Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Posts 1 to 48 of 48
  1. #1

    User Info Menu

    Steve seems best known here for his chord melody material. Our own Ducthbopper has a nice video compilation of himself playing (over a period of years) 7 Crowell arrangements . Good stuff, well worth checking out. Other threads have discussed Crowell's chord-melody material.

    But for now I am interested in his single-line material. (Steve studied with Warren Nunes for a long time. They shared a house for a few years. Steve says Warren inspired this material.)

    So I got this book / CD / DVD. Came by mail today.

    84 is not scary: 7 x 12. 7 scale patterns in each of the 12 major keys.

    He's using 3 nps major scale fingerings and integrating arpeggio shapes into the practice of them. I think it will be good for my technique if nothing else. (Though I'm hoping for more than that. Time will tell.)

    Here's an excerpt from a review of the book. (It's on Steve's site and there will be a link below, so you can see the whole thing for yourself there, but I want to highlight a descriptive section so you can get some sense of what he's about in this book. (The bold print was for my own use in the copy I made to print out--there is no bold print in the review as posted on Steve's site.)

    >>>>The five CAGED forms sometimes have sometimes two, sometimes three notes per string, which generates complexity for the right hand and for the left. The 84 EQs always have three notes per string, which enormously reduces the complexity for both hands. All you have to decide is “which three notes?” It is not difficult to intuit the answer. There's more. Each scale form comes with four exercises in scales and arpeggios. In the scale exercises, the index finger anchors scale movement, and the third or fourth finger anchors arpeggios(broken chords). The arpeggios move diagonally up and to the right from the fourth finger, while the arpeggio roots jump across four adjacent strings (6-5-4-3), which generates about half of a diatonic circle of fifths (I-IV-vii-iii-vi-ii-V-I), a series that is basic to jazz progressions.

    Consistency is a hallmark of the 84 EQ system: You always play three notes per string, always anchor scales with the index finger, always anchor arpeggios with the ring or pinky finger, and always march the arpeggio roots horizontally across four strings in a chord progression that is highly likely to occur in real music. Also,the right hand always plays the scale notes with alternating down-up strokes, and always initiates arpeggios with a downward sweep across three strings. In 7th chords,the pinky always plays the 7th of the chord on the same string as the chord 5th.<<<<


    I downloaded a free pdf from Steve's site that goes over what he calls "the harmonic telephone number." (I learned it as "Bach's phone number": 147-3625.)

    Here's a video of that. (Not from the 84 Equations book. But you immediately see how he integrates the arpeggios in sequences within fingering patterns.) This is a lot of notes but it's pretty easy to play because the fingerings are so consistent. (Consistent as the guitar allows...)



    Here's a short intro to the 84 Equations book.



    Next would come taking these rudiments and making good jazz.

    I worked with 3 nps scales many years ago. (Think it was a Frank Gambale 'speed picking' book that introduced me to them.) But I didn't see the benefit OTHER THAN for "shredding" and that was only my thing for about 15 minutes, so I let it all go.

    What I like about Steve's approach is that it makes it easy to cycle the arpeggios of keys---there's a consistency to the fingering that I find useful now.

    Anyway, this is what I'm going to focus on until I work through this book and the companion one, "Formulas of Jazz Guitar Improvisation." After that, who knows?

    I would like to know if anyone here has worked through this material before, or is working through it now.

    Jazz Science Guitar Institute

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #2

    User Info Menu

    Mark,

    I'm working through the material now. I have the 84 Jazz Equations, Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation and the Jazz Guitar Power Soloing books. I'm currently working through the Formulas book.

    Mike

  4. #3

    User Info Menu

    I think the stuff is pretty good--I used it as a starting point and review. The harmonic telephone exercise is something I do a lot (daily) because is arps ascending in 4ths, But I do it starting and using every finger and go through the multiple cycles. I do not only major, but also melodic and harmonic minors. It is a great way to learn your way around through I do triad iterations using the phone number system and start on different fingers as well.

    Adam Rafferty (The finger style guy) wrote a book years ago that resulted in scales falling from my eyes--covers the same material in more depth using Hanon excerises adapted for guitar. Still available as PDF: How to Develop Virtuoso Technique for Jazz Guitar - Adam Rafferty

  5. #4

    User Info Menu

    well book collectors..what do you think..we have come along way from basic Mickey Baker book I to a flood of information that can never be digested in one life time (or several) ....

    my main study guides now are information from:
    Ted Greene
    Bobby Stern
    Joe Diorio
    John Scofield
    Howard Roberts
    John McLaughlin
    Jeff Beck
    Eric Johnson
    and of course Jimi

    To fully digest any of this material ( in small amounts) in all keys and positions takes time and determination..and then review..and trying to create some tunes with it to keep it alive..

    while collecting another "book" seems tempting on the surface..I know I will not be able to access all of it and continue with my already full schedule of studies..

