Reply to Thread Bookmark Thread
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Posts 101 to 143 of 143
  1. #101

    User Info Menu

    I never thought to add the Minor 7b 5 to the Relative Major Minor Pair as you suggested Reg ...



    Aminor 7 b5 Cminor EbMajor7





    That is beautiful because it's so simple- the six note forms are just right there and just connect the dots.


    Works immediately- thanks.



    Also expands comping ideas....where the Min7b5 becomes non Dominant ornamentation .


    Very simple and useful.
    Last edited by Robertkoa; 02-26-2018 at 12:17 PM.

  2.  

    The Jazz Guitar Chord Dictionary
     
  3. #102

    User Info Menu

    Yea... the expanded.... relative concept, is just applying modal concepts to Maj / Min functional Harmony Borrowing .

    Jazz used Modal concepts, all that really means is... instead of everything based on Maj./Min. with embellishments. The basic references can be different, they can expand.

    If you get into composition, arranging etc... the embellishment approach can sound very vanilla... and even lousy etc...

    And that is just one example... right, the approach has all possibilities. And generally is used along side standard functional harmony etc...

    Hey rpjazz guitar.... Yes it's great to know all notes in all scales and chords.... but it's also good to know basic sources for why all those notes are called what they are. What is the organization of why those notes are called what they are.

    The mixing of different references... the adding of notes to chords that are not spelled or derived from function etc... like mixing of different functional dominant chords.... usually creates mud. In the example of taking a G7#11 and adding extensions from altered G7... without being aware of how the chord is functioning... using one's ear.... Well... that's your personal choice...
    But generally.... G7#11 has very specific function, meaning the chord is there for a Harmonic movement reason. The adding of non chord tone notes change the relationship and if someone is soloing or a melody... etc... the physical use needs to be very rhythmically organized... so one doesn't screw up basic harmonic implied rhythm.

    One can create Tonal Targets... as with your example... the chord is an island in it's self.... but even when using Tonal Target approaches for adding and changing notes and chords.... it still needs a relationship, a tonal relationship that has a tonal reference.

    Also all those different approaches to organize what and when to use specific chords... thinking about grids, or patterns... are part of learning processes. Mechanical concepts to help visualize the fretboard... eventually the fretboard needs to become what it is... a 6 string 12 fret repeating instrument.

    So when one thinks or hears say that G7#11... the entire fretboard reflects that chord... and all the possible sources and possible organizations for. Anywhere on the fretboard... if you choose to use Dmm as reference as in a Modal approach, you have access to all possible chords from that Dmm scale. And eventually... you don't need to think Dmm as starting reference, you are able to think and hear G7#11 with natural extensions. And the Dmm or D-ma7 chord is a relationship of that G7#11.

    You can learn what notes and chords to use etc... through the trial and error and memorization process.... But many times one misses why those notes and chords are there in the first place. When specific notes and chords are used... they have implications. When one adds notes, in the old embellishment approach... one can screw up what's implied. I have said many times.... Music is not just about what YOU think or hear.... There is jazz standard common practice... ( rpjazz don't take these comments personal... they are for anyone reading and not just directed to you). Anyway... there is much more going on besides what we personally think sound OK.

    Tal175... if you want to get Lydian Dominant together.... The fingering organization is different from understanding what Lydian Dominant is musically. There are a few different harmonically organized functional common practice uses of Lydian Dominant. What that means is that there are a few specific uses of that chord and note collection that is common jazz practice. Becoming aware of those is not about how to play the chord, scale or arpeggios on the guitar.

    Sight reading is a given, but sight reading is also a different subject as compared to fretboard organization. When you sight read on Piano or sax... your still sight reading... the keyboard, fretboard or keys have nothing to do with the music. Technical skills are different from sight reading.... Good technical skills can help your sight reading skills, can help with realizing different musical concepts and approaches on your instrument etc...

    Good luck

  4. #103
    OK this discussion is super useful to me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Tal175... if you want to get Lydian Dominant together.... The fingering organization is different from understanding what Lydian Dominant is musically. There are a few different harmonically organized functional common practice uses of Lydian Dominant. What that means is that there are a few specific uses of that chord and note collection that is common jazz practice. Becoming aware of those is not about how to play the chord, scale or arpeggios on the guitar.
    The part that I don't understand is, once one understands the uses of the Lydian Dominant, one still needs to overcome the the hurdle of knowing how to play it on the guitar. Let's take the 3rd bar of Blue 7. The melody has an "E" over Bb7. So if I want to preserve that sound when improvising, Bb Lydian dominant seems like it would be a good choice. Now one can think F melodic minor but that's not really what's going on in the music. We aren't modulating to a minor tonality. Ok, it would give us the right fingering and we can go from there, that's fine but why thinking Bb Dominant with a sharp 4 over that bar shouldn't be a good way to start learning that song (and the Lydian Dominant scale mapping on the fretboard)?

