Nice Wes Close ups here on 4 on 6

[ott...@hotmail.com]

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FDZ1jR5sB6M>

Bg

[ott...@hotmail.com]

Oops, wworng Link :-(
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRsMzCnQNpo>
Bg

[335]

wes doesn't seem to rely on position playing very much. He mostly
plays in a circular way shifting up and down the top 3 or 4 strings.

[ott...@hotmail.com]

Wes doesn't seem to rely on position playing very much. He mostly plays in a circular way shifting up and down the top 3 or 4 strings.

Yaeh and very little use of the left hand pinky in single note lines.

Bg

[335]

I think Raney also covered the neck in a circular way that didn't
appear to rely as much on position playing. Also with limited use of
pinky.
Makes you wonder about the doctrinaire approaches to fingering that we
learn in Mel Bay, Smith, Leavitt etc. Not saying those are bad, just
that some people, some of the very best, play great without using
those fingering concepts.

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-03 17:37:30 +0000, 335 said:

> I think Raney also covered the neck in a circular way that didn't
> appear to rely as much on position playing. Also with limited use of
> pinky.

What does "circular" mean in this context?

> Makes you wonder about the doctrinaire approaches to fingering that we
> learn in Mel Bay, Smith, Leavitt etc. Not saying those are bad, just
> that some people, some of the very best, play great without using
> those fingering concepts.

I don't think there's intend to be doctrinnaire at all. I think there's
a logical utility in understanding and conceptualizing consistent
blocks of turf before playing in smaller subsets of that turf. I think
there were likely more guitarists in older times that learned to play
by acquiring one lick after another, and each would frame a small group
of notes and relationships.

But it's certainly arguable that this systemic teaching (as mentioned
by the authors above), after focusing on CAGED or others, don't spend
much time personalizing smaller units; showing how they can be moved
and connect with other units. And none of these tend to teach licks per
se, or give guidance in actually building individual phrases or
*playable vocabulary" and connecting them.

Barry Galbraith does this in his "Jazz Improv" book, focusing on this
the way it is done in context via etudes. The same would be true of
transcribing solos and dismantling them to see the way they work. In
Barry's case they were solos that were constructed didactically.
--
Music is the best means we have of digesting time. -- W. H. Auden

[335]

On Oct 3, 1:50 pm, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:
> On 2012-10-03 17:37:30 +0000, 335 said:
>
> > I think Raney also covered the neck in a circular way that didn't
> > appear to rely as much on position playing. Also with limited use of
> > pinky.
>
> What does "circular" mean in this context?

"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 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.

> > Makes you wonder about the doctrinaire approaches to fingering that we
> > learn in Mel Bay, Smith, Leavitt etc. Not saying those are bad, just
> > that some people, some of the very best, play great without using
> > those fingering concepts.
>
> I don't think there's intend to be doctrinnaire at all. I think there's
> a logical utility in understanding and conceptualizing consistent
> blocks of turf before playing in smaller subsets of that turf. I think
> there were likely more guitarists in older times that learned to play
> by acquiring one lick after another, and each would frame a small group
> of notes and relationships.

The Leavitt books especially are highly position oriented with limited
space devoted to shifting. They are intended to be exhaustive for
fingerings in position. I said doctrinaire because his method is so
intensively position oriented. However, when we watch a great guitar
player such as wes or raney, it's apparent that they are not
conceptualizing the neck on the basis of positions, or they
transcended that long before they developed their mature style.
btw...I like the Leavitt books, just saying there is a vast difference
between playing jazzlines and knowing every possible fingering for a
harmonic minor scale. Also not saying one shouldn't learn all the
possible fingerings over time,` but you have to find your way of using
certain groups of fingerings to make your music sound good which is
what wes and raney were doing.

[TD]

Personal. If you have a good working pinky, it would be foolish to ignore utilizing it.

