Major Scales in 2 and 3 Octaves (Four Fingers vs Guitar Fingerboard)
Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device.
You can download and read online Major Scales in 2 and 3 Octaves (Four Fingers vs Guitar Fingerboard) file PDF Book only if you are registered here.
And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Major Scales in 2 and 3 Octaves (Four Fingers vs Guitar Fingerboard) book.
Happy reading Major Scales in 2 and 3 Octaves (Four Fingers vs Guitar Fingerboard) Bookeveryone.
Download file Free Book PDF Major Scales in 2 and 3 Octaves (Four Fingers vs Guitar Fingerboard) at Complete PDF Library.
This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats.
Here is The CompletePDF Book Library.
It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Major Scales in 2 and 3 Octaves (Four Fingers vs Guitar Fingerboard) Pocket Guide.
I know there is no such thing as a Segovia scale. C'mon you know what I meant. It's all about the shifting principles and how the scales lay horizontally and vertically across the fret board.
Major thirds tuning
Save the sass for your cats that almost rhymes As Gob Bluth would say:. That's all. One can certainly finger scales in any fashion you like - ask Django. Better to just be able to play in any key freely across the entire fretboard. I think that's the ultimate goal of learning various positions and fingering systems:. Very true. I did that work for years. It helped more than playing endless scales and licks, believe it or not.
Taught me how scales "behave", so to speak. Now I can mess with the "behavior" of scales more freely. Originally Posted by RyanM. That's Johnny Smith for you! No one, well He's my model for tone, timbre, execution, precision, and range when I play melodic lines on the guitar. No one else had the tonal and timbral control of JS. There's only a couple of guitarists who come to mind when I mention JS 1. John Williams 2. David Russell 3. Julian Bream when he was recorded and mic'ed correctly, shesh what travesty Segovia Notice anything about that list.
I know. I meant that they were classical guitarists. I wasn't talking about their background, but I could see how that might be offensive. Remember, that's my opinion. That's the sonic goal that I have set for myself. Benson's tone is legit, so is Grant Green's. Wes pioneered the "Blue Thumb", fer chrissakes.
We should always be able to give some sort of justification, right? Every note sounds clean for the most part. Like every note was executed with the utmost precision.
- Want free guitar tips and video lessons delivered to your inbox??
- Major Scale Quick Facts.
- Microbiology - Staphylococcus - A Quick Review (1).
George Van Eps talks about the mechanics of the fretting hand and JS embodies that scientist-like precision. JS does that all whilst improvising truly beautiful and flowing lines please, let's not start THAT argument again 2.
The tone isn't too muddy Pat Metheny I love his acoustic stuff The tone has a lively but subtle brightness to it it's there, but you gotta listen to it. Especially when he plays chords it becomes apparent 4. The tone is round and full. He pays attention to how he frets notes. His timbre isn't percussive. Although I love Lionel Loueke's playing and the percussive nature of it all, I am not a fan of percussive smacks whilst playing bebop, standards, and ballads all the time.
Once again, my opinion 6. He uses dynamics This is a huge part of what separates JS from a lot of "traditional bebop players" of today's day and age. They don't pay attention to the dynamics of the line That's part of what makes the line exciting IMHO. Last, but not least. He uses the whole range of the instrument and he pays attention to the intonation issues that are a natural consequence of the guitar. Other guitarists have a couple or most of these attributes in their sound, but IMHO, JS has them all Different strokes for different folks.
Makes the world go round As a musician Remember that Tal still painted signs to make money on the side. Being a musician is about how you approach the bandstand, the audience, your instrument, and your ears, not about how you make a living. My studies are certainly not indicative of a mere hobby As a musician I think that an important part of your musical maturity is figuring out who speaks to you on your instrument for certain attributes. JS is tone, timbre, and range for me.
Wes is dynamism and being a true story teller something I value very highly on the instrument. OK, but waaaay off topic Irez.
How to Play The Major Scale Guitar Guide for Beginners and Intermediate
So back to 3-octave scales: What is the point, or points, of practicing them? It helps build facility with "range playing" stolen from Jerry Coker. Every melodic instrument has this challenge 2. It forces you to develop smooth shifts, with the goal of playing shifts just as smoothly as playing in position.
One-Octave Major Scale | Bass Scales | StudyBass
Not easy. It helps you learn where the notes are. Of course there are other methods that do this too, and probably more effectively. You should practice them with all diatonic, symmetric and frequently used modal scales. The end game is not so much about playing scales up and down. The point is that by practicing them you begin to build the type of capability that you will use when moving freely up and down the fret board - while playing melodic material that is much more difficult than rote scales.
You have to walk before you can run. I tend to have those flights of fancy sometimes Point taken. Range playing range playing range playing There is a very good reason to break out of the position playing method. It is too mathematical, too geometric, too visual. As you aptly said, my fumbly friend, it has to be all about the notes. Even in classical music especially so the melodic contour and the range of the line creates interest. Yes you can play compound intervals in position, but you have more guitar to work with if you think more horizontally Even Barry Galbraith, mr.
He always stresses the primacy of the melodic line. Therefore, he teaches more horizontal methods with his fingering suggestions on Bach, and on Jazz Standards Fumbles, care to revive an old thread I started on shifting? We could take turns demonstrating shifting principles to the forum. You have a more extensive classical background than I, but I am a devotee of the 3 octave scale and shifting horizontal playing methodology.
I have a problem with facility if it is for the sake of playing fast, end all be all. Oscar Peterson, fast or slow, he always swings his arse off and plays lines that would sound just as beautiful slowed down. Same with Johnny Smith. Use facility to say something of depth, to create excitement and drama, to add to your story telling palette. Not to show off. Originally Posted by sgcim. NOT to use them in improvisation.
It's as simple as an athlete working out before they play their games. They don't do sit-ups in the football game, but the sit-ups give them the facility to do their thing in the game. There's a lot of hate among jazz fans for players with a lot of facility. Believe it or nuts, there are many serious haters of Oscar Peterson, because of the great facility he had.
You can't win. Sounds like a Kurt Vonnegut novel. I like virtuosity.
Why Know the Whole Fretboard?
Virtuoso, correct? But used that technique to say something more than lemme rip through all the scales and Charlie Parker licks I know. Dizzy Gillespie. Same deal. My point being that the general audience hears fast vs. The knowledgeable listener hears thematic development, altered notes, elusion, and other musical techniques within that speed. All of these elements build together to create an intentional solo.