-
Damn you Bird, Cannonball, Stitt, Trane, Henderson...... just too quick for most pickers! OK, so we as guitarists have learned to appreciate aspects of playing such as harmony, voice leading and taste, but let's face it, who wouldn't love to occasionally let rip at 320 bpm (extended, unbroken 8ths and triplets etc). I don't mean simple scales, blues licks or 4 note per string chromatic shredding, I mean complex lines combining string jumps, arps, chromatic embellished "scales", cliches and "licks" etc.
I work on my own "etudes" that combine all the above for every common progression in every key in every position etc, but struggle to keep it clean past say 290. The hardest things one plays become your bottom line, so it's no good playing the simpler lines clean at 315 and smearing the hard stuff, so it's back to 290... = Sonny Rollins in slo-mo....
Now I know guys like Oberg play whatever they want all over the neck at 320+, even older cats like Tal Farlow could rip (Cherokee at 400 bpm anyone!), so, just wondering what you guys would consider to be an "ok" max speed for yourselves. Obviously, some of the greatest players seldom break past 240, so obviously speed isn't important for lots if not most players?....
-
11-03-2009 02:18 AM
-
-
Fingerboard athletics anyone? Or should we discuss music instead?
-
I assume you're talking about playing 8th notes at 320 bpm? Count in 16th notes, and the tempo would be 160 bpm = 640 notes picked per minute.
That is very fast. But I guess my bar is even higher. For me to able to play the things you mention freely and clean at this tempo would mean that I should be able to play 20-30 faster. Example: If I were to play a tune in 320 bpm (with lots of 8th note lines) then I build my tempo up to 360-380 bpm. Just to have enough to give from so that I wouldn't be playing at my max.
That is not unrealistic. I think if you can play 16th notes at 200 bpm (8th notes at 400 bpm), 24th notes at 135 bpm (triplets at 270 bpm) then you're good to go. Arpeggios can be even faster when sweeped.
Right now my max is somewhere between 150-160 bpm/16th notes = 300-320 bpm/8th notes. My goal is the above mentioned.
-
Originally Posted by franco6719
-
Originally Posted by randalljazz
So, why is it that Jazz guitarists like to poopoo the notion of acquiring speed on their instrument? My guess is that it's so hard to do well that it is usually at the expense of covering the more important bases first. And this is what I'm asking: how much time do you guys put into speeding up your chops? If speed is not of interest, is it because you'd rather put time into getting more (and better) chops?
How fast is fast enough?
-
Here are my thoughts on speed:
I believe speed is worshiped above most all else by younger players.
I believe speed is one of the least musical things a player can employ.
I believe speed is just another tool in the player toolbox, and like say a hammer, has its place, but not with everything.
I believe most of us can reach very fast speeds on the guitar IF we are dilligent in spending countless hours working on it.
I believe such time is better spent on more musical pursuits than speed.
Speed is a fine tool to have, but there are other tools I personally value more. BTW, I was faster a number of years back when I only focused on pentatonics, major and minor scales in a rock/blues type setting. Lots of time with a metronome back then.Last edited by derek; 11-03-2009 at 12:27 PM.
-
it's funny, because I was watching a "greatest guitarist ever" vid with McLaughlin, and thinking about guys like him and a 13 year-old Jimmy Rosenberg playing Cherokee at like 300 bpm. I have conceded that although speed is nice,
1. I am not a horn player playing "Koko" at 320 bpm
2. I was never given athletic ability to begin with, I won't go past 200 b/c I will end up 1.getting hurt or 2. passing out (i take anti-epileptic meds)
so while speed is nice, it's just another tool as Derek says. I would rather hear a catchy slow motive ala Jim Hall that I'll remember than a blurred 64th note run that I'll never remember. I once had the fortune of playing with Bob Conti, and I told him I wasn't nearly as fast as him, and he told me "that doesn't matter, soeed doesn't make you a good player."
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
Listen to:
John McLaughlin
Paco De Lucia
Al Dimeola
Early Vic Juris (You tube vid w/ Phil Woods)
Pat Martino
Bruce Forman (Countdown)
Jimmy Bruno CD - Burnin')
Mike Stern (Donna Lee)
These guys play pretty fast. As far as jazz guitar players shying away from speed, I know some local guys in NJ that aspired to play like JM. Man they are fast. I'm pretty sure we all know some players that can play fast.
But speed isn't everything. YOu have to remember that there are non musicians out there listening as well. If they can't remember what you played and can only recall that it was 'real fast' , well I'm not sure if that's a good thing.
-
I always liked the way Django (yeah, I'm reaching back) could scare you with a fast run or two, but still play a very melodic as well as rhythmically interesting solo.