    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    So when one thinks or hears say that G7#11... the entire fretboard reflects that chord... and all the possible sources and possible organizations for. Anywhere on the fretboard... if you choose to use Dmm as reference as in a Modal approach, you have access to all possible chords from that Dmm scale. And eventually... you don't need to think Dmm as starting reference, you are able to think and hear G7#11 with natural extensions. And the Dmm or D-ma7 chord is a relationship of that G7#11.
    I guess that's the answer. So if I understand correctly, your approach is to have 7 positions of a few "parent scales" memorized where each position corresponds to a mode. Gradually one starts hearing them as all chord tones (core tones and extensions) in different contexts rather then "here I play melodic minor up a forth, here major down a second".
    Is that correct?
    This actually makes sense to me. I am going to try these positions as an umbrella to hold the octaves together and think both ways for a while and see how that goes.
    Thanks Reg.

  5. #104
    Quote Originally Posted by Robertkoa
    I never thought to add the Minor 7b 5 to the Relative Major Minor Pair as you suggested Reg ...



    Aminor 7 b5 Cminor EbMajor7





    That is beautiful because it's so simple- the six note forms are just right there and just connect the dots.


    Works immediately- thanks.



    Also expands comping ideas....where the Min7b5 becomes non Dominant ornamentation .


    Very simple and useful.
    Yeah. This has been a profound understanding for me to gain as well.

    Reg has always talked about "where notes want to go" depending on function etc, and a lot of that that kind of eluded me. Anyway, applying these diatonic extensions this way makes that VERY obvious, and not just in a theoretical way. Your m7b5 is an obvious one.

    The other for me has been phrygian or III. Always heard about it being talked about as being potentially either tonic OR dominant, but I never really got that in terms of what I could hear. When you play it is an extension of the I or V, it becomes immediately obvious to your ears. I'm actually really surprised at how quickly my fingers could apply the tonal gravity there. Same notes, but different ones are tensions depending on the function which is there ...or that you want to imply. You begin to see how you could easily apply it in places where it's not explicitly spelled out.

    I've begun to think more and more in the last few months that Reg's entire concept of hearing harmony /relationships etc is probably as much the natural result of his physical/kinesthetic approach as any theoretical learning or seven inferences from tons of tunes. I don't know that it's as easy to get one without the other. The relationships that he's always referred to as "simple and basic" seemed anything but to me honestly, but I think they're kinesthetic as much as theoretical.

    The fingers training the ears is really good stuff.

  6. #105

    User Info Menu

    Cool... nice to hear.

    Yea... I play the Guitar... it doesn't play me... unless I choose for it to.

    Tal175... so yes... learning to realize or play something on guitar is a technical physical thing. Just like learning to play something on a piano or sax. You need to understand the instrument... what it is and how it works. (you don't have to do anything), but it helps.
    And yes Sonny's Blue Seven is a blues.... which just being a Blues has harmonic implication, and a jazz blues also has harmonic implications.

    Typically with Blues... the Blue Notes become part of Harmonic organization...

    But to keep it simple... The tune is standard I IV V blues... and the basic harmonic reference is still just Dominant chords, with basic Mixolydian reference, but the use of modal interchange using Mixo. with #11 or#4... Lydian Dominant is also going on.

    During the head... you imply that Lydian Dominant chord on melody notes etc... and because They're still using the chords and even melody is standard Functional application... basically both are implied. So really just don't use Sus chords etc... But because the Harmonic use is Modal you have access to other chords from same pitch collection as the Lydian Dominant chord. That is what Modal implications are... Have access to modal concepts, You can sill use other types of harmonic relationships. II V's are example...F- dorain and Bb7lydian Dominant same with IV and V chords work well... They use the changing 11th or 4th as a tool for motion , they are a simple Chord Pattern

    So yes I don't think or hear F melodic Minor.... I'm thinking and hearing and using as my basic reference... Bb7. I can create Relationships with Bbmm if I choose, but that would be a secondary relationship with Bb7.
    And at some point while your working on fretboard mapping, you need to be able to think and hear Bb lydian dominant as one 6string 12 fret shape thatrepeats... and Fmm as a different 6 string 12 fret repeating pattern that just happens to be the same notes. They are different.

  7. #106

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Tal_175
    To be concrete, suppose I want to internalize the Lydian Dominant scale (I do). There is the "Melodic minor up a fifth" approach which I don't believe in. I want to hear the scale and see how the scale tones correspond to the chord I am playing over. I know many people use the "Melodic minor up an X" approach with success, so I'm sure there are merits to that too, but I don't see it.
    I've been messing around with this because I've been kinda-sorta dabbling with the Barry Harris thing, where everything is something else. Am7 is C6 A7 is E-6 or Bb-6, etc. I think it's a way of thinking that probably works well for horn players, but maybe not so much for guitarists.

    But what I have noticed... I've also been working on getting the melodic minor scale together all over the fretboard, (I decided to take Reg seriously about fundamentals) and by doing this, you find that the fingering patterns for, say, Lydian Dominant are in there. Then, by shifting your root focus you can see your Lyd.Dom., but you have access to all the fingerings because you practiced them as part of the MM scale.

    (I.e., I'm playing A Lyd.Dom. I know that that fingers the same as B Mixo(b6) and G Lydian Augmented (Which I actually think of as Ab Phrygian(b1) for fingering purposes)).

    For thinking purposes, I want everything in relation to the chord of the moment, but for fingering purposes, sometimes a relative approach helps.

    I've also noticed that seven positions seem to help me more than five, even if a couple of them kind of melt together.