    Clint is right.."..A man has got to know his limitations.."

  6. #5

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeS
    Mark,

    I'm working through the material now. I have the 84 Jazz Equations, Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation and the Jazz Guitar Power Soloing books. I'm currently working through the Formulas book.

    Mike
    Great, Mike! Glad to hear it. I have the first two books you mentioned (offered together at a reduced price as the "Starter Special"). First things first: I have to learned the 3 nps fingerings and really get them down, then the 4 arpeggios that lie within each fingering. (Actually, more than 4 arps lie within the scale fingering but it's a group of four in a cycle sequence that he means.)

    Really enjoy playing the exercises. They will improve my technique and increse my fretboard awareness. So I'm happy but I realize I'm just getting my toe in the water here. ;o)

  7. #6

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by wolflen
    well book collectors..what do you think..we have come along way from basic Mickey Baker book I to a flood of information that can never be digested in one life time (or several) ....

    Clint is right.."..A man has got to know his limitations.."
    I have an overwhelming amount of material. More than I need. Thing is, you don't know--up front--what you need! It takes making some mistakes, weeding some things out, and also realizing that some book is quite good in its way but you can only fit so much in to your schedule and you have to let some good things slide, at least for the present.

    But I'm doing this now. If nothing else, I'll get the 3 nps fingerings down cold in all keys and know how to cycle arps in all keys through 7 positions. A lot of people here already know all that. I don't. I was having trouble cycling arps in the "five fingerings" (or CAGED) approach. I could do it. But it never flowed to suit me. (Well, 3 fingerings flowed fine; 2, not so much.)

    What I like about THIS apporach is that the fingerings are consistent and my picking seems cleaner even though I haven't changed my picking. Not sure why that is----maybe uncertainty with my left hand caused my right hand to play unevenly to stay--or try to stay--in synch with it. Hmmm.

    Many paths lead up the mountain...

  8. #7

    User Info Menu

    Mark,

    Here's a video from Eddie Lastra who took lessons from Warren Nunes. He did a tutorial on Satin Doll and he applies a lot of Nunes and Crowell's techniques.



    The volume is a little low in the beginning, but gets louder when he starts the tutorial.

    Mike

  9. #8

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeS
    Mark,

    Here's a video from Eddie Lastra who took lessons from Warren Nunes. He did a tutorial on Satin Doll and he applies a lot of Nunes and Crowell's techniques.



    The volume is a little low in the beginning, but gets louder when he starts the tutorial.

    Mike
    I miss Eddie! Where did he go off to? He was a mainstay in the early period of the Jimmy Randy/Aebersold study group.


    Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  10. #9

    User Info Menu

    Lawson,

    I've read a lot of Eddie's earlier posts on the forum. I always looked forward to his videos.

    Mike

  11. #10

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeS
    Lawson,

    I've read a lot of Eddie's earlier posts on the forum. I always looked forward to his videos.

    Mike
    I sent Eddie a message at his YouTube channel but haven't heard back. He is a good player and a good guy. Perhaps he'll find his way back here. Hope so!

  12. #11

    User Info Menu

    I play the seven fingerings in one key each day. (Today was Db. Tomorrow will be Gb.) This requires starting on different patterns. Today, for example, the first available pattern was #3 (starting on F, the 3rd of Db.) Tomorrow, in Gb, pattern 7 will be the lowest available.

    Four arpeggios are lined with each pattern. They come from the sequence I IV vii iii ii vi V.

    Today, in Db, starting on pattern 3, the first arpeggio (low E string) is IV. Next is vii, then iii, then vi.

    It sounds cumbersome to think this way. It is a bit at first but in a short time I'm much better at mentally navigating the patterns when away from the guitar. I like that.

    So I'm sticking with this.

  13. #12

    User Info Menu

    All I can say about this thread is:

    I don't think this guy knows what an equation is.

    People are always trying to make jazz guitar sound important and intellectual.

    Learn the songs, play good notes in time, and try not to eat too much lobster on the gig.

    It's not rocket science.

