Frettistic - Circular Motion

[Gerry]

At least that's what 335 calls it. I think it's a good way to describe
non-positional, ostensibly phrase-driven, left-hand structures that
make use of frequent shifting.

[ If you don't give a shit, you should move on now. ]

Anyway 335 (I could use a name here), says this:

> "vertical" as in playing up and down the neck would probably have been
> a more accurate word. but I don't think that totally captures it
> either. There is a fluidity in shifting around the neck that I see in
> both of those guys (Raney, Galbraith), that does appear as an overall
> "circular" motion and concept to me. The freedom they have in moving
> "vertically" up and down the neck is part of what allows the lines to
> breathe.

He then later cited "A Melodic Approach" by Fewell. I got the book and
dimissed it as not addressing my topic. Instead, I found passing
references (or so I thought) to triadic structures, handistically
convenient in four areas of the neck. A good start. But I saw nothing
more on the topic.

I was mistaken. It is apparently the fundamental approach over which
much (most?) of the remaining material discusses. I've only read-down a
quarter of it. I need to read the book in total before attempting a
description.

It looks damn interesting: Not because of any specific lesson it's
teaching, but because of the way it goes about doing the same things I
do, but in a much more "handistic" way; A way I think (VERY) generally
describes Raney and Galbraith's angle on shaping lines.

More later.
--
Music is the best means we have of digesting time. -- W. H. Auden

[Bill Williams]

Hmmm - maybe I should dust down my copy of the book.
Look forward to hearing more.

[lukejazz]

I think the book is fantastic and it has been a giant help to me. He also has another edition by harmonic approach as opposed to melodic. I haven't taken the time yet to study it as I have the first.

Luke

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-11 13:25:17 +0000, lukejazz said:

> I think the book is fantastic and it has been a giant help to me. He
> also has another edition by harmonic approach as opposed to melodic. I
> haven't taken the time yet to study it as I have the first.

So do is your playing generally "circular" with frequent phrase-driven shifts?

Since I'm so obsessed with triads this has been an interesting
point-of-entry for me. Galbraith says, relative to reading music, that
when you see a triad on the page you let your hand cover it logically,
finger-to-string, rather than playing it two-notes-to-a-string and
other even less logical fingerings dictated by position: Change your
position. He also said one should always change position by sliding
either the first or 2nd finger. I disregarded BOTH of these things to
my disadvantage.

Additionally during actual play (in his etudes: Jazz Improv), he
repeatedly illustrates such shifts in position to cover various
structures, similar to what Fewell indicates. It all makes plenty of
sense to me and I'm pretty comfortably inclined to this because of my
long-time triadic focus. It's just that my conceptual organization has
been primarily positional.

[lukejazz]

On Thursday, October 11, 2012 10:35:09 AM UTC-5, Gerry wrote:
> On 2012-10-11 13:25:17 +0000, lukejazz said:
>
>
>
> > I think the book is fantastic and it has been a giant help to me. He
>
> > also has another edition by harmonic approach as opposed to melodic. I
>
> > haven't taken the time yet to study it as I have the first.
>
>
>
> So do is your playing generally "circular" with frequent phrase-driven shifts?
>
>

I'm not sure about the circular part but I'd say yes for the most part about phrase driven shifts. Maybe not every single tune in my repertoire, but definitely the ones I'm the most comfortable with. I like creating short melodies and expounding on them with variations.
The book had a lot of useful "tools" (i.e. fingerings and concepts) that helped me approach improvising in a way I wasn't familiar with.
I may have been exposed to those ideas previously, but I have found over the years that until the right person explains it the right way in the time frame I'm ready to understand it, things may not really "click" for me. Very frustrating when I realize years later....oh....THAT's what he meant!

Luke

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-11 18:54:28 +0000, lukejazz said:

> The book [ "Melodic Approach", Fewell ] had a lot of useful "tools"

> (i.e. fingerings and concepts) that helped me approach improvising in a
> way I wasn't familiar with. I may have been exposed to those ideas
> previously, but I have found over the years that until the right person
> explains it the right way in the time frame I'm ready to understand it,
> things may not really "click" for me. Very frustrating when I realize
> years later....oh....THAT's what he meant!

At some level I think we learn the same thing in many ways over the
years, and each time we learn it a different way.

I got hung up last week, but am turning my attention back to this book.
When you think of the "aha" moment(s) you may have had with this book,
can you flip through it and either remember, or note from your
exclamations scrawled in the margins, exactly where that was? Or which
chapters provided the most payback for you?

If not, that's cool; just curious.

[Bill Williams]

Garrison Fewell analyzing Grant Green’s solos on Dogit, could be of interest: http://www.jazzitalia.net/lezioni/chitarra6/c6_dogit_eng.asp#.UH_UF2_A9js
http://www.jazzitalia.net/lezioni/chitarra6/c6_dogit2_eng.asp#.UH_UJG_A9js

[TD]

There lies the "secret."