  8. #107
    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe
    .
    (I.e., I'm playing A Lyd.Dom. I know that that fingers the same as B Mixo(b6) and G Lydian Augmented (Which I actually think of as Ab Phrygian(b1) for fingering purposes)).
    Say it ain't so Joe! :-)

    Kind of kidding, but honestly, that's the best melodic minor fingering we have on the guitar IMO. Also, it relates physically/kinesthetically to major seven Ionian and Lydian, which are its main uses as subs.

    Strongly recommend learning it, even if you view it as an alternate for the time being.

  9. #108
    Quote Originally Posted by Boston Joe
    For thinking purposes, I want everything in relation to the chord of the moment, but for fingering purposes, sometimes a relative approach helps.

    I've also noticed that seven positions seem to help me more than five, even if a couple of them kind of melt together.
    When someone is learning improvisation (like myself), regardless of what their level is in other styles of guitar, I think the important thing is not to be able to skate all over the fretboard and use all the positions. That's useful later on for better phasing and use of pitch range.
    I feel like I can just practice and play in one smallish area of the fretboard, say between frets 7 to 12, for years to come and improve constantly (even perform). What I do need in order to be able to practice over changes is to be able to quickly find any scale and any arpeggio starting from any note. I don't need to do that real-time, only when I practice improvisation in the context of a particular song. Once I've practice for sometime I can just improvise in that area. But I do need to be able to see the scales and arpeggios in that area without too much mechanical overhead. Moreover I only need to see 1 or 2 octaves, then I can practice connecting them starting from different notes.
    Implicit in this is the belief that one needs to see each chord-scale individually and be aware of the chord tone/scale degrees in relation to the harmonic back drop and not just play 1 or 2 parent scales over everything. Otherwise no need to worry too much about the mechanical overhead.
    Last edited by Tal_175; 02-26-2018 at 09:46 PM.

  10. #109

    User Info Menu

    [QUOTE=Reg;8hat's implied. I have said many times.... Music is not just about what YOU think or hear.... There is jazz standard common practice... ( rpjazz don't take these comments personal... they are for anyone reading and not just directed to you). Anyway... there is much more going on besides what we personally think sound OK.
    k[/QUOTE]

    No problem. I'm not taking this personally at all. I appreciate the viewpoint and I'm here to learn.

    I prefaced my analysis of the available notes by saying it depends on context.

    When you go through it, the biggest pieces are natural ninth vs altered ninths and what to do with the 5, #5 and 6.

    I guess I'm more interested than some in making those decisions by ear. But, if someone else can make even better choices based on theory, great. I have no doubt that some can.

    As always, I find it easiest to deal with a specific tune. So, I'd suggest Desafinado. Fmaj7 to G7#11.
    In this case, my ear tells me that I don't want altered ninths and the 6th sounds ok. So, I'm probably not going to be leaning on the D#. That's straight lyd dominant. But, OTOH, with a strong enough line, any note can sound fine, at least to me.

    Lyd dominant is a mode of mm, and mm has no avoid note, so any note or chord generated by the scale is an option. I'd be interested to hear how others use that bit of information. I don't usually think, oh, it's Dmm, so let me play Esusb9, at least not when soloing. I sometimes use it when I'm looking for more voicings for comping.

    In a situation where there's a ii V I and the V has a #11 (can't think of a tune, but it happens), then other alterations may come in to play.

    I fully agree with Reg that it's situational. I'm not sure we see the use of other alterations in the same way, but that may be a matter of taste. I'm not trying for a classic jazz guitar sound, so that may be the difference. I am trying to play through changes, in my own way.

    I'll admit that I don't understand "reference, relationships, development" and I don't think I understand "organization" either, as Reg uses these terms.

    In the practice room, there's plenty of time to try out all 12 notes in a given situation. That allows you to internalize the sounds, one tune at a time.

    On the bandstand, I don't want to be thinking about theory. I just want to make melody using the sounds I have internalized. Of course, that's a goal that I often fail to achieve and I may think about chord tones and pitch collections.

    It seems to me that trying out the various sounds and figuring out what you like is valid way to go about it.

    If the issue is finding new sounds, there are a number of ways to go about that ... theoretical predictions have worked for me, but not as often as other approaches. If the issue is remembering the way to achieve specific sounds, theory can be helpful there.

    But, it seems to me that it still comes down to notes that are in the chord, notes which can be added to the chord without pushing the harmony in an unwanted direction, and the notes that are left - typically an avoid note or two, and a small handful of other choices.

    But, I may be misunderstanding the entire thread. I always find it easier to talk about a specific tune than in the abstract.
    Last edited by rpjazzguitar; 02-27-2018 at 06:30 AM.

  11. #110

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    Say it ain't so Joe! :-)

    Kind of kidding, but honestly, that's the best melodic minor fingering we have on the guitar IMO. Also, it relates physically/kinesthetically to major seven Ionian and Lydian, which are its main uses as subs.

    Strongly recommend learning it, even if you view it as an alternate for the time being.
    I don't view it as either an alternate or a primary thing. The point of all of this is to eventually make all of the positional fingerings kind of interlock together, so the whole fretboard is available. I have that with the major scale, so I don't really ever worry about finding a major scale or a major scale mode, or whatever.