  14. #13

    User Info Menu

    Equation:

    F Ionian = Am7, Dm7, Gm7 and C7

    By definition this meets the process of equating one thing with another.

    Not rocket science, but a method for using arpeggios in combination with scales to develop melodic lines.

    My assessment from purchasing the first three books of the course.

    Mike

  15. #14

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MikeS
    Equation:

    F Ionian = Am7, Dm7, Gm7 and C7

    By definition this meets the process of equating one thing with another.

    Not rocket science, but a method for using arpeggios in combination with scales to develop melodic lines.

    My assessment from purchasing the first three books of the course.

    Mike
    It’s not exactly a second order partial differential equation is it? I mean it’s pretty trivial in a mathematical sense... theory is never really difficult, it’s always application.

    One of the many annoying things about the internet is that the tone of wry amusement basically never comes off.

    I don’t really understand (or care) how this particular system works, but it does amuse me how these ‘concepts’ are marketed or described by their originators. That’s it really.

    I’m sure it’s great if you apply it consistently.

    It also says something about jazz guitarists that they are willing to not only tolerate by go for a system with the word ‘equation’ in. I think many find the idea that music can be ‘solved’ like an engineering problem is somehow comforting.

    I say this from a point of view of feeling that myself. I’ve come up with plenty of systems of my own over the years. In the end they are curiosities....

  16. #15

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    It's not rocket science.
    no it’s jazz science!

    Jazz Science Guitar Institute

  17. #16

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I don’t really understand (or care) how this particular system works...
    That's obvious from your posts. One wonders why you've bothered to make them.


  18. #17

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    It’s not exactly a second order partial differential equation is it?
    No, you are absolutely correct. If it were a second order partial differential equation, it would be rocket science.

    Mike

  19. #18

    User Info Menu

    No doubt I’m being terribly unfair. Just that i found the title of the thread rather hilarious.

    There’s only eighty four of them.

  20. #19

    User Info Menu

    I have a number of Steve Crowell books, good stuff! I started out with his 4 year course linked below but I haven't worked through the whole course yet because I found his Chord Melody books to be more in line with what I was looking for at the time. One of the last books I bought from him was "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation", great book with a ton of information and it's based on his 84 Equations system. Super informative stuff and I'm really happy to see that others are having as much fun and learning moments as I'm having!

    Self Development in Music - Jazz Science Guitar Institute

  21. #20

    User Info Menu

    I've had the "84 Equations" book for a month now.
    I've learned them in all keys. They're not perfect yet, but I don't need to check the book when going over them. Instead, I "finger it out."

    I spend time daily away from the guitar going over these in my heads. Naming the notes in all keys, for all fingerings, is a chore but focusing on one key per day makes it manageable. Today is B (my least favorite key for this purpose). Yesterday was Gb (my second least favorite). Tomorrow is E, and "E" is for easier. ;o)

    My knowledge of the fretboard has increased. And because the fingerings are systematic, my hands know where to go quicker then my mind can name the destination.

    I'm glad I got this book and started working in it.

  22. #21

    User Info Menu

    Hey Mark how are you doing? Still working with this method?

  23. #22

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark
    Hey Mark how are you doing? Still working with this method?
    It's part of my daily routine. It took me a little while to get down the 3NPS scales. (They're not hard but I'd never spent much time with them.) Then playing them in all keys. I play through all 7 in a different key each day. Then I play the four arpeggios from each pattern. They run in the same series. It goes like this:

    Pattern 6: I IV vii iii
    Pattern 4 : vi ii V7 I
    Pattern 2: IV vii iii vi
    Pattern 7: ii V7 I IV
    Pattern 5: vii iii vi ii
    Pattern 3: V7 I IV vii
    Pattern 1: iii vi ii V7.

    It moves you around the neck. Some keys are easier than others.

    It took me longer than I expected to be able to run this cycle through, say, Gb or B or D than I had expected. (My fiance tells me I never appreciate how long it will take to do something.) But once this is second nature, the real fun begins! ;o)

  24. #23

    User Info Menu

    Thanks for the reply! Whoa, that is quite a workout, for both technique and fretboard knowledge right? I think after you've done all this grunt work you have a pretty good overview of the neck? Does the method also talk about on how to use this to create solo's? And does it talk about the harmonic and melodic minor scales?

    Thanks!

  25. #24

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark
    Thanks for the reply! Whoa, that is quite a workout, for both technique and fretboard knowledge right? I think after you've done all this grunt work you have a pretty good overview of the neck? Does the method also talk about on how to use this to create solo's? And does it talk about the harmonic and melodic minor scales?

