Do you use arpeggio shapes, major scale shapes, or something else?

[znerken]

From reading/watching tutorials on arpeggios, I have understood there are two different approaches:
1. Defined arpeggio shapes.
2. Relating arpeggios to major shapes, that you already know. Which I guess is basically just knowing your fretboard, and knowing the notes of a chord. That way you know which notes you can play, and don't need specific shapes.


I wonder, which approach do you tend to? When I practice arpeggios I have been mainly practicing them in two matters:

1. Vertically. Through every 3 notes per string position for the scale the current standard I am practicing belong to. So for autumn leaves in G-, I practice the chords through all the Bb major scale positions.
2. Additionally, I have been practicing them horizontally: Start on the lowest note in terms of pitch, on the 6th string, and randomly move towards the highest note. So for a Eb^7, start on G 3rd fret, then end on for example the highest D on the first string. Jens Larsen illustrate this here:

I think having shapes for all the arpeggios can be a little overwhelming, and I find that I don't learn the chord tones as good, compared to when I try to find the chord tones in a major scale shape my self. Fretboard knowledge should be one of the biggest advantages to practicing arpeggios, together with chord tone knowledge?

I perhaps feel that arpeggio shapes are a little unnecessary, and I guess that is the reason behind asking. You are welcome to enlighten me. I mean every chord is built by a scale, so why do you need more than scale shapes?


And yes, it also is very overwhelming if you need to know arpeggio shapes, scale shapes, pentatonic shapes etc..

[Liarspoker]

So, I don't know if I am correct on this matter, but this is based upon what I have seen in lessons/videos. I believe there are two ways to practice/think of to arrange/play arpeggios, and that is either in defined shapes for the chord types, or just to play the notes through major scale shapes(or just randomly, cause you know the notes of the chord).

I wonder, which approach do you tend to? When I practice arpeggios I have been mainly practicing them in two matters:

1. Through every 3 notes per string position for the scale the current standard I am practicing belong to. So for autumn leaves in G-, I practice the chords through all the Bb major scale positions.
2. Start on the lowest note in terms of pitch, on the 6th string, and randomly move towards the highest note. So for a Eb^7, start on G 3rd fret, then end on for example the highest D on the first string. Jens Larsen illustrate this here:

So what do you do?

I think having shapes for all the arpeggios can be a little overwhelming, and I find that I don't learn the chord tones as good, as just trying to find the chord tones in a major scale shape. Fretboard knowledge should be one of the biggest advantages to practicing arpeggios.

I don't think any other instruments have such a way of thinking, where they are so focused on shapes. I however understand the benefit of shapes for beginners.

I practise each arpeggio in 5 positions. However I play one bar of one arp then I switch to the next arp. This way I am actually learnings songs which is the ultimate goal after all.

There's a great thread called An Introduction to Jazz Soloing which is a book by Joe Elliot. That's my approach right there although I have derived my arps from Leavitt scales rather than the book.

Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

[znerken]

I practise each arpeggio in 5 positions. However I play one bar of one arp then I switch to the next arp. This way I am actually learnings songs which is the ultimate goal after all.

There's a great thread called An Introduction to Jazz Soloing which is a book by Joe Elliot. That's my approach right there although I have derived my arps from Leavitt scales rather than the book.

Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

I looked at the book. So do you have shapes for every type of arpeggio, for every scale pattern?

So in one major scale shape, you would have to remember 7 different shapes?

I practise each arpeggio in 5 positions. However I play one bar of one arp then I switch to the next arp. This way I am actually learnings songs which is the ultimate goal after all.

Yes, I do this as well. Great exercise.

[Liarspoker]

I looked at the book. So do you have shapes for every type of arpeggio, for every scale pattern?

So in one major scale shape, you would have to remember 7 different shapes?





Yes, I do this as well. Great exercise.

Ultimately I will have more than seven shapes if you factor in shapes based on the 6th, 9th etc.

In fact I already play some of those in various positiond.

I've never thought about how many shapes I know per major scale position. It's a bit irrelevant for me as I often sub with melodic minor (ie the VI and V) and if I have what I need for the song then that's all I need.

Also I've recently started following the commit to a tune per week thread. That's a great exercise.



Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

[ragman1]

I use arpeggios all the time. They're invaluable. See video above and other vids on YT re bebop playing.

(I don't really do bebop but I do use them)

[znerken]

I use arpeggios all the time. They're invaluable. See video and other vids on YT re bebop playing.