  12. #111

    User Info Menu

    I was following closely Reg' s approach for quite some time now. I think I understand his points. Few months ago I started lessons with Peter Farrell who is George Benson student for 15 years or so. Their method uses different fingerings with basis on even notes per string. Even notes per strings influences the picking hand and that's where Georges and Peter's fluency is from. Connection between both hands. Results are really fast. Regs approach is fighting with picking, at least for me so I decided to trade it for George's method. But, Reg' s method is organizationally fantastic too. I think, for sight reading that it is maybe even better.
    The positions George is referencing to are based on simple C Maj - A min. Everything is connected this way. So 5 positions, but different from CAGED.
    What we are focused on in our lessons are lines. We practice lines, not scales. So, we went trough all scales but in this manner. First, we go trough tetrads trough out the scale (ex. Amm - a,c,e,g#) then connecting tetrads (a,c,e,g# - f#,a,c,e...). Then we go trough possible lines in Amm trough out the neck systematically. And here we can use tetrads plus scale or chromatic or other embellishments etc. By practicing lines and not scales you learn practical use of the scales and what is very important how to connect things while playing without thinking but hearing things.
    Another thing is thoroughness. You can't just skimp trough. You gotta really go trough all the positions, all the lines. Than we go trough practical usage on changes. Than we apply rhythmic approaches, space usage etc.
    Reg didn't show to many lines based on his system (he did actually post something recently) so many misunderstanding of his system comes from that. Not theoretical, but practical misunderstanding.
    So, George's approach is definitely more fluid, like in a "speed of light". But, the rest of the approach is similar. The reason why? is similar. And when I read trough the Reg' s posts I pickup the reasons and whys and just disregard the fingerings.
    So, great George Benson is using similar system as Reg only different fingerings. That's why Reg's post are important to me. I would just ask Reg if he could post more lines and different excercises. That would really spice up the forum.
    Thanks Reg.

    Sent from my SM-C7000 using Tapatalk

  13. #112

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by mikostep
    ... I would just ask Reg if he could post more lines and different excercises. That would really spice up the forum...
    If I counted correctly, there are at least 137 clips on Reg's YT channel, all guitar playing. Maybe you should take a look?

  14. #113

    User Info Menu

    I know about YouTube videos. But, many people can't see a lot from them because there are many of them, it's hard to make connection and he plays fast. I did watch and studies many of them. Great material.
    I was thinking about printed material. That would be much easier to understand for a lot of people. I understand that it's demanding for Reg to do it. But maybe he has something already printed or any other form.

    Sent from my SM-C7000 using Tapatalk

  15. #114

    User Info Menu

    I'm not that much interested in study, but I think matt.guitarteacher already posted compilation of PDFs previously posted by Reg, as well as some of his own transcriptions of Reg's clips. You can search the forum for that post, but I believe matt.GT will chime in anyway.

  16. #115

    User Info Menu

    Hvala mnogo, Vladane.

    I have two or three transcriptions of comping and scale and arpeggios. If there is more I would like to see it.

    Sent from my SM-C7000 using Tapatalk

  17. #116
    Quote Originally Posted by mikostep
    I was following closely Reg' s approach for quite some time now. I think I understand his points. Few months ago I started lessons with Peter Farrell who is George Benson student for 15 years or so. Their method uses different fingerings with basis on even notes per string. Even notes per strings influences the picking hand and that's where Georges and Peter's fluency is from. Connection between both hands. Results are really fast. Regs approach is fighting with picking, at least for me so I decided to trade it for George's method. But, Reg' s method is organizationally fantastic too. I think, for sight reading that it is maybe even better.
    The positions George is referencing to are based on simple C Maj - A min. Everything is connected this way. So 5 positions, but different from CAGED.
    What we are focused on in our lessons are lines. We practice lines, not scales. So, we went trough all scales but in this manner. First, we go trough tetrads trough out the scale (ex. Amm - a,c,e,g#) then connecting tetrads (a,c,e,g# - f#,a,c,e...). Then we go trough possible lines in Amm trough out the neck systematically. And here we can use tetrads plus scale or chromatic or other embellishments etc. By practicing lines and not scales you learn practical use of the scales and what is very important how to connect things while playing without thinking but hearing things.
    Another thing is thoroughness. You can't just skimp trough. You gotta really go trough all the positions, all the lines. Than we go trough practical usage on changes. Than we apply rhythmic approaches, space usage etc.
    Reg didn't show to many lines based on his system (he did actually post something recently) so many misunderstanding of his system comes from that. Not theoretical, but practical misunderstanding.
    So, George's approach is definitely more fluid, like in a "speed of light". But, the rest of the approach is similar. The reason why? is similar. And when I read trough the Reg' s posts I pickup the reasons and whys and just disregard the fingerings.
    So, great George Benson is using similar system as Reg only different fingerings. That's why Reg's post are important to me. I would just ask Reg if he could post more lines and different excercises. That would really spice up the forum.
    Thanks Reg.

    Sent from my SM-C7000 using Tapatalk
    Yeah. I'm going to have to check out the Benson thing at some point. Read about it or saw a preview video a few weeks back and was really struck by the similarities . really really like the idea of fleshing out reference licks which become symmetrical in multiple positions , relative to six string etc.