-
Originally Posted by BigDaddyLoveHandles
Now for Sax players, I can name at least 50. WTF?
-
Like I said initially speed is byproduct of accuracy = good tone and technique.
Practicing for speed isn't about trying to move your hands faster and faster. This would be the same as a boxer who just throws many punches fast after one another. The thing to do is to concentrate on using the right amount of tension, not picking with too big movements, the left hand fingers must be close to the fretboard, and the body should be in a relaxed state. When doing this very, very slow you acquire good technique, and because of this you're able to play faster because your hands are making small, precise movements, you're relaxed. It is basically a question about being relaxed enough and using economy of motion.
Speed WILL come if the focus is correct. This isn't supposed to take many years. Whether you like it or not, technique is needed to play music. I find it funny that most guitar players neglect this. Technique has whole other priority when I'm speaking to sax players, violinists, etc.
When people say that must spend countless hours before attaining any speed, I can't help but wonder if they practice correct. It isn't about repeating fast movements, but how to get more accurate.
For instance if I'm feel my hands start to cramp up when playing a 16th note sequence at 150 bpm, then I analyze why it's cramping. Maybe I discover some weak upstrokes, which is causing me to cramp up because I'm trying to keep up with the tempo. Then I reduce the metronome to 60% and isolate the upstrokes, and spend about 5 min. of this slow practice of getting my upstrokes more accurate with the least amount of tension. Then I will set the metronome to 150 bpm again and see if it's changed. This rinse and repeat process is done over and over. I'm not sitting there trying to get it right at 150 bpm, and just trying and trying.
I practice 1-2 hours per day. 25% of my practice time is spend on technique. It's not rocket science.
-
I hear ya CAJO, but I guess the peeps here are arguing that "technique" is more than just "speed technique". After all, playing slow, smooth, fluid lines where tone and touch is paramount is a technical mountain that can take a lifetime to climb too... Me, I want it all!
Dunno, maybe the guitar is just a tougher instrument than most to master...?
-
something to think about. if fucking trombone players can play up there we have no excuse
-
Originally Posted by C.A.JO.
-
Originally Posted by C.A.JO.
As I stated above, if we work on it, we can all improve, whether we think we are athletic or not. However, what the OP is talking about is speed that is on the end of the bell curve. That kind of speed, keeping up with the likes of Farlow and Bruno does take years to master in my experience. Particularly if you are not just playing mindless licks like metal players do.
25% of practice time on tech sounds about right. I have spent that much time and more in the past. However, at this point in my development, I am satisfied that the technique I possess is sufficient for now. However, there are a great many other things that aren't where I want them to be, so those are the things I spend time working on.
It is not rocket science, but fingerboard athleticism, particularly at the speeds mentioned above.
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
-
Originally Posted by princeplanet
-
here are a couple of ideas:
1. Saxophone players always play legato. Guitar players that play fast tend to try to pick each note. (except for allen holdsworth my favourite "fast" player)
How fast would charley play if he tried to do the equivalent on the horn; aside from sounding stupid, it might slow him down a lot. or Freddie Hubbard?
which leads to.....
2. Guitar is the only instrument where you have to coordinate both hands exactly together , to play a single note. Think about it for a second.
it's true. It's a bad deal, but it's true.
Therefore it is inherently harder to play anything, whether fast, slow, or medium tempo, than on any other instrument.
face it. Guitar is a mind #$%#@#.
so, for instance, I never practise the piano, but right now, I could sit down at a piano, and play some things faster than I will ever be able to on the guitar. no matter how much I practise.
not fair, right?
3. Face it, lots of players are fast, very fast, but how many of them are actually creating something new, (very few) and how many are actually just playing riffs they have practised thousands of times to be able to dazzle. (most of them)
4. As a friend of mine said, fast guitar players are a dime a dozen. I agree.
-
Originally Posted by C.A.JO.
-
I'm going to disagree about the guitar being the hardest instrument to play.
I'm a former horn player, and I think that the harder horn instruments are more difficult than guitar; learning to use your hands is easier than learning to control your embouchure, or, at least, that's been my experience.
-
Originally Posted by markf
we have no excuse bro
and your whole post is nonsense you say guitar is the world's hardest instrument and then proceed to explain how everyone in the fucking world can play it fastLast edited by thebluntman; 11-03-2009 at 10:43 PM.
-
I think they might mean that it's one of the hardest instruments on which to play fast, the syncro thing is a real bitch!
-
Originally Posted by Goofsus4
-
Originally Posted by markf
All instruments in the string family require the same coordinated 2 hand dexterity.
Elias Prinz -- young talent from Munich
Today, 10:24 PM in The Players