(I don't really do bebop but I do use them)

Of course, but my question wasn’t about arpeggios or not. My question was about wether people use arpeggio shapes, or they just use arpeggios through major scale shapes, and just know the chord tones. I mean if you ask a old scatter, he probably would say he just knows the chord tones, and don’t utilize shapes.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Of course, but my question wasn’t about arpeggios or not. My question was about wether people use arpeggio shapes, or they just use arpeggios through major scale shapes, and just know the chord tones. I mean if you ask a old scatter, he probably would say he just knows the chord tones, and don’t utilize shapes.

Who would say such a thing? I don't know where you're getting this from. I think this is a faulty assumption . What is it based on?

[znerken]

Who would say such a thing? I don't know where you're getting this from. I think this is a faulty assumption . What is it based on?

From my impressions from my teacher. When I asked him about it, he just said "I know the notes, and I know where they are, I don't think about shapes".


As I said, I am very open for people to inform me. I even ask to be informed. Wasn't meant as a "this is the truth" comment.

[znerken]

From my impressions from my teacher. When I asked him about it, he just said "I know the notes, and I know where they are, I don't think about shapes".


As I said, I am very open for people to inform me. I even ask to be informed. Wasn't meant as a "this is the truth" comment.

I actually ask, cause I am terrified to practice something "the wrong way". As I said, for Autumn Leaves. I have been practicing the arpeggios through the 7 positions I have for the Bb major scale. I haven't been utilising/practicing specific arpeggio shapes. So for the chord of Autumn Leaves, -7, ^7, 7 and ø7, I haven't learned those three shapes for every one of the 7 positions. Should I?

Then you might ask, how do you know how to play the D7, in 2-5-1 of Aø7-D7-G-. Well I just know where the notes are in every position, since I have been practicing it for like two hours every day for three weeks.

[Liarspoker]

I haven't learned those three shapes for every one of the 7 positions. Should I?

If your goal is to become free on your instrument then definitely





Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

[znerken]

But, by practicing the arpeggios, through a major scale position, aren't you essentially, without being aware, practicing arpeggio shapes? Take this as an example:



This is exactly what I have done, but I never thought of it as practicing shapes. I just found all the chord tones for that chord in every major scale position. Photo credit Jens Larsen.

[rpjazzguitar]

I know the notes of the chords and scales I use, and I know where they are. That was a fair amount of work, since I felt that I needed to learn all 12 keys for everything, plus the enharmonic equivalents (that is, for example, learning G#m7 and Abm7 separately, because you don't have time to think about it when you see the one you didn't learn automatically).

That approach works great, until the tempo gets too brisk to be thinking about individual note choices. At that point, it helps to have some patterns under your fingers. I know major, minor, melodic minor, diminished and WT scales. I know arps in 5 or 6 positions. I start with 7th chords and then adjust the notes that need to be changed for minor, 6, 7, #11 and so forth.

This works for me, but I'm not trying to play in the classic jazz guitar style.

EDIT: I want to add one other issue. Ideally, you want to be able to start any arp on any note. You don't want to have to go to the same place to start the pattern every time. At the time I realized that was important, I already knew some arps, so I tried to practice them in ways which allowed me to start anywhere in the arp. I wanted to be able to get the arp for a given chord going from any note within it anywhere on the neck with any finger.

I found that really hard to do. My brain didn't want to work that way.

Around that time, I noticed that I could play the notes of Cmaj7 anywhere on the neck, starting on any note, any finger. That was because I knew, without having to think at all, that the chord contained C E G B and I knew, again, without thinking, where those notes are on the fingerboard.

And, I could do it with Gmaj7 and Dm7 and so forth, but I broke down at G#m7b5 - meaning chords with more alterations in keys I hadn't practiced much. So, I decided to drill myself on the notes in the chords I used. It took a couple of years and I have cheated on some by learning visual patterns (because it takes less thought when I'm in a hurry). It was a lot of work, but it seemed easier, to me, than trying to parse all those shapes.

Now, with a moderate tempo, I can nail the chord tones of any commonly used chord anywhere on the neck starting on any finger without much thought. At high tempos it's harder and then knowing some shapes helps.