    I honestly believe now that working through the symmetries is the absolute fastest way to improve right hand technique , beyond actually thinking about right hand or doing anything focused on it. amazed at the amount of technical improvement I acquired myself in a relatively short time of working on things more this way, just using basic alternate picking. I was really always kind of a fingerstyle player , not a pick guy, and certainly never a technical player .

    I would love to see reg post some of these kind of reference symmetrical lick patterns on different scale types etc. I would gladly transcribe myself, if it's in video form.

  18. #117
    Sorry for all of the text recognition errors in the last one. Between driving at the moment. Actually agree with both of you guys on this. The wealth of video material is more than you could ever ask for. It's really a life's work in and of itself , but it can be a lot to take in, depending on where you are.

    It's all a lot easier to see, if you've actually worked through his basic fingerings for major and melodic minor , with arpeggios etc. If you look at the types of licks he had posted above, you'll start to see them pop up in all of his playing in those videos. easier to see what you know etc.

    Probably the next biggest gap in being able to see/hear what is going on with single notes in those videos is going to be his altered pentatonic patterns, which he has posted in another thread. If you know these, it's a lot easier to see what he's doing .

    Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

  19. #118

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    ... fleshing out reference licks which become symmetrical in multiple positions ... working through the symmetries .. .reference symmetrical lick patterns ...
    Matt, I believe you are presenting something important, but I totally do not understand it.

    What are symmetrical lick patterns? What symmetries you work through? How do licks become symmetrical in multiple positions?

    If you could give just one example, no need video. ... the lick goes like this _________(fret/ string) ... here_____is the symmetry ... this _____ makes symmetrical lick pattern ... this _________ is how it becomes symmetrical in this ______ other position ...

  20. #119
    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Matt, I believe you are presenting something important, but I totally do not understand it.

    What are symmetrical lick patterns? What symmetries you work through? How do licks become symmetrical in multiple positions?

    If you could give just one example, no need video. ... the lick goes like this _________(fret/ string) ... here_____is the symmetry ... this _____ makes symmetrical lick pattern ... this _________ is how it becomes symmetrical in this ______ other position ...
    Sure. It's symmetrical, in the sense that you're picking basically the same string/ finger /scale degree , but in multiple positions. That's what he's doing in the above notated examples. For C minor, he's playing a C minor lick , and then playing an E flat major lick with the same fingerings/picking almost exactly, while accounting for the diatonic transposition. Then, he does the same for am7b5, a diatonic third below. again, symmetrical in context of the whole scale pattern , although that one starts on the third finger, because of the reference to the original scale fingerings.

    The analogous approach that most of us work on in other methodologies would be to do the same thing maybe, but you'd be learning that one lick in the original position and then just transposing the same lick to five new positions. Then, you're completely starting over with search position. Everything is fingered completely differently in right and left hand, and you're starting from different string etc. In addition to that, you're doing all of that technical work just to get something which is musically EXACTLY the SAME THING.

    Reg is killing two birds with one stone in a sense. He's using the Ebmaj7 to basically give you an extended C min9 lick in the new position , (or C min6 below). You're getting the harmonic implications of doing that , the different notes etc., while at the same time keeping the right and left hand aspects basically the same. Kind of analogous to pianists learning five finger scale patterns in multiple positions. Fingerings references stay the same.

    Anyway, I first started really seeing the benefits of this in learning reg's arpeggios fingerings in 4 inversions. Arpeggios can just be beastly. It had always seemed to me that some worked so much better technically than others. Anyway, I found that when you start from the same string/finger reference , the technical issues start to greatly diminish. The weak spots kind of clear up technically on there own. Honestly, if you did nothing with reg but learn those arps, You're getting a tremendous value. I think anyone could learn them too. They're not super difficult. They are probably pretty different if you're not already using his fingerings for things like reg and etc. but the cost/benefit on that particular item is as high as anything he does probably.

  21. #120

    User Info Menu

    OK... I'll start posting licks... lines etc...

    I would also like to say... that my approach to playing isn't just about soloing. Personally I believe learning to comp is much more useful and helps lead to fuller understandings of Music. But requires much more work etc... and your usually not a star out front comping.

    But would also say.... very few guitarist actually become or reach the performer status of a GB or recognition, and it took a while etc...

    And too be clear... I can post burnin licks etc... that most will never actually be able to play, because of basic technical skills, but I don't know if that would really accomplish that much. I'm not trying to make me look good. But I will try and add some licks and the organization behind them etc... maybe it will help.

    rpjazz... your points about playing by ear yada yada... again your talking about yourself. What makes different notes sound good to your ears? I know Barrie etc... there is more going on than basic rules of thumb. Those are basic guidelines... they are from common chord pattern examples... you generally don't mix. I'm assuming you understand secondary and extended Dominants... those contexts of common practice Chord Patterns are where those basic tension applications are from. And generally other added and embellishment notes are from additional chords... implied.

    In your example of Desafinado...the G7 is V7/V
    So old school.... you take the key... melody and chord tones... and just fill in the blanks....

    Modern school... you use the same process and extend the borrowing, relative and parallel relationships... by using modal concepts. The big differences between old school and modern approaches are Modal. Which is just extending old school organization. With Jazz there is also Blue notes... which can be organized using relative and parallel relationships... and the use of Melodic Minor beyond just being an embellishment.