[GuyB]

On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 7:50:34 PM UTC+1, Gerry wrote:
> On 2012-10-03 17:37:30 +0000, 335 said:
>
> > Makes you wonder about the doctrinaire approaches to fingering that we
>
> > learn in Mel Bay, Smith, Leavitt etc. Not saying those are bad, just
>
> > that some people, some of the very best, play great without using
>
> > those fingering concepts.

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

I agree.
Guy

[GuyB]

On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 8:31:19 PM UTC+1, TD wrote:
> On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 1:37:30 PM UTC-4, 335 wrote:
> If you have a good working pinky, it would be foolish to ignore utilizing it.

I was going to say it would be like hopping around on one leg instead of using both legs, but I won't.
Guy

[Mr Maj6th]

On Wed, 3 Oct 2012 12:31:19 -0700 (PDT), TD <tonyde...@gmail.com>
wrote:

If you have a good working pinky, it would be foolish to ignore
utilizing it.

Same principle applies if a person has six fingers on their hand.

Maj6th

[Mr Maj6th]

I knew a man that had two wooden legs; they caught fire and he burned
to the ground, but I won't mention that here.

Maj6th

[ott...@hotmail.com]

Personal. If you have a good working pinky, it would be foolish to ignore utilizing it.

And then there are those Django-ites that refuse to use their 4th Or 3rd finger except in the way django Did for the sake of authenticity.
Bg

[TD]

Paradox on "authenticity." I did think it peculiar, as well as sad, to see a parade of gypsy children shuffling along about two minutes behind each other in Paris sporting the identical side clubbed foot as they begged. I guess their parents also strove for authenticity. Very sad to see.

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-03 19:21:29 +0000, 335 said:

> The Leavitt books especially are highly position oriented with limited
> space devoted to shifting. They are intended to be exhaustive for
> fingerings in position. I said doctrinaire because his method is so
> intensively position oriented.

Granted it is intensively position oriented. I think that's fine for
starters but it needs to be continued on to a phrase-driven
application, and they don't cover than, and in fact hardly even
indicate that it's a matter of concern. It may be due to the thinking
of the time.

> However, when we watch a great guitar player such as wes or raney, it's
> apparent that they are not conceptualizing the neck on the basis of
> positions, or they transcended that long before they developed their
> mature style.

To be fair we don't know what they were "conceptualizing". When they
played a phrase then shift to another phase, then another, we can't
really say that they did or didn't conceptualize a larger map of the
region than they actually used.

> btw...I like the Leavitt books, just saying there is a vast difference
> between playing jazzlines and knowing every possible fingering for a
> harmonic minor scale.

Understood: Leavitt was a significant satori in my own development, but
I digested it and moved on. In the process I also rejected some
positions and some aspects as not critical to my own needs. Doesn't
everyone? Knowing the topography is indispensible, but there are other
things to be learned. Van Eps does the same exhaustive sort of thing
and I think it winds up being enough of a hindrance that what is
valuable to supply us gets lost in the process.

> Also not saying one shouldn't learn all the possible fingerings over
> time,` but you have to find your way of using certain groups of
> fingerings to make your music sound good which is what wes and raney
> were doing.

That's why I really wish someone would develop the "next chapter" in
this kind of teaching, one that supplies a few approaches to highly
mobile and phrase-driven mechanics. It would be a great aid to many.

[thomas]

On Wednesday, October 3, 2012 6:35:56 PM UTC-4, Gerry wrote:
>
> That's why I really wish someone would develop the "next chapter" in
> this kind of teaching, one that supplies a few approaches to highly
> mobile and phrase-driven mechanics. It would be a great aid to many.

I've read in this ng that the Garrison Fewell approach develops some of Wes's signature triad licks to implement position changes. I haven't read it myself. The Tal Farlow book also gets into multi-position playing a bit. I think practicing the gypsy arpeggios would be another entry point.