[Tal_175]

Ok so here is what's worked for me.
What makes arpeggio "shapes" difficult and counter intuitive to learn quickly is, in my opinion, they are presented as 4 x 6 rectangular section of the fretboard (or 5 x 6). 4 frets to 6 strings. So an arpeggio (or scale) is something that starts from the whatever the lowest note happens to be in that rectangle to the whatever the highest note in the same rectangle (2 and a fraction octaves). These forms do not capture an intuitive, meaningful repeating musical structure.. You have a bunch of weird patterns for different variations of the same musical concept. There is no symmetry that reflects that they all represent one concept.
Learning scales and arpeggios of any kind stopped being a burden for me when I started looking at them as REPEATING one octave forms. I was able to start using them right away.. Gradually they all connect and you have the same "shapes" if you want to see them that way.
Let's take the major 7 arpeggio. Take a note on the 6 th string. Say Bb (6th fret). Next note is the major 3rd. There is only one place you can play it without an unreasonable stretch, 5th string 5rth fret. Now the perfect 5th. You got 2 options (5th string 8th fret or 4th string 3rd). Continue this way. You'll see that you got only TWO major 7 shapes (one octave). Of course you have to adjust these two shapes for the tuning on the 1st and 2nd strings for octaves that start higher.
The idea is you should know your intervals on the fretboard and be able to construct and learn one octave forms (there are very few and they repeat). This way you are also aware of the scale degrees of the notes you're playing, something that's very obfuscated in the traditional positional shapes. This applies to both scales and arpeggios.

[pauln]

I think the important question is whether your method uses "forms" (shapes or note names) upon which you must apply modifications (adjustment to the shape or alteration of the notes), or if your method uses "figures" which already contain the shapes or notes required. "Figures" are not in this sense numerical or geometric; they are things one has "figured out"... how to play them, how to hear them, how to recognize their potential harmonic relationship in context.

The use of figures means knowing more of them than knowing forms, but the advantage of figures is that they may be applied immediately without cognitive analysis and adjustment... it takes more time and effort to learn figures, but in the long run they can be played much faster with much less attention.

Everything I do on the guitar is a figure, selected by ear.

[ragman1]

My question was about whether people use arpeggio shapes

Yes, I do.

they just use arpeggios through major scale shapes

No, all chords.

Hope that's a better answer! You understand I can't speak for 'people'... I don't know who they are

[Jazzstdnt]

I think learning arpeggio shapes is good, and one octave shapes first. (a lot of melodies and jazz solos traverse less than two octaves and even less than one octave - before changing direction. The overall contour of a jazz solo will certainly span more than one octave and even two in many/most cases).

Then connect one octave shapes to get two octave shapes. You should learn two octave shapes both in position across all six strings, and also traversing adjacent fingering patterns. For example, two octave arpeggios starting on the fifth string.

Then some of those other ideas shown in the video should be explored as well. All of this isn't accomplished overnight.

One example, play all seventh chord qualities in one octave starting from the same note, root being the obvious example: CMaj7, C7, Cmi7, Cmi7b5, Cdim7, etc. Then C7sus, CMa7b5, CMa7#5, C7#5, C7b5, CmiMa7, C6, Cmi6, on and on..

Then do it in two octaves.

Then do it from all chord tones.

Learn the intervals, learn the fretboard.

[WillMbCdn5]

Arpeggios first made sense to me when I was taught this way -

Bebop Dom scale for example. Stack thirds from the R then the 3rd then the 5th then the b7. You get a set of diatonic tones that spell a couple of things . R/dom7 , 3rd/m7b5, 5th/m7 and b7/maj7 and also spell out intervals in relation to the parent R/135b7, 3rd/ 35b72 , 5th/5b724, b7/b7246 . So you can switch back and forth between thinking of the 4 tone groups as arpeggiated discrete chords or as scale intervals/extension groups and by applying that approach to different scales see how 4 note groupings can occur/function in relation to different reference points .

So I guess I'm in the group seeing things less about shapes and more about relationships between and within note groups and their reference.

pretty stripped down basic stuff but I hope that makes sense, maybe its not the mechanical approach that matters but how you think about its use and context

Will

[Liarspoker]

If your goal is to become free on your instrument then definitely





Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

This is how I practise my arpeggios. Bit of a rough take but you get the idea. Obviously some scale tones mixed in as well.Tapatalk Cloud - Downlaoad File VID_118981113_135306_288.mp4

Sent from my MYA-L11 using Tapatalk

[znerken]

Yes, I do.



No, all chords.

Hope that's a better answer! You understand I can't speak for 'people'... I don't know who they are

Is this what you mean by “all chords”?


So that’s the new question. Do people have shapes for Maj7, min7, and Dom7 and just alter needed notes from there, or do you have shapes for all chords? How do you arrange your arpeggios, I guess.

[Jazzstdnt]

Is this what you mean by “all chords”?


So that’s the new question. Do people have shapes for Maj7, min7, and Dom7 and just alter needed notes from there, or do you have shapes for all chords? How do you arrange your arpeggios, I guess.

You missed a few but yep that's the idea.

I take an approach where there are 7-8 "base" one octave arpeggio fingerings ("shapes") per 7th chord. That amounts to 1-2 fingerings per string set.

