Less fingerings - mastering the changes faster ?

[rodolfoguitarra]

Do you think if we stick with only one or two fingerings for each arpeggio the process of mastering the changes would go easier or faster? Less pattern = less decisions or paths to take, making the thinking process more efficient. Some people may argue that certain types of fingerings results in unique sounds (example: horn like phrasing). What do you think? See the example below, I have 3 options to do an Cm6 arpeggio, but the green one does not require finger stretch, so stick with it for everytime I see a Xm6 would be much more efficient. In tune in P4s, so this shape repeats for the entire fretboard.

[jordanklemons]

As a general rule of thumb, I think anytime you limit the focus of what you're working on into a more narrow and specific thing, you're going to absorb that thing much easier or more quickly than if you were attempting to work on multiple things at a time.

[emanresu]

We can argue back and forth but just in case you pick the "less is more" side, at least try to play all sorts of fingerings in the mornings. It never hurts to have more. Maybe they will become useful, who knows.

[jazznylon]

Maybe.. maybe not? I think each fingering has an advantage and a disadvantage, maybe it varies. For instance imagine being able to play a Charlie Parker solo convincingly well with only one finger and in only one position. The positive is that your shifting technique would most likely definetly improve. The negative? .. well it probably wouldn't sound ideal because you just lost the ability to hammer-on, pull-off.

One could go on and on with the positive and negative and even that varies too sometimes. Django managed very well with two fingers. Just do what feels right to you.. within reason. Or no reason. Maybe be crazy. Maybe I'm crazy. I think maybe is my new favorite word.

[henryrobinett]

Ach! Yes, but the problem with guitar is its hard. Harder than the sax. You never know where your finger's going to be or the phrase is going to lead you. That's why REALLY you have to know the fretboard completely. As an EXERCISE of course. Simplify. But in reality you gotta know them all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[jazznylon]

Yeah I guess that was a bit too much haha

Actually now that I think about it.. why not just develop and improve from where a person would normally finger (or play) for like 50% of their practice time? They can spend another 50% exploring new fingerings, maybe a different ratio? 75-25%? Who's counting anyways

[henryrobinett]

Yeah, I like that. BUT if you spend too much time, even 50%, you'll favor that 50% area over the other, so you'll know it much better, which crippled you in the other half.

I'm with you. I tell my students to simplify. But at some point you gotta know all the areas equally.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[rpjazzguitar]

I believe that it's best to know the fingerboard and know the notes in the chords you use.

Then, you can find all the notes in the arpeggio anywhere on the fingerboard, starting on any finger.

It takes some work to know them that well, but learning fingerings and being able to start on any fret/finger and connect them up and down the fingerboard is a lot of work too.

That said, in a kind of belt and suspenders approach, I also know arps in 5 positions on the neck in every key. I learned them by practicing the 7th chords and I modify them pretty much by ear. I have not practiced arps for every chord type in all 5 positions, but I can pretty much get to the notes I need.

I use both in my playing. Having those fingerings is helpful when the tempo gets up there.

[rodolfoguitarra]

I believe that it's best to know the fingerboard and know the notes in the chords you use.

Then, you can find all the notes in the arpeggio anywhere on the fingerboard, starting on any finger.

Definitely you have to know the entire fingerboard, but in a fast changing situation, it's good to know the shapes, because you don´t have time to think in the root, 3rd, 5th and 7th of each chord. You have a fraction of second to think in the chord and it´s not good to have lots of options (other thing is a modal context)

[emanresu]

Ach! Yes, but the problem with guitar is its hard. Harder than the sax. You never know where your finger's going to be or the phrase is going to lead you. That's why REALLY you have to know the fretboard completely. As an EXERCISE of course. Simplify. But in reality you gotta know them all.

No,
its easy
diat.bmp - Google Drive

Thats all there is - in diatonic. Green is lydian, blue aeolian, red ionian. Then it just repeats. Black boxes are pentatonic.
...

Eh, I kid.. it is hard

[matt.guitarteacher]

You have to start somewhere, but I don't know that fewer patterns and jumping around a lot more is necessarily simpler. I'd say if you want to simplify, in that sense, learn one tune in one position. If that's hard, choose an easier tune.

That's really what sax players and other instrumentalists do. There's only one "position", For them. You can always add more as you go.

[emanresu]

I figured that it was hard because each arp, scale gets practiced individually and is kinda isolated from the rest. When minding that anything you do lands on the big pattern will help connect everything better. But sure isn't easy overall. When the big pattern is ready for you, there is still like 99% work ahead. It just makes a bit more sense... but that's just me. And also, I use it for comping rather than soloing. When used to abuse the simple layout for soloing, I started to play with my eyes. That's complete crap.

[MarkRhodes]

Do you think if we stick with only one or two fingerings for each arpeggio the process of mastering the changes would go easier or faster?

If you're talking about the changes to, say, "Autumn Leaves", sticking with arpeggios in one position at a time might make more sense. (If you limit yourself to one or two fingerings for each arpeggio, you may have to shift around the neck more than you want to.) Sheryl Bailey does this in her Bebop Dojo / Essentials course (TrueFire). It's one way to do it.