    Thanks!
    Yes, it is quite a workout. But once you've done it for a while, it doesn't take long. It does increase fretboard knowledge and it's good for technique. One great advantage in terms of technique is that the patterns recur and the fingerings recur. (All of the arps begin w/ the 3rd finger or pinky and all of them begin w notes on 3 consecutive strings.)

    After that it focuses on the Tonic and Dominant arps in each pattern. Chromatics, speed drills, turnarounds, augmented and diminished patterns, and (IIRC) 8 solos over standard changes . (This latter is in the "Formulas" book. The 84 Jazz EQs book diagrams the patterns for all keys, w triads, 7th chords, and 7th chords w scale tones added: it's great for 'up the arp and down the scale' practice.)

  26. #25

    User Info Menu

    I've never really understood the appeal of 7 positions instead of 5, or 3 nps instead of 2 or 3 nps. I worked out all the basic fingerings in 5 positions years ago and never have a problem finding any chord, scale or arp in any key in any position. I'm never more than 2 or 3 frets from an adjoining position and find myself frequently surfing the margins. I just don't need 7 positions, any way, after a while, all the positions just become "one big position", if you know what I mean.

    I once tried to reduce things down to just 4 positions, one for each drop 2 inversion, as in, see the chord first, then align all scales arps, devices, licks etc to it. But I missed the 5th position, left too big a hole, so I plugged it with a drop 3 inversion and all was well with the world...

    As for 3 nps, not only does that seem like wimping out (to me), but wouldn't that surely lead to a "sound", where the mechanics control you and not the other way around? Sure, it's tough to pick your way through all those different Caged fingerings when you're learning, but thousands of great players have shown it can be done blindingly quick- if that's your thing- in all rhythmic groupings (sixteenths, triplets, quintuplets etc). It's quite freeing for one's technique to not be bothered by any combination of down or up stroke across any string jumps. It takes time, sure, but only the same time it takes to learn to have good ideas worth playing in the first place! In other words, by the time you have your picking hand together (many years), you will have better ideas to express with it! If I were a teacher I would warn against looking for shortcuts for technicals, it just breeds legions of kids that think playing scales really fast is a worthwhile pursuit ...

    Same goes for P4 tuning, it appeals to some perhaps because it seems like a shortcut, but really, how easy do we need to make this? I remember when Guitar Hero was the thing, I overheard a guy in his 20's say to his mate " I used to take guitar lessons, but now I just play Guitar Hero - it's more satisfying! "

  27. #26

    User Info Menu

    Hi to all. I'm a new member tough an a old reader. My name is Raffaello and I'm from Italy.
    I'v been using the Crowell method from two years now getting many benefits.
    In my opinion one thing that it miss is applayng the equating patterns to armonic and melodic minor scales.
    Crowell manages them as "tools" aside diminished and whoole tone scales.
    I think that h. and m. minor would deserve the same work made with the major scale.
    I have made some attempt in this direction but the minor word is harmonically a bit different: haminic min. is mostly dominant and melodic mostly tonic.
    So that the alternating app. patterns may get best risults mixing the two tipe of minor scales.
    Has anyone experimented the same problems?

  28. #27

    User Info Menu

    The approach... equation, is good. Old school. Can't go wrong. Everything is I chord, it's relative Tonics, up and down a Diatonic 3rd and then the II V... That's basically all Wes used. Basically traditional Relative and Parallel Borrowing and the II V.

    The only thing that pushed me away is the technique.... slow motion is cool, but like up tempo... anything gets old.

    Hey Prince... do you stare at your fretboard while playing. Not trying to get in your shit, but like most vids on this thread or forum in general.... the technical advantage of seven positions, sight reading for one, are basically designed on the design of the instrument and structural elements of Music in general. I like it for the obvious mechanical reasons. But I also use caged licks or positions all the time... I like and need to cover styles and articulations from.

    Rg relate Harmonic minor to Nat. minor or Aeolian with Ionian functional guidelines.
    Relate Melodic minor to Dorian minor... more of a Subdominant thing.
    Same with fingerings.

  29. #28

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    ......

    Hey Prince... do you stare at your fretboard while playing. ....
    Well yeah, when I'm practicing, but not much when I'm improvising (I play better with my eyes closed, I think...). As for sight reading, I don't do much of it any more, but when I did, If I hit a wrong note (and I would) during a position shift, my ear would usually tell me and I'd adjust from there. I guess I can see how 7 or 12 positions can help for reading, if that's your thing.