    When aware of guidelines based on theory and general compositional general practices... the added or altered notes are not random or derived by ear. They sound good because they are derived from an organized system. I understand we like to say the theory comes after the practice, but for most of the music we're talking about... the Practice is over.

    Our ears think something sound good because through common practice, trial and error and then the analysis of that practice... we have theory of common practice etc...

    When we play solo or with basic accompaniment... there is more free space, you can add and alter notes, play by ear etc... because even when you don't really have any organization, use whatever you think sounds cool etc... It can work because of less mud. When you start performing in larger ensembles... start performing music that has implications, harmonically... perform other peoples music.

    You need to make choices because of what's implied. Well developed Ears... work because you've put in the time performing, generally not just practicing.... you need more than your ears. You recognize sounds from being exposed etc...

    It works, and I have ears and believe and trust them. But I'm aware of other ears and respect and understand them...

    Usually one needs to develop skills that can repeat... yes one can have magic moments, performances etc... but when the magic isn't there you still need to play... yada yada

    I 'll try and post more examples... I am lazy.

  22. #121

    User Info Menu

    Valdan...

    Play a lick in "A" then move that lick up to "C" and play the same thing. That is mechanical constant structure symmetrical lick moving or transoposition
    Now take that Lick and mechanically move it up or down... but in stead of moving the lick, chromativally... where the lick is the same but in a different Key.... now move the lick... Diatonically.... keep the key the same.

    Example... Diatonic symmetrical movement

    A C E G F#....... A-7 to D7

    nowmove the lick up diatonic 3rd.

    C E G B A......... Cmaj7#11 to F#-7b5

    Simple

  23. #122

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by matt.guitarteacher
    ... It's symmetrical, in the sense that you're picking basically the same string/ finger /scale degree , but in multiple positions ...
    Quote Originally Posted by Reg
    Valdan...

    Play a lick in "A" then move that lick up to "C" and play the same thing. That is mechanical constant structure symmetrical lick moving or transoposition ...
    Thank you, both. More less I already understood this before. I just could not grasp "symmetrical" part, because in order something to be symmetrical, there must be some axis of symmetry, as I understand what symmetry is.

    Talking about mechanical aspect, here we do not have symmetry. We go 3rd up, or 3rd down, but some notes move major 3rd some move minor 3rd, also direction dependent, so it's not really symmetrical. I'd say those licks are analogue.

    Undo edit: Regarding picking patterns, as far as I can see, they are also not symmetrical, they are all the same, ie. uniform. (After all, I think I was right first time around, as far as Reg's example in his previous post)

    Whatever, for me it's only important to know what you are talking about.
    Last edited by Vladan; 02-27-2018 at 05:06 PM. Reason: undo edit

  24. #123

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Thank you, both. More less I already understood this before. I just could not grasp "symmetrical" part, because in order something to be symmetrical, there must be some axis of symmetry, as I understand what symmetry is.

    Talking about mechanical aspect, here we do not have symmetry. We go 3rd up, or 3rd down, but some notes move major 3rd some move minor 3rd, also direction dependent, so it's not really symmetrical. I'd say those licks are analogue.

    Regarding picking patterns, as far as I can see, they are also not symmetrical, they are all the same, ie. uniform.

    Whatever, for me it's only important to know what you are talking about.
    Perhaps I'm unusually dense, but I don't think I understand the goal of this.

    Is this for hearing the patterns and learning the sounds (scale fragment vs chord, in context) in the practice room?

    Or is this for an actual solo -- where you take a cell of, say, 4 notes, with a certain contour, and move it around based on some theoretical construct, say, different modes of melodic minor? Or different extensions of a minor chord, or something like that?

  25. #124
    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Thank you, both. More less I already understood this before. I just could not grasp "symmetrical" part, because in order something to be symmetrical, there must be some axis of symmetry, as I understand what symmetry is.

    Talking about mechanical aspect, here we do not have symmetry. We go 3rd up, or 3rd down, but some notes move major 3rd some move minor 3rd, also direction dependent, so it's not really symmetrical. I'd say those licks are analogue.

    Regarding picking patterns, as far as I can see, they are also not symmetrical, they are all the same, ie. uniform.

    Whatever, for me it's only important to know what you are talking about.
    Yeah. I think you may simply be using English a little more precisely than I'm used to. My vocabulary is maybe a little more of the southern US, redneck variety . :-)

    I was basically talking about "degrees of symmetry " , about one being perhaps " more symmetrical" than the other. Probably a bad use of the term. meanwhile, my millennial kids and friends think I'm a snob for using ANY punctuation in text form.

    Ha ha! :-)

    Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

  26. #125

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by rpjazzguitar
    Perhaps I'm unusually dense, but I don't think I understand the goal of this.

    Is this for hearing the patterns and learning the sounds (scale fragment vs chord, in context) in the practice room?

    Or is this for an actual solo -- where you take a cell of, say, 4 notes, with a certain contour, and move it around based on some theoretical construct, say, different modes of melodic minor? Or different extensions of a minor chord, or something like that?
    I'm not the right address, but since you quoted me ...

    I think it goes in iterations, you start with one, proceed with another, order does not matter. Eventually you both hear them and have them in your fingers. Then you use mechanical similarities as starting point for musical variations.