[mhch]

I often found that easier arp fingerings come with using chord inversions, which we tend to forget !!! specially for these Xm6 and Ym7b5

Just on the few patterns you showed, you can add the 5 near the 1 on fret 3, as well as add the 1 near the 5 on fret 5.

really worth remembering them !

[rodolfoguitarra]

If you're talking about the changes to, say, "Autumn Leaves", sticking with arpeggios in one position at a time might make more sense..

Well, not necessary Autum Leaves, this tune is easy and do not present major problems. I am thinking in the efficiency in tunes with 2 chords per bar in 200 bpm or more.

[wzpgsr]

I've been studying in Richie Zellon's bebop blues course for over a year now. In the first 4 modules (which I spent like 15 months on), you use three fingerings, one each for the I7, IV7, and V7 of a basic blues (no subs). I had been flailing about half-assed practicing umpteen scale and arpeggio types, and this level of intense focus has helped me quite a bit.

[MarkRhodes]

Well, not necessary Autum Leaves, this tune is easy and do not present major problems. I am thinking in the efficiency in tunes with 2 chords per bar in 200 bpm or more.

Well, if those two chords are a ii-V, you can focus on one or the other: you don't have to outline both.

[henryrobinett]

A couple of things tp clarify. I firmly believe you must take up one thing at a time. When I suggested you needed to learn them all, I still stand by that. But you have to do it one at a time, especially if you are dedicated to doing them all - comprehensively across the neck. So one area to get you feet wet, limiting your choices and focusing in an area is a very important thing to do.

Secondly I disagree very much that Autumn Leaves is an easy song. If you play by tonal center and use basically one key, sure, you can get away with murder. But play the song on all, each and every, chord. It's great because it tends towards the melodic. ii- V - I - IV to the relative minor iiø - V i. If you don't play every chord you're short changing yourself. It's not an easy tune.

[DaveF]

It won't work in my opinion. You'll need a couple of inversions to voice lead your lines nicely so you'll be forced to learn different inversions in other positions anyway.

EDIT:

If you go ahead an learn just the root inversion you'll end up practicing in a way that isn't very musical and won't be terribly useful once you know the others. Rather limit your focus to Major 7th, Dominant 7th and Minor 7th arpeggios in every inversion. That's enough to get you started and then you can add more color once you have those down cold.

[rpjazzguitar]

It occurs to me to wonder, what if you had NO fingerings at all?

What would mastering chord changes look like then?

You'd hear the chord, then sing a melody in your head, and then find those notes. If you liked a particular bit of melody, I guess, sooner or later, you'd play a certain fingering.

What you wouldn't do is think "the next chord is G7, I'll find my G7 arp and play it". Or maybe, "I'll try to make a smooth transition to my G7 arp".

Instead, your practice might be listening to several recordings of a song, picking out bits you like, learning to sing them and, afterwards, moving to the guitar. Or just singing your own ideas.

You might work on the skill of hearing a melody and playing it, accurately, without thinking.

The main disadvantage would be if you didn't know the song at all.

I know one atheoretical player who would wait to hear the change and then play on it. This is a guy who'd be about 80 now and was trained as a clarinetist in the midwest of his youth. He could play on any changes, but he couldn't tell you the notes in a Cmajor triad. Yes, he was way behind the beat if he didn't know the song.

This approach would involve no prescribed fingerings and no theory. It would require a good ear and the patience to learn directly from recordings. It would not have the advantage of using theory to find sounds.

[emanresu]

It occurs to me to wonder, what if you had NO fingerings at all?

What would mastering chord changes look like then?

Hm.

I can't imagine how this could be possible. What would be the road to such skill?

[emanresu]

Btw for 3 note chords, I've been doing ear training to play them properly. Can't hit the the right voicings. Can get the right triad if the exercise plays only min/maj/dim triads but only whatever inversion. The best I can do is play a suitable chord against the challenge chord. That's about 6 months hard work. And usability of that skill seems still out of reach. I give it another 6 months before giving up

[rodolfoguitarra]

It won't work in my opinion. You'll need a couple of inversions to voice lead your lines nicely so you'll be forced to learn different inversions in other positions anyway.

of course, I mean, I´m not excluding the inversions, I´m talk about knowing only 2 fingerings maximum for each arpeggio inversion

[bako]

Rodolpho,

Less Fingerings = Mastering The Changes Faster?

You posed this question. The best way to gain understanding as opposed to getting the correct answer on a test is
through direct experience and experimentation. If you can engage the music you envision within fewer fingerings
then the equation can be judged a success. If you feel musically constrained, that the fingerings are dictating the
results then perhaps more fingering options could be considered.

Personally I like to let the music as much as possible dictate the fingerings and techniques needed to achieve it.
The foundation for this approach consists of fingerboard knowledge, awareness of the intervallic content of
different structures, having fingering options for each interval and the many combinations that present themselves
in the day to day of playing music. Nobody emerges from the womb with all this in place, it's a gradually evolving process.

Best of luck with this pursuit. Please update and share your findings.

[rodolfoguitarra]

I´m talking about the fast access of these tools in improvisation. Example: if I see a DMaj7 chord, and I want to superimpose the F#m7, so the faster is the thinking the better it will be.