  30. #29

    User Info Menu

    I'm still working with this material, spending more time in the "Jazz Formulas" book, which puts the "equations" to work in various ways.

    If asked, I think Crowell would say there is nothing wrong with other fingerings. He knows the CAGED ones (as we now call them) and also Pentatonic fingerings. I think he would say the advantage of this way is that you have more range in each fingering. (This might sound surprising: one might think 7 fingerings would each involve a shorter range than 5 fingerings but this is not the case.) One tremendous advantage is that you can use consistent fingerings, which makes lines easier to play. (Easier to finger fluently.)

    Of course, if you're fine the other way, then as Chuck Berry said, "Ain't nobody gonna bother you."

  31. #30

    User Info Menu

    Hey Mark thanks for the update! Thanks to this thread and that some other people that use it (Henry, Jens etc.) I started to look more into 3NPS. I was a die hard CAGED proponent but I think that 3NPS might be simpler and easier for the brain for me. As I said before if you modify intervals (flat or sharpen them) they are still on the same string. So 3 and b3 are both on the same string, same applies to 6 and b6 and 7 and b7. This is contrast to CAGED where for example the 3 is played on the next string with the index finger and the b3 is played on the same string with the pinky. For my brain 3NPS is way easier. It also is super easy to then derive the other scales (melodic minor and harmonic minor). HM and MM in CAGED are a mess IMO.

    Other great things are the arpeggios. Every shape has (4*3=) 12 full 4 note 7 arpeggios in them. 4 where you start with your index on the root. 4 where you start with your middle finger on the root and 4 where you start with your pinky or ring finger on the root. And since modified intervals are still on the same string these fingerings are really consistent. I feel the 3NPS gives you a very good reference and really see the fretboard as a grid instead of 5 boxed shapes. For me at least ;p.

    However, the con is the wide major third interval stretch. And also that you move out of position for the last 2 strings (B and E strings). Other con is that the pentatonics don't fit that nicely into the shapes. Here CAGED is a big plus: first learn the pentatonics and then just add 2 notes.

    Mark could you tell us some more about the Jazz Formulas book? Does it provides ways to generate lines? Because I sometimes feel that learning the scales etc. all the grunt work is still the easy part :P. I saw that it covers a lot of material? What do you think of it?Thanks!

  32. #31

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark
    Hey Mark thanks for the update! Thanks to this thread and that some other people that use it (Henry, Jens etc.) I started to look more into 3NPS. I was a die hard CAGED proponent but I think that 3NPS might be simpler and easier for the brain for me. As I said before if you modify intervals (flat or sharpen them) they are still on the same string. So 3 and b3 are both on the same string, same applies to 6 and b6 and 7 and b7. This is contrast to CAGED where for example the 3 is played on the next string with the index finger and the b3 is played on the same string with the pinky. For my brain 3NPS is way easier. It also is super easy to then derive the other scales (melodic minor and harmonic minor). HM and MM in CAGED are a mess IMO.

    Other great things are the arpeggios. Every shape has (4*3=) 12 full 4 note 7 arpeggios in them. 4 where you start with your index on the root. 4 where you start with your middle finger on the root and 4 where you start with your pinky or ring finger on the root. And since modified intervals are still on the same string these fingerings are really consistent. I feel the 3NPS gives you a very good reference and really see the fretboard as a grid instead of 5 boxed shapes. For me at least ;p.

    However, the con is the wide major third interval stretch. And also that you move out of position for the last 2 strings (B and E strings). Other con is that the pentatonics don't fit that nicely into the shapes. Here CAGED is a big plus: first learn the pentatonics and then just add 2 notes.

    Mark could you tell us some more about the Jazz Formulas book? Does it provides ways to generate lines? Because I sometimes feel that learning the scales etc. all the grunt work is still the easy part :P. I saw that it covers a lot of material? What do you think of it?Thanks!
    I like your point about alterations being on the same string. I've found this to be a big deal in the Patterns For Jazz study group. Enclosures are easiest when all the notes are on the same string.

    As for pentatonic scales, just use the five normal boxes. (That's what Crowell does) It's a five-note scale; there can't be seven positions of it!

    All for now. Busy day. More later.