  27. #126

    User Info Menu

    Yes the use of the term symmetrical is more in the sense of proportions and balance as compared to mathematical usage. The reference when using Diatonic... is the scale. The major scale is the reference as being a balanced starting point with the whole step, half step proportions or pattern being symmetrical within the scale. Look it's not that complex... we're talking about Diatonic transposition. If you don't like the term Symmetrical ... dump it. Just use Diatonic and chromatic. And this is the beginning of the applications of using functional relationships for creating harmonic and melodic relationship.... as with most things, there are extended and different levels of application... how one can use somewhat mechanical tools for helping to find and use possible performance and compositional approaches. You have worked with the golden segment, ratio or spiral... the Fibonacci spiral etc...

    So rpjazz... there are many uses... but to keep it simple, lets talk soloing sense that seems to be what guitarist like to do... When you solo... how do you approach, what is your goal etc...
    -Melodic development... so what makes a melody a melody.... generally there are specific notes in specific locations with specific harmony... then you connect those notes. Example take head for Scrapple (because it's simple),
    1st two bars
    F# G Bb A G F D / E C... G-7 to C7
    most important notes...
    .....G............F.../..E C
    You can pick other notes... but most of the melodic organization leads to those 4 note which spell G-7 to C7

    So when you start melodically developing the melody... this can be in the practice room or live.... (I don't really remember what practice is), I practice at gigs...I guess. Anyway.... there are a few different approaches to soloing over tunes... but generally there are Targets.
    The target can be as above... a few melody target notes that I decide are what I want to use to create different relationships with and then develop those relationships... I can use embellishment, rhythmic and articulations, and harmony.

    A possible beginning....harmonic melodic approach for melodic development...(improv), is to use call and answer or using two melodic statements and create interaction between to two.

    The example of being aware of.... Expanded Diatonic relationship.... being able to hear and play same lick in different locations... with different harmonic implication... is that it helps physically and aurally begin to be aware of that basic improve approach... as well as educate the ears as to what it sounds like... and what will become even more useful... you begin to understand musical relationships, how and why they work. The example would be play a line and then transpose the line up a third and begin to create a relationship between the two. Start with simple changes first, then with actual changes, same process just need to know and understand the organization and relationships between notes and chords... there are some intervals that just don't work that well on specific harmonic rhythm locations.
    Anyway... you usually start simple... until you have the concept down and understand why it works. Then expand...

    Like I say to much.... it's not magic, it's usually that one is just not aware and can't hear yet. It's never just one specific approach etc... all of them become one, and you can choose what to use... or hear and organize. And Again....IT NOT ALWAYS JUST ABOUT YOU.... there are other musicians that might want to go somewhere different.

    I can give you an example of very practical usage of the simple Diatonic approach above..... At least for me and most horn players... when playing heads or melodies... background lines during others soloing,.. melodies or heads that we all know or even those we don't know. I have no problem playing a harmony part with someone playing the head... I know what up or down a diatonic third sounds like... and I don't need to memorize what to play... It's simple mechanics, part of being able to play the instrument.

    Anyway... there are many goals, this is just part of being able to play the instrument, which requires having some technical skills worked out. I worked the technical part out back when I was a kid... I'm still learning new applications. The advantages of having an organized fingering system that works with all aspect of playing the instrument... I can basically play new concepts and applications.... new music sight reading... I don't usually need to memorize things....

    My approach obviously isn't required and most players have their own system etc... It's pretty simple to see and hear which ones work etc... If something I posted isn't clear enough... just let me know. I'm more that happy to try and break it down. I need the practice.

  28. #127

    User Info Menu

    The example of being aware of.... Expanded Diatonic relationship.... being able to hear and play same lick in different locations... with different harmonic implication...
    And another piece of the puzzle drops into place. This is one of those moments when a bunch of kind of shapeless proto-ideas are swimming around in my head, and then something comes along and crystalizes it. Thanks Reg! There's other good stuff in there as well, but I love these "A-ha!" moments especially.

  29. #128

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    I just could not grasp "symmetrical" part, because in order something to be symmetrical, there must be some axis of symmetry, as I understand what symmetry is.
    There must be some axis of symmetry in regard to reflectional symmetry. But that is only one type of symmetry, of many. If you consider the twelve notes of our musical system in a circular arrangement, like the Circle of Fifths, then Reg's example of shifting a sequence of notes chromatically up or down is a symmetrical movement. That is rotational symmetry. Same for the seven notes of a certain key--arrange them in a circular manner, and the diatonical shift is an application of rotational symmetry. So for me, the term of symmetry in this context is valid.

    Robert

  30. #129

    User Info Menu

    My question was not to Reg, it was to Matt. They both already explained where the symmetry was. Reg specified the symmetry was not mechanical, about physical refference but rather about diatonical movement (not chromatic sliding).
    I was specifically talking about mechanical movement up and down the neck because system was presented as based on physical refference.
    In my explanation I already acknowledged I was aware of symmetry in moving up and down in thirds, from some scale degree, but resulting shapes were not symmetrical in regard to physical reference and mechanical movement.


    Sent from VladanMovies @ YouTube

  31. #130

    User Info Menu

    Sorry, if you got that wrong--I didn't run down anything you wrote, nor did I deconstruct your discussions with Matt or Reg. It was just your "because in order something to be symmetrical, there must be some axis of symmetry" that triggered my reflex to indicate the existence of other types of symmetry. In general, there is no requirement of an axis for something to be symmetrical, just for mirror symmetry. If you're not considering other kinds of symmetry, your vulnerable to overlooking a lot of beauty in this world.