Whether you play known melodies or create melodies, the technique of playing each melody beginning from a different finger (for example, begin the melody from 1st finger and generate your fingering there of, then begin from the 2nd finger....there of, then 3rd abd 4th, will get you to what you seek. I stated this already, but it went unnoticed. The changing of fingerings for the same melody, opens many doors to phrasing changes, interpretations, register shifting in the midst of melody, improvising along with the melody (as in the half, whole notes and rests), but most of all concerning technique: It automatically brings you into the art of pivoting and shifting. It also provides a smooth bedding if you wish to phrase like a horn or piano or human voice.

You really don't need a book per se, but books and advice from others can help *facilitate* the development of your own mental faculties for the melange of "chord form/pos." and non-chord/pos. fingerings. Though, they may may have an opposite reaction concerning any possible cultivation of a "sixth sense." The idea goes for the improvised line, and even more so. Many old school players developed their jazz playing before they developed their technique. This is why so many great players can be seen playing great ideas using only two fingers. On the other hand, there are highly proficient technicians that improvise poorly, or at least dubiously. Such observations must be taken into consideration before deciding to join a club. I would imagine.

-TD

[van]

On Thursday, October 18, 2012 6:08:00 AM UTC-4, Bill Williams wrote:
> Garrison Fewell analyzing Grant Green’s solos on Dogit, could be of interest: http://www.jazzitalia.net/lezioni/chitarra6/c6_dogit_eng.asp#.UH_UF2_A9js http://www.jazzitalia.net/lezioni/chitarra6/c6_dogit2_eng.asp#.UH_UJG_A9js

Thanks for the interesting Grant Green articles, but I found it strange that Fewell didn't mention the one guitarist that GG did state that influenced him a great deal in his bop playing, Jimmy Raney. Shoddy research.

[Greger Hoel]

On Thu, 18 Oct 2012 20:12:15 +0200, TD <tonyde...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Whether you play known melodies or create melodies, the technique of
> playing each melody beginning from a different finger (for example,
> begin the melody from 1st finger and generate your fingering there of,
> then begin from the 2nd finger....there of, then 3rd abd 4th, will get
> you to what you seek. I stated this already, but it went unnoticed. The
> changing of fingerings for the same melody, opens many doors to phrasing
> changes, interpretations, register shifting in the midst of melody,
> improvising along with the melody (as in the half, whole notes and
> rests), but most of all concerning technique: It automatically brings
> you into the art of pivoting and shifting. It also provides a smooth
> bedding if you wish to phrase like a horn or piano or human voice.

I suspect that right there is the answer to this whole discussion. BTW,
the advice of starting melodies on different fretting fingers, earlier on,
might have gone unacknowledged but definitely not unnoticed. Thanks a lot.

> You really don't need a book per se, but books and advice from others
> can help *facilitate* the development of your own mental faculties for
> the melange of "chord form/pos." and non-chord/pos. fingerings. Though,
> they may may have an opposite reaction concerning any possible
> cultivation of a "sixth sense." The idea goes for the improvised line,
> and even more so.

You mean relying too much on advice, from books or people or whatever, is
detriumental to cultivating a 6th sense, right?

> Many old school players developed their jazz playing before they
> developed their technique. This is why so many great players can be seen
> playing great ideas using only two fingers. On the other hand, there are
> highly proficient technicians that improvise poorly, or at least
> dubiously. Such observations must be taken into consideration before
> deciding to join a club. I would imagine.

Makes a lot of sense to me.

--
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

[Jonathan]

On Thursday, October 11, 2012 11:35:09 AM UTC-4, Gerry wrote:
> He also said one should always change position by sliding
>
> either the first or 2nd finger. I disregarded BOTH of these things to
>
> my disadvantage.
>

I'd like to hear more about this.
Does this apply regardless of which "position systems" (e.g., CAGED) you are using?

Do you just time all the shifts to occur when you happen to be fretting a note with the first or second finger?

Thanks,
Jonathan

[TD]

Too much over-reliance on anything tends to send one in the opposite direction. Books are for learning. Wings are for flying, "grasshopper."

[charlieguitar]

On Friday, October 19, 2012 9:53:17 AM UTC-4, Greger Hoel wrote:

It used to be common practice years ago to practice playing phrases with different fingers, for instance omitting the index finger and just using the other three. This was seen as a way of developing strengh in all your fingers with the goal of being able to grab anything anywhere with whatever fingers were available at that point in the line.

Charlie
P.S.
I did notice though that Bob Conti in one of those YT videos recommends always shifting with the first finger.IMO whatever works for you is the "right" way.