  33. #32

    User Info Menu

    Jeez, I'll be dead soon. That's about 82 too many

  34. #33

    User Info Menu

    I finally got around to opening my "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation" book and I'm really happy that I did! I didn't know what a goldmine it was and the idea of 84 equations made me a bit apprehensive as I was thinking that's way too much work for me to get into. Truth is it's a lot of work but most of the players here already play so basically, you're just adding to what you already know and that by itself makes it easier. This is a book with a wealth of information, I like the way Steve teaches with basically the same scales that Warren Nunes taught with. The scales alone is a better way to learn improvisation and guitar in general IMHO. Here's a pdf so you all can see the scales, it came from one of Warren's books. The "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation" teaches triads, arpeggios and everything in-between.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  35. #34

    User Info Menu

    morebooksmorebooksmorebooksmorebooksmorebooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooookkkkkk kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkssssssssssssssssssss


  36. #35

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    morebooksmorebooksmorebooksmorebooksmorebooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooookkkkkk kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkssssssssssssssssssss

    I agree with the author of Ecclesiastes 12:12 that "of making many books there is no end and much study is a weariness of the flesh." Yet one who took from this lesson that no books are useful and no study worthwhile are mistaken.

  37. #36

    User Info Menu

    Moderation in all things, including moderation.

  38. #37

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by cosmic gumbo
    morebooksmorebooksmorebooksmorebooksmorebooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooookkkkkk kkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkssssssssssssssssssss

    OMG! You've discovered the subliminal track that's been playing in my head since 1975. Freedom at last!


    Um, I own this book too.

  39. #38

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    Those numbers crop up a lot, that's for sure: 12 months of the year, 12 AM and 12 PM hours in a day, 12 signs of the Zodiac.
    I knew a Jesuit who said 7 was a bit different and he preferred the phrase "5 plus or minus 2", which would allow 7 in some instances (such as the number of days in the week and the number of sacraments in Catholic and Orothodox churches) but also 3 (5-2), which is a VERY common grouping as well as 5 (less common but not so uncommon) and of course, 7.

    For Crowell, it's just 7 fingerings in 12 keys. The "84 Jazz Equations" book is a reference. It lays out the seven fingerings in 12 keys. That's it. (Well, there are a few exercises but not many.) The later books put the "equations" to work in common musical contexts.
    The 12/24 hour system, and the whole set of measurements based on 60 (360 degrees in a circle etc) is of Sumerian origin based on the reconciliation of the solar year (365.25 or so) days and the Lunar Year of 354 days. 360 (the whole number average of the two year lengths) became the default way to describing a year, and since one year is a circuit of/around the sun, it became natural for a circle to have 360 increments.

    The 7 day week is silly simple. It's based on the lunar cycle which runs 28 days and change, so the very conspicuous half-moon at 14 days naturally inspired half-way points on either side, hence 4 weeks of 7 days. The days at which a phase became complete was considered highly significant, and the human habit of treating the 7th day of the week as special was born. We lost that connection with the emergence of calendars based on absolute day-counts rather than seasonal observations. While we are at it, the solstices and equinoxes occurring every 90+/- days provided for 4 seasons so it became natural to think in terms of quarter-years. The attempt to reconcile the lunar and solar years generated a series of religious and/or civic festivals in various cultures.

    Professor hat is now off and I go back to being a mediocre jazz guitarist.

  40. #39

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    For Crowell, it's just 7 fingerings in 12 keys. The "84 Jazz Equations" book is a reference. It lays out the seven fingerings in 12 keys. That's it. (Well, there are a few exercises but not many.) The later books put the "equations" to work in common musical contexts.
    I bought 84 Jazz Equations as well.

    Essentially, the information presented could easily fit on one page accompanied by the words "transpose in 12 keys".

  41. #40

    User Info Menu

    At $46.40 shipped, thats about 55 cents per equation, less than a cup of coffee.

  42. #41

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Lark
    Hey Mark thanks for the update! Thanks to this thread and that some other people that use it (Henry, Jens etc.) I started to look more into 3NPS. I was a die hard CAGED proponent but I think that 3NPS might be simpler and easier for the brain for me. As I said before if you modify intervals (flat or sharpen them) they are still on the same string. So 3 and b3 are both on the same string, same applies to 6 and b6 and 7 and b7. This is contrast to CAGED where for example the 3 is played on the next string with the index finger and the b3 is played on the same string with the pinky. For my brain 3NPS is way easier. It also is super easy to then derive the other scales (melodic minor and harmonic minor). HM and MM in CAGED are a mess IMO.
    I feel that conversion to minor in CAGED requires a different approach. In essence, the five CAGED major scale fingerings are 'filled out' versions of their equivalent major pentatonic scales. As Miles Okazaki points out in his book, Fundamentals of Guitar, the open strings of the guitar constitute a reordered G major pentatonic and therefore the instrument's tonal layout is defined by that scale. 'CAGED' itself is simply yet another reordering of the G major pentatonic, GEDBA (less catchy, I know...) transposed up a fourth.

