-
How well does the CAGED Method work for playing Jazz
Do you use this method for your Major-Minor-Melodic-Harmonic scales/Modes/chord shapes?
-
01-19-2011 09:09 PM
-
It worked for Joe Pass!
-
Compared to what?
Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
Some heavy hitters say that is what they use. It has to be most of what anyone uses.
I have always used other positions. For example, most G-chords are in the third position. so I practiced that scale in the third position, mostly reach out with the pinky. It seemed like the common Am (played on 6432 with the second and third finger, actually puts the hand in the fourth position, so I practiced G in that position, reaching back out with the index. I do the same thing in those positions with the C scale. I used to practice by playing a phrase, then repeating it up one fret to the end. I doubt many others do that.
I also use the scale forms with three notes per string. Some think these are good for speed. I have a feeling many players use these.
-
I use it a lot, but I don't think in strict boxes anymore. It works well enough with HM and MM. I recommend it to my students in my book text/diagrams. I made cool interlocking diagrams of diatonic and HM. I'll post if you want to see.
The shredder-style "thee notes per string" scale shapes are an alternative, but seeing the intervals that way is a little harder.
-
Yes I do want to see! Originally Posted by JonnyPac
I am trying to compare the caged method to the Bruno method also.
Thanks guys.
-
Some like CAGED, some like the 7 scale system. There are advantages and disadvantages to both and there are great players using each. Use whatever works best for you.
Peace,
Kevin
-
I guess the way I visualize things is CAGED, but I'm not one to view things in terms of scales, really.
-
Thank you! Originally Posted by JonnyPac
The III is the root, it's to show it's relation to the major scale... enjoy!
-
I have been trying to figure out the pros and cons for each. what are they? Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar
-
Hi mr. beaumont. how would you describe how you visualize things on the fretboard? Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
I visualize chords and chord tones. that can be related back to CAGED, but CAGED isn't a concept I ever really learned or studied
-
chords in "movable shapes"? I ask because this is what I am starting to do
and not 100% sure I should be?
-
Interesting point. I'm a guy who learned the 7-scale way, but no longer thing scalarly. Hmmm. I always tried to visualize the harmony over the scale patterns and to pick out the chord tones, so I think that it is doable. But perhaps (considering where I've ended up) I might have been better off going CAGED - I guess we'll never know. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Again, I think that each system has its pluses and minuses - whatever works for you. I actually learned the 7-position system but in real use some of them get combined together to form a quasi-CAGED system.
Peace,
Kevin
-
Thanks Kevin! Originally Posted by ksjazzguitar
I was just trying to decide today if I want to stick with the 3 note per string or the bruno 5 shapes or the caged so all this info will help me.
-
CAGED is very logical. It is based on chord shapes, but easily translates to scale fingerings.
I learned to play pretty well before I ever heard of it. At first I thought it was some mystery. Then I realized it is just a way to describe what I was already doing. It all boils down to knowing the fretboard.
CAGED is a way of moving open chord forms to any position on the neck. You have to do that, even if you don't call it that.
-
Sorry, missed that. From my perspective, the advantages of each are are: Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
CAGED............................7-position
align with chord shapes..........align with the modes
simpler to learn.................comprehensive fretboard coverage
no finger stretches..............no position shifts
As you can see, for each advantage of one, there is a counter-balancing one for the other.
The only advantage that I can think of for the 7-position system is that people who start with it seem to have an easier time understanding CAGED than the other way around. Really, I just see the CAGED as the 7-position system with some of the positions combined, shifting between the positions. When I get students who start with CAGED, they are mystified by the 7-position system. But that's just my experience. And it ultimately, it may prove irrelevant.
That's how I see the two systems.
Peace,
KevinLast edited by ksjazzguitar; 01-20-2011 at 02:25 AM.
-
THis is kind of my perspective, although instead of thinking it a mystery I thought it was crap--mostly because I got a student who was teaching himself previously with CAGED, and he was doing some stuff very wrong, IMHO... Originally Posted by kenbennett
When I got into jazz I alrady had my major scale and major and minor chords licked, up and down the neck. So I saw no reason to relate the scales/arpeggios I was going to be using back to major and minor triads, I wanted to relate them back to the chords I was going to be using, which I broke up into four categories-- major7, minor7, dominant and half diminished.
I then went about learning those chords with a root on the sixth, fifth and fourth strings, then eventually arpeggios for each and inversions for each "shape" I had learned. Doing this on my own meant I really had to learn the fretboard--I didn't sit down with a book called "drop 2 voicings," I spent some hours, found them and wrote them out myself.
You could easily relate back my visualization system to CAGED, but like I said, it's nothing I've ever looked at. Obviously, I don't teach it either--I teach fretboard knowledge and octave/interval recognition, which someone told me a few years ago that CAGED does too...I guess I like CAGED!
-
I'm actively trying not to think in the CAGED system anymore. Doing so usually get's me back to playing cowboy chords with 6 note voicings. I'm trying to work on my rhythm chops so I'm using and studying more 4, 3, 2, and even 1 note chords in my progressions.
