Page 1 of 2
#1
I know theory, all the 11 letters (yay) and how to construct scales. That I know.

My question is, would it be possible for a guitarist on stage who suddenly wants to play a harmonic minor... ever be able to suddenly whip it out not having played it before... but just knowing what notes to play?
Let me be more specific for those of you who just got lost:

If a guitarist who knows theory perfectly, and knows where every note on the fret is without a second thought, would that guitarist suddenly be able to play some weird scale if he suddenly knew the intervals needed to play them?
Ex:
"Oh I want to play the XYZ scale! I know it goes 1 2b 3b 4b 5b 6b 7", then he picks note A on the highest string and just shreds it out, knowing what each note is for 1, 2b, 3b, 4b, 5b, 6b, 7 because his theory knowledge is just that vast. The crowd orgasms.


My question: is that possible? If I sit down and learn theory hard and cold, can I easily make stuff up on stage if I know the interval pattern?

OR... is shredding out something mainly based on memory rather than creating a scale on stage? For example, I could shred down at like 200 bpm (with some **** ups cause i suck) the C major scale no problem, but if someone said "okay do C# dorian... and... GO!" I'd have to:

a) stop
b) write out the interval pattern on a sheet of paper
c) write down the notes for each piece
d) figure out where they are on the keyboard
e) play it a few times to get a feel for it
** This ASSUMES outside the box pattern, since box patters are really easy.

and even then, I would end up just staying in the box pattern for like a day...
Right there from steps A through E above, those would take me a good 5 minutes. Thats a long ass time.


Any tips on the above? Or is theory just for making your own music at home and learning it the good old hard way ?
: )
Last edited by Cjk10000 at Aug 25, 2010,
#2
There are ways to pass it. Like...
Dorian is the mode in the scale. So if you go back a whole tone you'll get your regular scale. B. So just play in normal B...

Did this answer your question? Sorry I'm kinda confused by all the different stuff you asked.
#3
well once you know the c# dorian you wont have to do step a-e itll be like you know c major
and most guitarists on stage wont use any scale unless he/shes comfortable with it
#4
That's definitely possible assuming you know the notes of the guitar neck really well. Also if you know how certain intervals look, you could easily figure it out on the fly although you'd be limited to an octave or two of notes unless you know the guitar neck.
C# Dorian for example... I know C# is on the 9th fret in standard tuning, and I think of constructing Dorian as the natural minor with a raised 6th. (1 2 b3 4 5 6 b7)
So I'd play it as:
----------------------------
----------------------------
----------------------------
-----------------------9-11
------------9-11-13------
-9-11-12-----------------

That's if I had to do it on the fly.

Sadly, I do not know the guitar neck that well so I'd be stuck in one position

If you know the interval patterns, you can skip the step of notes as long as you know where the root note is. A major scale is 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 and minor is 1 2 b3 4 5 b6 b7 so if you know how to play those, you just alter the intervals you play accordingly.

Edit: C# Dorian also shares the notes of B major, so if I can play the major scale all over the neck, I could just adjust it to the correct frets and play that (of course resolving to C# since it's C# Dorian)
Quote by DiminishedFifth
Who's going to stop you? The music police?
Last edited by FacetOfChaos at Aug 25, 2010,
#5
Yes it is possible.

I think what music theory does is allows those who know it well to not have to think about those kinds of things. I don't recall ever thinking "Hey! Harmonic minor would be great here! I should do that!" when playing out. Once you know scales up and down the neck in every position, it allows you to just pick the notes out without really thinking about them. After that, you get a feel for what passing tones will work in whatever key you are in. It becomes instinctive. As long as you know what key you're playing in, the possibilities are endless. But I don't think you can sit and think, "how about a flat 5 here", because by that time, the moment has passed. Improvising is like that, it happens very quickly. I'm a pattern player, but pattern playing does not necessarily mean staying inside a box pattern in one position. A box pattern is simply one position on the neck that is connected to another pattern further down or up the neck. Learn your scales over the entire neck and things will become second nature to you. It sounds difficult, but really isn't. It just takes a bit of time to understand where the patterns fit in different keys. The trick after that is to execute musically. That is, not just play the notes in the scale, but be able to play whatever musical phrase is in your head without thinking too much about it.
Last edited by stoic at Aug 25, 2010,
#6
theory knowledge and fretboard knowledge part ways many time in the journey to play music on guitar...

i play mostly jazz .. blues and fusion...each form has many different ways to play it...but...the hardware/mechanical part...learning the "feel of space" on the fret board...knowing where a b5 of a chord run is and ending the run on the b7 an octave higher...

its more then "knowing" the fretboard in a mechanical way..

when you hear top players play a simple line..then play a complex line..and do it with the same ease...they have integrated the music in them through the instrument..

so the basics are a must to play what your asking your guitarist to play...knowing the scales,intervals, arpeggios, chords and their inversions inside and out in ALL keys...knowing how they relate to each other and being comfortable in ANY key

this takes alot of work and time...dedication and practice...theory becomes an afterthought when you get to that level

play well

wolf
#7
If you know the notes or intervals in a scale and the notes on the fretboard then, yes, you will be able to play that scale.