    Robert

  32. #131

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by diminix
    Sorry, if you got that wrong--I didn't run down anything you wrote, nor did I deconstruct your discussions with Matt or Reg. ...

    I got that wrong.
    Last edited by Vladan; 02-28-2018 at 07:12 AM. Reason: Quote inserted

  33. #132

    User Info Menu

    I think symmetry is colloquially used to mean only reflectional symmetry.

    Which btw is negative harmony.

    #jacobbloodycollier

  34. #133

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    colloquially used to mean only reflectional symmetry
    ...which is a pity--that's what I meant to say.

    Robert

  35. #134

    User Info Menu

    If the discussion is still going on, any kind of symmetry is always in regard to some (set of) reference(s), that reference is colloquially called axis of symmetry.
    For example, in rotational symmetry, the reference is the center of the circle, center of the circle is point, point can be understood as projection of a straight line (usually associated with axis) from perpendicular plane.

  36. #135
    Actually I was thinking diatonic scale degree of the chord/scale of the moment. So, THAT.. 7-1-3-5, is exactly repeated. Three axis is diatonic position, if you will. Not literal intervalinterval. Maths. Oy.....

    Anyway, there is another similarity which should be mentioned: rhythmic. For me, when you have same rhythm, similar number of notes per string, same finger numbers for the majority... the technical/mental ease of anything greatly increases. ( By the way, if you are alternate picking, your right hand picking ends up being nearly exactly the same as well.)

    I was struck by this when I was working some of the bh stuff months ago, and I started applying the concept of rhythmic or intervallic unity/symmetry/similarity to anything I could really. It's something obvious in what reg talks about that I was missing to a large degree. It greatly accelerates technical improvement. One less variable always helps.

    Anyway, I started a thread about it, because I was kinda of geeking out about it. Met with some earnest and well-intentioned blank stares.

    Ha! Some things just don't work in text form.

    Sent from my SM-J727P using Tapatalk

  37. #136

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    If the discussion is still going on, any kind of symmetry is always in regard to some (set of) reference(s), that reference is colloquially called axis of symmetry.
    For example, in rotational symmetry, the reference is the center of the circle, center of the circle is point, point can be understood as projection of a straight line (usually associated with axis) from perpendicular plane.
    Maybe we need to explore other terms, like "congruent?" Not quibbling, just thinking there might be some really great word out there that would capture what we're talking about. No harm ever came from finding the right word!

  38. #137

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    If the discussion is still going on, any kind of symmetry is always in regard to some (set of) reference(s), that reference is colloquially called axis of symmetry.
    For example, in rotational symmetry, the reference is the center of the circle, center of the circle is point, point can be understood as projection of a straight line (usually associated with axis) from perpendicular plane.
    As understood in mathematics, a symmetry need not have an axis. For example, a translation, which moves every point by the same length and direction, is a symmetry. Shifting positions up and down the neck would be the analogy on the guitar.

  39. #138

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Ren
    As understood in mathematics, a symmetry need not have an axis. For example, a translation, which moves every point by the same length and direction, is a symmetry. Shifting positions up and down the neck would be the analogy on the guitar.
    Sh**, I was wrong, again.

    Anyway, in example presented, not all point's/ notes are moved equally, some are moved by 3 frets, some by 4.

    It can be seen as translation only if we say 3rd is 3rd, no matter if minor or major, it's only important to be every other note of the scale.

    Whatever, my knowledge is weak, my opinions are strong.

  40. #139

    User Info Menu

    I went through the octave thing with a student today. I think it’s a good way to teach positions and fretboard mapping

  41. #140

    User Info Menu

    Quote Originally Posted by Vladan
    Whatever, my knowledge is weak, my opinions are strong.
    Can you do a mug or baseball cap with that on? I would totally buy one!

  42. #141
    Quote Originally Posted by christianm77
    I went through the octave thing with a student today. I think it’s a good way to teach positions and fretboard mapping
    If this is referring to the one octave shapes discussed in the original post of the thread, after I posted I did a search on the subject to see if there were other similar approaches. I found the following book:
    3 Shape Fretboard: Guitar Scales and Arpeggios as Variants of 3 Shapes of the Major Scale - Kindle edition by Gareth Evans. Arts & Photography Kindle eBooks @ Amazon.com.
    I don't have the book so I am not sure but based on the images in the review of the book below, 2 of the 3 shapes correspond to the 2 shapes in the post. I actually use the 3rd shape as well (requires stretch) especially for descending down from one of the other two shapes:
    Guitar Scales & Arpeggios Book

    The blurb on the Amazon site says "This system can help to understand the larger CAGED guitar scale shapes in terms of their single octave components." which is what I was trying to communicate as well by hand waving through the posts and what not.
    I have no doubt this book provides a more organized presentation of the approach then I did in the post in case anybody is interested.

  43. #142

    User Info Menu

    Don’t need a book. Just practice it.

  44. #143

    User Info Menu

    Tal_175 You might be interested in Prokobis Skordis' Effective Music Practice courses and YT channel from a teaching perspective.