[TD]

As an aside, I suggest being able to shift from *any* finger. The index finger can act as counter-weight when doing so, because it operates near perfectly with the eye. If you are content with what you already do; cool. If not, then my advice may be of some help, but still it's outside advice. It is not just for making stronger fingers or being able to leap tall buildings at a single bound. It's about more than one way to facilitate the music. There is so much more that can be done concerning the improvised line (and other) via such ambidexterity. I can demonstrate some of my viewpoints on this free via Skype, if of interest. Words are too easy.

"Life goes on within you and without you." GH

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-19 14:12:10 +0000, Jonathan said:

> On Thursday, October 11, 2012 11:35:09 AM UTC-4, Gerry wrote:
>> He also said one should always change position by sliding either the
>> first or 2nd finger. I disregarded BOTH of these things to my
>> disadvantage.
>
> I'd like to hear more about this.
> Does this apply regardless of which "position systems" (e.g., CAGED)
> you are using?

Maybe, maybe not; music makes demands and guitar has its limitations:
Everything always applies--but "regardful"!

> Do you just time all the shifts to occur when you happen to be fretting
> a note with the first or second finger?

Not so much: You just develop the habit of logical shifting where the
1st or 2nd leads the charge. It also means you are, to some extent,
"thinking ahead", which is always desirable.

In context it works like this. If you find yourself on the E string
with your 4th finger and you need another higher note, you'll have to
shift. If you begin sliding your 4th finger up higher and higher you
are using the least capable tool in your arsenal for the task, and
additionally you will find yourself with no higher capacity for
movement every time you stop. So better to shift to a higher location
and to a note playable with something other than your 4th so you still
have some room to move.

I got the view on this while working with the Klose Daily Exercises
etudes. Whenever I was in this situation with the 4th, he would back me
up and point out the logical place(s) I could have slid up a half-step
so that when I arrived at the problem area I would *already* be in a
higher position. He always said "look for the half steps", because
these were the opportunity locations.

He was big on one-fret positional shifts and insisted they be done with
the 1st and 2nd fingers. I've seen some Galbraith's etudes in which
there are 3rd finger shifts/slides, whole stop shifts/slides and even
the "groping 4th" shift up the high E, but these are infrequent and to
be avoided. But optimum circumstances aren't always our domain.

I am *particularly* inclined to 4th finger shifts, sadly. It's
generally because I work my 4th finger as hard as most people do their
3rd (or so it would seem). As such, I not-infrequently shift with the
4th, 1/2 steps or worse. But I know when I do it it's inconvenient and
limiting. I've painted myself into a corner.

One way I developed this bad habit was by running a scale in one
position, from low to high, shifting up, running high to low in the
next position, shifting up and repeating to the end of the neck. This
produced the following "logic": Play to the highest note in
position--logically with my 4th--then shift to the next highest
position and play down from the highest positional note--also logically
the 4th. In sum a poor use of the 4th.

I should have *built in* a postional shift on the last few strings that
led to the next position. A good example of this kind of thing, also
gleaned from Barry, is frequently mentioned in reference to Tal Farlow
and Steve Rochinski's book.

With this technique, one plays a 7th chord on two strings, say the 1
and 3 on the B string and the 5 and 7 on the high E. In doing this, you
logically shift up a whole step for the E string (unless the 7th chord
has a b5 in it). When I was doing improv during a lesson, I found
myself "groping" up with the 4th on the high E. He pointed out that
when I found myself in this situation it was easy enough (again this is
improv) to play a phrase leading down a string or two, and then do one
of these 2-string arps which would put me in a higher position. This
can be done on the G and B strings of course.

I assume that's more answer than you wanted.

[Jonathan]

I'm still in the somewhat early stages of learning to improvise diatonically using Bruno's five shapes, so when I have to do a position shift to grab a higher note, I try to land on the correct finger in the new shape. Therefore, the finger I slide with dictates where I land (you may be saying the same thing, though I'm not sure).
I understand what you're saying, though, and I think I do this somewhat intuitively, but your post made me realize what I was doing.

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-20 15:17:03 +0000, Jonathan said:

> I'm still in the somewhat early stages of learning to improvise
> diatonically using Bruno's five shapes, so when I have to do a position
> shift to grab a higher note, I try to land on the correct finger in the
> new shape.

I'm sure you're in the right place doing the right thing at this point.
If I understand you correctly you are just picking up your whole hand
and moving it 2-3 frets and "mapping" the neck out in your mind's eye
with a full 6-string positional map. I'm sure that's fine at this
point, if you are familiarizing your thinking with the CAGED.

What I'm addressing, though, is that part that lives outside CAGES per
se. It's when you narrow the focus and are really only thinking about
5 notes, are phrase driven, in motion and eventually you will find
yourself in another position.

In fact this entire "circular" thing is explicitly about an alternate
mindset than CAGED. CAGED isn't bad, mind you: It's critical. But
eventually once you have a complete idea of your terrain you begin
concentrating on smaller and more flexible units within it.