[Gerry]

I've heard but haven't read the Fewell book, but was reminded in
watching the Wes video of Galbraith's admonition to "follow the triad"
in fingering. At the time I encountered this it was the diametric
opposite of the way I played and had me shifting far more frequently
that I was use to, or comfortable with. It still's still not my bread
and butter, but as I continue to pursue solo performance it's becoming
more valuable on a daily basis.

Yeah, arpeggios are the substance of a lot of the stuff that Wes is
doing in the video is well. But I always go back to Raney as the the
most liquid and mercurial use of phrase-driven improv. Anyway a
"consolidating" view to techniques would be swell.

[Paul K]

transcribing....I've found that with the advent of online videos
transcribing takes on a new aspect in that you can cop the positions
too, this makes a huge difference in getting the right feel.

mick goodrick advocates playing along one string in his book. I find
that doing a lot of that helps me get away from positions. I think it's
an ear thing more than a visual thing.

Also, practicing/memorizing chord/melody solos develops moving
positions, since you are forced to move a lot to get decent voice
leading. It might be a chicken/egg thing, but I suspect Wes' chord
soloing fed into his single line approach.

Finally, I notice that many of the players who change postions
effortlessly also hold the LH thumb mover over the edge of the
fretboard. I think it might lessen the friction which might slow you
down when shifting. But I havent been able to keep the thumb up in my
own playing.

--
Paul K
http://www.youtube.com/user/fibrationboy
http://www.soundclick.com/paulkirk
http://mypage.iu.edu/~pkirk/

[TD]

Ear thing is so correct. Wes had a fantastic ear. And it's all about a melange of conventional PLUS "unorthodox" fingerings. Be able to play any line by transferring to all possible fingerings. The lines take on different "attitudes." If you normally play a particular line beginning with first finger, also try beginning from 2nd, 3rd and fourth fingers. The array of fingerings not only enables the possibility to be ambidextrous (concerning technique), it also enables the player to emulate the horn or pianist's approach to a line, phrasing, etc; often chord form, position fingering won't really cut it. It's about 'in combination'. Both are necessary. And if your pinky is fully functional, it is certainly to be used. Especially, when copping horn and piano type lines. If it's not developed, then use three fingers, as long as you feel your job is being done. In the end result, again it is really a personal matter.

-TD

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-04 02:52:19 +0000, Paul K said:

> Also, practicing/memorizing chord/melody solos develops moving
> positions, since you are forced to move a lot to get decent voice
> leading.

Precisely my current philosophy. I wish I had done it more over the
past 30 years. I've been hard at it for a year and a half and it has
been a dramatic growth in lots of areas. Lots of changes in my playing
I could never have predicted.

> Finally, I notice that many of the players who change postions
> effortlessly also hold the LH thumb mover over the edge of the
> fretboard. I think it might lessen the friction which might slow you
> down when shifting. But I havent been able to keep the thumb up in my
> own playing.

I'm not sure that means anything. These people also tend to use mostly
their first 3 fingers and the 4th only rarely.

Though I haven't seen any specific member of the "endlessly shifting"
crew that was a democratic 4-finger user, I can't imagine any good
reason their wouldn't be some.

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-03 23:16:09 +0000, thomas said:

> I've read in this ng that the Garrison Fewell approach develops some of
> Wes's signature triad licks to implement position changes.

For any who may know: What book(s) by Fewell addresses the "shifty" approach?

[335]

Jazz Guitar Improvisation: A Melodic Approach.

Triad shapes moved up the neck to get the available tensions on a
given chord.

[TD]

It would be rather incomplete, if not foolish, to ignore executing a line (or a melody) beginning on the 4th finger or to deliberately restrict oneself from doing so (just because it may be perceived as vogue), if the 4th finger is a trained finger. Jazz lines can be executed utilizing only one finger, if desired. The remaining fingers could also be ignored.