    Indeed, I think of the guitar as basically being in 'G' rather than 'C'. The latter key is usually taught first as it contains no accidentals and is defined on the piano exclusively by its white keys. Most instrumentalists follow pianists' lead and run exercises/tunes through a cycle of 4ths starting from 'C'. However, when dealing with standard jazz repertoire, the five most popular keys are G, C, F, Bb, Eb and their relative minors (Em, Am, Dm, Gm, Cm) so it makes just as much sense to practise that same cycle from 'G'.

    Now, picking up on that point, we all know that the notes in a G major pentatonic scale are identical to those in the relative E minor pentatonic. Therefore, it may be easier to conceive of all major to minor conversions when dealing with the five CAGED regions in a similar manner. In modal terms, we are thinking in a derivative rather than parallel fashion (i.e. G major converts to E minor rather than G minor).

  43. #42

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by PMB
    Indeed, I think of the guitar as basically being in 'G' rather than 'C'. The latter key is usually taught first as it contains no accidentals and is defined on the piano exclusively by its white keys. Most instrumentalists follow pianists' lead and run exercises/tunes through a cycle of 4ths starting from 'C'. However, when dealing with standard jazz repertoire, the five most popular keys are G, C, F, Bb, Eb and their relative minors (Em, Am, Dm, Gm, Cm) so it makes just as much sense to practise that same cycle from 'G'.
    Interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way before. I know that Carol Kaye, in her book "Pro's Jazz Phrases" gives the phrases in four keys (G, C, Bb, Eb) but she never says why those four. (She does say that practicing things in four keys is usually enough.)

    As for running things through the cycle, I agree that C is not always the best place to start. It's not a bad place but one needs to be able to start in other places too, such as G, Bb, Eb, and F, for starters.

  44. #43

    User Info Menu

    42, the answer to life, the universe and everything is half of 84 . Thus implying the existence of a parallel universe, with the other half being the answer in the parallel

  45. #44

    User Info Menu

    I didn't buy the 84 Equations book as it was mind boggling to me, I just didn't understand what it was about and at the time I was learning to read music in Leavitt Book I! I bought the "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation" book and I'm really happy with it. The Formulas book laid around my house for 2 or 3 years until I had time for it, that was a bit ignorant on my part but I live and I learn. It's the perfect book for me as I learned to play guitar by ear and the scales I learned were based on the pentatonics both major and minor and that's all I really knew about playing guitar until I bought the formulas book! As a result of playing only major and minor pentatonics, it worked for blues but that was about it! BTW, pieces of this book are similar to what Garrison Fewell teaches about in his "Jazz Improvisation for Guitar A Melodic Approach", the same but different. The "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation" book comes with a DVD and a CD to clarify what he's talking about.
    Attached Images Attached Images

  46. #45

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    Interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way before. I know that Carol Kaye, in her book "Pro's Jazz Phrases" gives the phrases in four keys (G, C, Bb, Eb) but she never says why those four. (She does say that practicing things in four keys is usually enough.)

    As for running things through the cycle, I agree that C is not always the best place to start. It's not a bad place but one needs to be able to start in other places too, such as G, Bb, Eb, and F, for starters.
    I think Herb Ellis also dropped the 'D' shape (corresponding the key of 'F' in Carol's book). Ron Eschete includes it along with the others in his Complete Practical Guide for the Jazz Guitar Soloist. However, he doesn't follow the cycle of 4ths and it was while going through Ron's book about twenty years ago that I hit upon the idea of rearranging the five CAGED shapes into a cycle of 4ths (EADGC) and mapping them onto the five most common jazz keys (G, C, F, Bb, Eb). I wrote my own book at the time, Five by Five: A Progressive Approach to Jazz Guitar Lines to catalogue a whole series of lines I'd been working on and set them out in that manner. As it happens, it's comprised of five sections - major, dominant, minor, major II-V-I, minor ii-V-i - with each one moving from simple to more complex lines and concepts. I've used it for students wanting to get a grip on CAGED-based lines (I also teach single string scales, 'Reg' scales and 3nps concepts as well).