> Therefore, the finger I slide with dictates where I land (you may be
> saying the same thing, though I'm not sure). I understand what you're
> saying, though, and I think I do this somewhat intuitively, but your
> post made me realize what I was doing.

I'm not sure either. This stuff is pretty tough to talk about, but
only takes a minute or two with guitars in hand.

[TD]

You are doing right for yourself, as "beginning to improvise diatonically" is best served within (what I call) the "chord-form positions." And index finger best facilitates this. Sight-reading (another beast) is also best served by mostly shifting and pivoting via the index finger. An experienced sight-reader reads ahead and automatically undestands the proper applications to the terrain involved. Improvisation is like a street-fight: "no holds barred." But a player does as he or she does, no matter what. It's personal in the end.

-TD

[charlieguitar]

You are getting warm when talking about the notes outside the CAGED system. If one forgets about that system for a while and just plays off of the chord shapes,a system that has been around since Charlie Christian and before, you will find that with something like turnaround changes in F you can shift endlessly around the neck changing position for each new chord.If these shifts are done in half or whole steps away from the last chord adressed you will get a natural sounding ,seamless, voice leading effect. These shifts can be accomplished by any fingers that you choose.

Also,a benefit for using the little finger for a shift would be as follows:say you were playing off of a Gmaj.7 and wanted to jump up to an A (the 9th) above the 12 th. fret. If you used your little finger your other fingers would naturally fall into a Gmaj.7 chord shape opening up the possibility of playing a long line off that change. If you use the first or second finger,altough you could find some things they wouldn't flow as effortlessly as those found when using the little finger.This can make a big difference especially at fast tempos. Ease of playing always needs to be considered.
Charlie

[charlieguitar]

P.S. It just occured to me that one of the most basic position shifting excercises is to play a Maj.7th. form top to bottom and the shift up a half step and play it bottom to top and shift another top to bottom etc. all of the way up the neck. For instance areggiate a Gmaj.7 in the 2nd position (F#,D,B,G)then slide up to third position and reverse the order (G#,C,Eb, G) and then 4th position (G#,E,C#,A),etc. If you tried to accomplished this by just using your first or first and second fingers for the shifts you would step on more parts of your body than a contortionist.I think the least that can be gleaned is that there are exceptions to all of these rules.
Charlie

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-10 21:50:08 +0000, Gerry said:

> He then later cited "A Melodic Approach" by Fewell. I got the book and
> dimissed it as not addressing my topic. Instead, I found passing
> references (or so I thought) to triadic structures, handistically
> convenient in four areas of the neck. A good start. But I saw nothing
> more on the topic.
>
> I was mistaken. It is apparently the fundamental approach over which
> much (most?) of the remaining material discusses. I've only read-down a
> quarter of it. I need to read the book in total before attempting a
> description.

Okay, I'm made it through the book and I think it would be a good book
for that group of intermediate players who have learned their scales
and arps and chords and can improv but feel particularly good about
their choice of lines. Particularly that group of players that gets
exasperated with their own use of wanking away on scales.

So you transcribe some solos or steal some licks and use those instead
or with scale fragments, and that addes more personality but it's not
really systemic enough to expand on endlessly.

For these I think the Fewell book would be excellent. It really sets
you up for these modular handistic centers from which you can launch
lines. Fewell sets out convenient triadic structures, shows how they
can be interlocked to cover wider ranges of the neck, and shows many
lick-type movements within them.

Then he spends a goodly time pushing the conscious use of 3rds and 7ths
as the "leverage" points in voice-leading and momentum within line
structure.

One of the better things about this book for students would be that it
doesn't try to cover every damn thing there is, it just addresses the
few "most critical" aspects of importance and gives *many* different
views of the same material.

He also stresses doing all these lines or types of motion in many
positions rather than saying "go figure out how to do it everywhere",
which I know can be a problem for some students.

The only unique aspect about his teaching here is that he consistently
illustrates the use of 3 fingers in line construction, and shifting as
a part of almost everything line he uses for demos.

As compared to many all-purpose jazz guitar/how to improv sorts of
books, I think this one is very user-friendly and focuses directly on
real-world application, rather than to canvass all possibilities and
approaches in an abstract manner.

[Mental Handle]

On Mon, 22 Oct 2012 09:42:57 -0700, Gerry wrote:

> So you transcribe some solos or steal some licks

Oh, what is a lick? (Do you lick or suck on asses?)

-
Guitar Etude - All Major and Minor Triads
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qzos3Q5ttPI

[charlieguitar]

I read through it a few years ago and found it to be a fairly basic book but the concepts that are covered are good and could serve as the basis for expanded ideas of your own.Also if you have been improvising for years you tend to stop thinking about a lot of the type of things that are covered so it could also be used as a review.
Charlie