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-04 14:12:28 +0000, 335 said:

> On Oct 4, 12:32 am, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:
>> On 2012-10-03 23:16:09 +0000, thomas said:
>>
>>> I've read in this ng that the Garrison Fewell approach develops some of
>>> Wes's signature triad licks to implement position changes.
>>
>> For any who may know: What book(s) by Fewell addresses the "shifty" approach?
>

> Jazz Guitar Improvisation: A Melodic Approach.
>
> Triad shapes moved up the neck to get the available tensions on a
> given chord.

Thanks; it's on the way.

[thomas]

On Thursday, October 4, 2012 12:21:47 PM UTC-4, Gerry wrote:
> On 2012-10-04 14:12:28 +0000, 335 said:
>
>
>
> > On Oct 4, 12:32�am, Gerry <addr...@domain.com> wrote:
>
> >> On 2012-10-03 23:16:09 +0000, thomas said:
>
> >>
>
> >>> I've read in this ng that the Garrison Fewell approach develops some of
>
> >>> Wes's signature triad licks to implement position changes.
>
> >>
>
> >> For any who may know: What book(s) by Fewell addresses the "shifty" approach?
>
> >
>
> > Jazz Guitar Improvisation: A Melodic Approach.
>
> >
>
> > Triad shapes moved up the neck to get the available tensions on a
>
> > given chord.
>
>
>
> Thanks; it's on the way.

I would appreciate your opinion on it. I don't look at jazz guitar books much any more, since most are aimed at beginning and intermediate players. I'm interested in hearing about books that are also stimulating for more advanced musicians. I think the best books usually have something for players at any level.

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-04 19:24:13 +0000, thomas said:

> I would appreciate your opinion on it.

Okay.

> I don't look at jazz guitar books much any more, since most are aimed
> at beginning and intermediate players. I'm interested in hearing about
> books that are also stimulating for more advanced musicians. I think
> the best books usually have something for players at any level.

Generally, there's something noteworthy, though not earch shaking: It
beats reading the sports page.

[Gerry]

So this thimble-full of conception/distraction has infiltrated my work
over the past couple of days. I've mused, as I play, particularly on
Raney's "shifty" style, but also that of Wes and others, and the
miserly use they make of their fourth finger.

Me, I use my 4th; likely much more than 25%. And my thumb is most
frequently dead-center at the back of the neck. So I've been goofing
with not using the 4th at all; none. I am forced to splay my 3 fingers
(usually between 1st and 2nd), and invariably must shift to accomplish
the phrase-logic of improvised lines. Kind of interesting that the
three-finger approach necessitates shifting. Of course you could always
shift back and pretty much stay "in position", but "following the line"
tends to keep you moving elsewhere.

By and large, I am a positional player; I do what I need in a single
position, and when I need to move elsewhere, which is frequent, I move
to another neck-wide position. Within these positions, of course, I am
alwasy working with smaller nests of "sub-positions", if you will. But
contextually they are a part of an image of a larger neck-wide
position. How much reference do I make of the larger position? Not
much, but it's almost always there.

So now I find that while using the 3-finger "shifty" approach I don't
treat it the same conceptually. My references tend more to the
sub-position (3-4 strings/4-6 frets range) in ceaseless transition to
other sub-positions. As I continue to do this the larger neck-wide
context is diminished--almost disregarded.

That's a very interesting change of perspective made possible by a very
small adjustment (dropping the 4th finger). It's not problematic for
me to do this, but after doing it for a few minutes I realize that I am
really doing a cognitive thing; I have to focus to keep this up, to
know where I am and where I'm going. Certainly if I do this a lot, I
know that would go away with constant use, but it's fun anyway.

One of the "fun" aspects is that by using 3 fingers and frequent
shifting I'm also emphasizing articulation more--the process just
demands more slide-slurring, and other "punctuation" in my phrases.
Comparitively, when I'm in 4-finger/6-fret position work there is less
opportunity for lots of articulation, particulary sliding, because one
is always "locked" to the position. I think there is more opportunity
for pull/hammer slurring in the neck-wide positioning, but in the
sub-position approach I find the pull/hammer slurring has more specific
personality and intent than neck-wide which can stray to reflexive
cliche. [ This is me I'm talking about not others. ]

Very interesting brain tickling going on here.