String sets:
6-5-4 - 2 fingerings
5-4-3 - 2 fingerings
4-3-2 - 2 fingerings
3-2-1 - 1-2 fingerings

Leavitt's method teaches more than that but I don't spend much time on them because I think many of them are awkward.

[znerken]

You have convinced me. So I have a few questions before I start practicing.

1. If we take the three notes per string system. That would mean that for each position in the major scale you have one arpeggio shape. So in a diatonic situation for each position you have two major arpeggio shapes. So for C major you have C major F major arpeggio shape for each position.
2. If we take the circle of fifths, for each of the notes, you have 7 major shapes, 7 dominant shapes and 7 minor shapes, etc.
3. When you think about the shapes, I guess you just have to think about three things. How the shape is, which scale shape it belongs to in the 3 notes per string system. And lastly the chord type it belongs to.
4. Then a problem arises, a C Major can be found in more than one key, so how do you connect it to the 3 note per string shape? Perhaps by practicing jazz standards, and connecting the chords in a standard, to the key in the standard is easier. Don’t worry about which scales you can find a c major arpeggio in, but rather how you easily can connect it to c major scale shapes, if that is the tonic you are in.
5. I guess the best way is to practice it diatonically. So play C major in every 3 notes per string position. Play I^7 arpeggio shape 1-7, see how each shape belongs to one of the 3 nps shapes. Then repeat for the rest of the chords.



Sorry for rambling, but this is helping me a lot. Just gotta connect the dots and grasp the concept.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Jazzstdnt]

Are you referring to two octave forms across all six strings? It seems like it.

Anyway, I use CAGED or traditional scale fingerings as opposed to 3NPS or Leavitt, with a few exceptions for logical stretches.

I don't worry about the scale shape that an arpeggio "comes from" but rather what are my 7-8 preferred one octave arpeggio fingerings. Why? Because the preferred arpeggio fingerings are based on the same logic and approach to the instrument as my preferred scale fingerings. And of course, they align, although not 100% percent.

So:

I practice them in stand alone fashion. One chord quality at a time, 7-8 one-octave fingerings. That takes you all over the fret board.

I practice them diatonically in one position at a time from the lowest sounding forms to the highest in that position. And playing them diatonically applies to Major, Mel. Minor, Harm. Minor.

I practice them one string set and position at a time, for all chord qualities. (Example: 5th position, starting note C, starting string 6, starting finger 4. Then CMaj7, C7, Cmi7, etc). The starting note doesn't change in this example because I am starting on the root. However, the starting finger may change depending on the chord quality.

[Tal_175]

Is this what you mean by “all chords”?


So that’s the new question. Do people have shapes for Maj7, min7, and Dom7 and just alter needed notes from there, or do you have shapes for all chords? How do you arrange your arpeggios, I guess.

Oh boy. Here is the bad news. These are only the 7th arpeggios. There are also 9th, 11th and 13th arpeggios and their alterations.
Here is the good news. Once you internalize a small number of core arpeggios, learning others get a lot easier. So yes I would say learning the 3 arpeggios you listed well is a very good start. Also notice a 9th arpeggio can be seen as a 7th arpeggio starting from the 3rd etc.
Here is again my experience.
- I can run all arpeggios up and down the fretboard, doesn't mean I know them. I know them when I can fetch them on demand in the context of improvisation, starting from any chord tone. In fact starting from ANY note and linking to a chord tone (nearest most likely) of the arpeggio freely.
- I can't do that if all I do is to play these arpeggios in isolation. I have to practice them in the context of a tune to be able to use them in improvisation.
- Practicing them all across the fretboard is a good overview. It's useful. But I believe once you get the big picture, it's best the pick a few and dig deep.
- A good way is to pick a blues tune and practice arpeggios for the chords of the tune to start with and learn them well. That would give you Dom7's and a vi-ii-V-I7 progression and a perhaps a Dim7 if you choose to.
Again these are things that are working for me, but also approved by seasoned pro's I've been studying with over the years.

[znerken]

So I am looking at how I can arrange this, to group everything and make sense in my mind. I need a name for shapes, cause "shape 1" get's confusing fast. So I wonder, how do you 3 notes per string people do this?

I have arranged three notes per string major scale positions into mode names, so like this:




So if I were to arrange the arpeggios based on this, I would do it like this:


Major shape derived from the Locrian shape:

(Cmaj7 shape)

Dominant 7 shape derived from the Locrian shape:

(G7 shape)



Is this a valid method? Feedback is welcome.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Way fewer 3nps players in jazz as a percentage, compared to heavy metal etc. I know Henry Robinett is a 3nps guy. Used to post here a good bit.