However, I believe that as a basic outline to how to play generic guitar, the CAGED system is a great tool. Unfortunately, many people get stuck in the CAGE and never get out. That's fine if you are playing solo, rock, some blues, or just don't want to learn more (which, honestly is okay if that's what you want).
I usually tell people that you want to learn the cowboy chords and how they work, then move on. If you want to be a better player, learn what the mediocre players are doing and then don't do it.
~DB
-
IMO, you should begin to make all your own diagrams from scratch. And go a good 15 frets across, for your master ones. The act of drawing them out physically helped me memorize to subconcious, and might help you. It couldn't hurt. Originally Posted by bobsguitars09
-
Personally I found the Jimmy Bruno system better than the CAGED system. Not massively different but simply the way he names the shapes after the scale degree they start on is to my mind a lot better than using the CAGED way
-
For Charlie Christian and Herb Ellis, "CAGED" is reduced to "FAD" ("F" replaces "E" because it as the barred version of open "E"). Those three positions link up the neck rather well. There are what Ellis called "half positions" between some of them, but those three provide solid ground for noodling up and down the neck. They are areas more than just three shapes because when you play Christian's and Ellis's lines out of those shapes, you use other chord tones, chromatics, the whole shmear.
If you want to look at it in scale terms, for a major key, say Bb, "A" is the Aeolian position, covering frets 3 through 6, "F" is the Ionian position, covering frets 6 through 10, and "D" is the Phrygian, covering frets 10 through 13, where the Aeolian position starts again. In short, those three shapes / areas divide the guitar neck in thirds, spanning an octave. There is some overlap, but it's convenient and you get used to it.
-
My entire journey as a guitarist thus far, I have more or less avoided the CAGED system for whatever reason. I have learned all my scales through the modes approach and I like the end result that way, BUT, can anyone give me a quick explanation of CAGED?
I tried to learn it one time through an online web page, but it just confused the shit out of me.
-
Briefly, CAGED is an acronym for the chord shapes (all open voicings) of "C", "A", "G", etc. It's what I've learned to call "Cowboy Chords".
There is some theory on their movability along with how scales over lay the shapes. You can really get deep in it. But (in my opinion) you don't loose too much on theory if you never approach it from a theory perspective.
~DB
-
Confuses the shit out of me, too. I think it's because those common or "cowboy" chords are not really in a clearly defined position, so if you apply CAGED to, say, position II, the transposition may be either a whole-tone or a minor third. Basically, if you're in position II, and you play the first of these major scales, you're supposed to 'visualize' it in terms of the commonest open-string chord of the second of these notes. Originally Posted by musicjohnny
D - C
C - A
A - G
G - E
E - D
As I say, with CAGED, I think the idea is you're supposed to think in terms of shapes rather than position, which encourages you to be flexible in your fingerings. But if you're like me and you can't stop thinking in terms of position, CAGED is slightly more helpful if you reorganize the keys like this (position II again):
E (D) A (G) D (C) G (E) C (A)
That way, if you stay absolutely in position, the first two of those keys require LH little finger stretches to play all the diatonic major arpeggios and scale. The second two require no stretches, and the last requires a RH first finger stretch. Or, in Berklee terms, the A form (C) is Leavitt's Type 1, the E form (G) is Type 2, the C form (D) Type 3, the G form (A) Type 4, and the
D form (E here) is something like Type 4A (I don't remember Leavitt quite using that term, but he does call his II position scale of F derived from his Type 1 1A).
Evidently, you can extend this sequence of fourths / fifths in either direction, adding a sharp with your little finger or a flat with your first until you have all your 12 diatonic scales. And I find it easier to build minor scales likes this - CAGED more or less works for building relative minor scales, but if you want to keep the tonic and change from major to minor, it grinds to a halt, as far as I can tell, and diminished scales just don't seem to come into the picture at all.
I have no idea how a 7-position system works, please don't enlighten me, it's sure to include dubiously applied Greek tribal names.
-
The "cowboy" chords are in the open position. That is a very clear definition. Originally Posted by JohnRoss
Look at the shape of the open A major chord. The 1st, 5th and 6th strings are open. the 2nd, 3rd and 4th strings are 2 frets higher than open.
Now move to the second position. Barre the second fret with the first finger. Then fret the 2nd, 3rd and 4th strings 2 frets higher than the barre. That would be the fourth fret right?
The notes you end up with are, from the bottom up: F#, B, F#, B, D#, F#
You're clearly in the second position playing a chord shape that looks like an open A. Your barre finger has replaced the nut. You are playing the CAGED A shape in position II, and the chord is clearly a B major, not a C.
It's not confusing at all. You could keep that barre on the 2nd fret and play everyone of the CAGED shapes in order. The resulting chords would all be raised from their open counterparts by a whole step.
In the second position:
The C shape produces a D chord
The A shape produces a B chord
The G shape produces a A chord
The E shape produces a F# chord
The D shape produces a E chord
Reply With Quote
Boulou Ferre solo performance
Today, 04:16 AM in The Players