4ths in the past and the huge immediate advantages are somewhat undermined for me by the abandonment of the history of the instrument.
The viheula/guitar and lute families have used irregular tunings for at least 400 years. As always YMMV. There's no reason you can't play John Dowland or Lynyrd Skynyrd in 4ths, it just *looks* absolutely hilarious when you do ;-)
-
That's a fair analysis. In terms of patterns, at the most very basic level, I think root note and frets above (A, E, D equivalent) or root note and frets below (C, G equivalents). Originally Posted by christianm77
As for what Quayle is thinking, I've no idea. I'm much more of a chordal player and he's more into single line - we're going in different directions.
-
That's an interesting discussion. The CAGED system can be thought of as an extension of viewing the fretboard through intervals, rather than an exclusive approach (CAGED vs. Intervals). CAGED organises the fretboard into groups larger than individual intervals and defines a position-based framework that spans the entire neck. As long as 1, 3, 5 are visualised within each chord shape (not just the dots or the root 1 and dots), other intervals are within easy reach. There is no need to play or even visualise the CAGED shape on all six strings; visualising partial shapes on a few strings is often enough. I like to think of CAGED as an application of what I call "anchoring", with 1, 3, 5 as the anchors. This concept is further developed in the book Fretboard PhD.
-
Joe says in his book "On Guitar" that "Grips (chord forms) tend to dictate melody... What you are looking for is right around your fingers." Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
Reply With Quote
1949 L5 and other vintage Gibson archtops at...
Today, 05:15 PM in For Sale