[ott...@hotmail.com]

Finally, I notice that many of the players who change postions effortlessly also hold the LH thumb mover over the edge of the fretboard. I think it might lessen the friction which might slow you down when shifting. But I havent been able to keep the thumb up in my own playing. -- Paul K http://www.youtube.com/user/fibrationboy http://www.soundclick.com/paulkirk http://mypage.iu.edu/~pkirk/

I just realized that if I sit in the normal poisition with guitar on lap then I play with the left hand thumb in the higher position as well as lean toward 3 fingerdom.
Usually my guitar neck is at a 45ish degree angle on a strap which facilitates chord work for me.

The position I play(sit /stand) seems to dictate the ideas I get oddly enough, but
I'm more interested in Chords/Voice leading etc. so I mainly keep the neck high.
Bg

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-04 19:24:13 +0000, thomas said:

> I would appreciate your opinion on it. I don't look at jazz guitar
> books much any more, since most are aimed at beginning and intermediate
> players.

This is aimed at beginning and intermediate players.

> I'm interested in hearing about books that are also stimulating for
> more advanced musicians. I think the best books usually have something
> for players at any level.

I don't know how stimulating it will be yet, as I only got it this
morning. I've skimmed through it and it does not seem to make any
concerted effort to address "vertical" (recently indicated as
"circular") activity. Early in the book he spends a couple of pages
indicating where a triad would be fond in four areas of the neck and
then mentions "extensions and related fingerings through the four
areas" of the fretboard. Five pages of fingerings and clarification.

I've only skimmed the rest but it doesn't really seem to address the
topic I had hoped it would address: Shifty, phrase-oriented movement
on the neck.

It does look like it will be generally entertaining reading, though.
It's likely worth the $14 I paid for a couple afternoons of
entertainment.

More later.

[thomas]

Thanks. Sounds like learning some Wes or Raney solos might be a better route.

[TD]

Sure, but learning improvs from non guitar criteria poses an even better ( or a strong parallel) route. You will see that. When I was a kid learning, besides copying the greats of jazz guitar, piano, sax, trumpet; I copied lines of Ravi Shankar (he sent me a beautiful laudatory quote for my method book). And *that* did amazing things for my chops (and ears).

[Gerry]

On 2012-10-09 18:06:52 +0000, thomas said:

> Thanks. Sounds like learning some Wes or Raney solos might be a better route.

Undoubtedly. I just wondered if there was somebody who had an
overarching perspective on the process.

[Paul K]

On 10/9/12 2:06 PM, thomas wrote:

> Sounds like learning some Wes or Raney solos might be a better route.

that's the right answer, no matter what the question was!

[TD]

Part II:

It is a common mistake to presume that certain things are learned, assimilated and utilized off of a mono-dimensional plane: Shear mimicry and reading the usual suspects of what is supposed to be, all from a book. Fingerings are akin to walking, skipping, swimming, climbing, hiking, jumping, standing, sitting; ad infinitum. It builds off strategies. It responds off of what the ear hears and what the emotion yields. It becomes *personal*. It is about a mixture of basic and adjusted fingerings. Merely watching the fingerings of heroes won't easily get the biscuit, because those fellows used their ears and *personal* adaptations. There is much more to this, although it can very well be a good thing to study fingering strategies of other players. This might be like trying to improve ones chess game. Everything must be compassed around the ear. If the Earth was the fingering and the Sun was the ear...

-TD

[thomas]

Great idea. I can see how learning a solo originally played on a one or two-string instrument would open up new vistas.

[TD]

Well, along with the foreign type *lines* as well, thus eliminating the ear's usual sense of criteria.

-TD