    Here's a sample from the first 'Major' section to give you some idea:
    Attached Images Attached Images

  47. #46

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by PMB
    I think Herb Ellis also dropped the 'D' shape (corresponding the key of 'F' in Carol's book). Ron Eschete includes it along with the others in his Complete Practical Guide for the Jazz Guitar Soloist. However, he doesn't follow the cycle of 4ths and it was while going through Ron's book about twenty years ago that I hit upon the idea of rearranging the five CAGED shapes into a cycle of 4ths (EADGC) and mapping them onto the five most common jazz keys (G, C, F, Bb, Eb). I wrote my own book at the time, Five by Five: A Progressive Approach to Jazz Guitar Lines to catalogue a whole series of lines I'd been working on and set them out in that manner. As it happens, it's comprised of five sections - major, dominant, minor, major II-V-I, minor ii-V-i - with each one moving from simple to more complex lines and concepts. I've used it for students wanting to get a grip on CAGED-based lines (I also teach single string scales, 'Reg' scales and 3nps concepts as well).

    Here's a sample from the first 'Major' section to give you some idea:
    That's nifty!
    I think of Herb's focus on three major triad shapes as "FAD" but the "A" here is what is sometimes called "long A" (which would be the "G" of CAGED). It can get confusing. Herb just numbers them, he doesn't name them. Since triads are 3-note chords, you don't have five positions, only 3, but the positions are wider than in "CAGED". (Fred Sokolow's "Fretboard Roadmaps" series is based on these shapes, though I think he calls them "F-D-A", as that is the order they appear in along the neck. I mean, D follows F, A follows D, F follows A, and then it starts over.

    Sometimes I think the desire to be thorough (-everything, everywhere on the neck) becomes impractical if one's goal is to improvise well rather than be able to play "everything, everywhere on the neck". It's okay to have tendencies and preferences.

    Anything built on the cycle is worth a jazz player's attention. That's the way the music tends to go.

    I haven't heard of your book. A Google search is not showing me anything. ???

  48. #47

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by fathand
    I didn't buy the 84 Equations book as it was mind boggling to me, I just didn't understand what it was about and at the time I was learning to read music in Leavitt Book I! I bought the "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation" book and I'm really happy with it. The Formulas book laid around my house for 2 or 3 years until I had time for it, that was a bit ignorant on my part but I live and I learn. It's the perfect book for me as I learned to play guitar by ear and the scales I learned were based on the pentatonics both major and minor and that's all I really knew about playing guitar until I bought the formulas book! As a result of playing only major and minor pentatonics, it worked for blues but that was about it! BTW, pieces of this book are similar to what Garrison Fewell teaches about in his "Jazz Improvisation for Guitar A Melodic Approach", the same but different. The "Formulas for Jazz Guitar Improvisation" book comes with a DVD and a CD to clarify what he's talking about.
    I have the "Formulas" book too. That's where it gets interesting. The 84 EQs book is more of a reference. I like the focus on arpeggio families within each of the seven scale fingerings. I find the 3 NPS scales (and their arpeggio fingerings) easier on my new Tele than my old archtop. (Different strings, lighter gauge, friendlier neck for this sort of thing.) So I'm getting a lot out of this book now.

  49. #48

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by MarkRhodes
    That's nifty!
    I think of Herb's focus on three major triad shapes as "FAD" but the "A" here is what is sometimes called "long A" (which would be the "G" of CAGED). It can get confusing. Herb just numbers them, he doesn't name them. Since triads are 3-note chords, you don't have five positions, only 3, but the positions are wider than in "CAGED". (Fred Sokolow's "Fretboard Roadmaps" series is based on these shapes, though I think he calls them "F-D-A", as that is the order they appear in along the neck. I mean, D follows F, A follows D, F follows A, and then it starts over.

    Sometimes I think the desire to be thorough (-everything, everywhere on the neck) becomes impractical if one's goal is to improvise well rather than be able to play "everything, everywhere on the neck". It's okay to have tendencies and preferences.

    Anything built on the cycle is worth a jazz player's attention. That's the way the music tends to go.

    I haven't heard of your book. A Google search is not showing me anything. ???
    It's not commercially available, Mark. I wrote it years ago and have made some revisions since but two kids, studying for a Master's and other life stuff took over at the time so I never got around to contacting publishing companies. I did try that with my Chuck Wayne transcriptions book and it looked like Hal Leonard was going to release it but the market quickly took a downturn.