However, playing something that sounds good is about much more than just knowing the notes of a scale. That's why experienced guitarists can play great sounding solos using only note from the minor pentatonic but beginners can hardly make a good melody with the same set of notes.

To be able to make a scale sound good you need to have played that scale and be familiar with it so you know what works and what doesn't and when to use each note. Simply mindlessly running through the notes of a scale randomly will not produce a good solo.

So the answer to the question "If I sit down and learn theory hard and cold, can I easily make stuff up on stage if I know the interval pattern?" is no. To be able to easily make something (that sounds good) up on stage you will have to use your ears and you will have to practice improvising.
Last edited by 12345abcd3 at Aug 26, 2010,
#8
If, hypothetically, you understood music perfectly, you could create any music you want.

If, hypothetically, you understood scale patterns perfectly, you could create any scale pattern you want.
        ,
        |\
[U]        | |                     [/U]
[U]        |/     .-.              [/U]
[U]       /|_     `-’       |      [/U]
[U]      //| \      |       |      [/U]
[U]     | \|_ |     |     .-|      [/U]
      *-|-*    (_)     `-’
        |
        L.
#9
Quote by Cjk10000
I know theory, all the 11 letters (yay) and how to construct scales. That I know.

My question is, would it be possible for a guitarist on stage who suddenly wants to play a harmonic minor... ever be able to suddenly whip it out not having played it before... but just knowing what notes to play?
Let me be more specific for those of you who just got lost:

If a guitarist who knows theory perfectly, and knows where every note on the fret is without a second thought, would that guitarist suddenly be able to play some weird scale if he suddenly knew the intervals needed to play them?
Ex:
"Oh I want to play the XYZ scale! I know it goes 1 2b 3b 4b 5b 6b 7", then he picks note A on the highest string and just shreds it out, knowing what each note is for 1, 2b, 3b, 4b, 5b, 6b, 7 because his theory knowledge is just that vast. The crowd orgasms.


My question: is that possible? If I sit down and learn theory hard and cold, can I easily make stuff up on stage if I know the interval pattern?

OR... is shredding out something mainly based on memory rather than creating a scale on stage? For example, I could shred down at like 200 bpm (with some **** ups cause i suck) the C major scale no problem, but if someone said "okay do C# dorian... and... GO!" I'd have to:

a) stop
b) write out the interval pattern on a sheet of paper
c) write down the notes for each piece
d) figure out where they are on the keyboard
e) play it a few times to get a feel for it
** This ASSUMES outside the box pattern, since box patters are really easy.

and even then, I would end up just staying in the box pattern for like a day...
Right there from steps A through E above, those would take me a good 5 minutes. Thats a long ass time.


Any tips on the above? Or is theory just for making your own music at home and learning it the good old hard way ?


I think the answer, if we were being honest, is no.

I think the steps that you outlined are clunky. When I teach, I also assign playing homework and application exercises, so that the student can get some real time with them. But like anything, that which you want to perfect, takes practice. I think you've made excellent points to your observation, which is something that I seldom see brought up in these discussions, when it comes to theory and application. I think its a generally agreed idea here on UG that, you're on your own when it comes to how and where and when you use the knowledge. But knowledge in and of itself will not make you better. You still have to work with the stuff, which is why in my opinion, applied theory is a critical piece of that puzzle.

What I can say, is that it IS very possible to simply play somewhere you never have played quite competently, but I can't say that anything Ive seen taught or shared here on UG will, or would help you accomplish that.

Best,

Sean
#10
Quote by Cjk10000


My question is, would it be possible for a guitarist on stage who suddenly wants to play a harmonic minor... ever be able to suddenly whip it out not having played it before... but just knowing what notes to play?


it might be possible, but its highly unlikely, and not worth considering as an approach to learning guitar.

You'll be able to play what you practice..... its that simple.

so, theory alone won't cut it. You have to play music on your instrument as well.
shred is gaudy music
#11
Quote by GuitarMunky
it might be possible, but its highly unlikely, and not worth considering as an approach to learning guitar.

You'll be able to play what you practice..... its that simple.

so, theory alone won't cut it. You have to play music on your instrument as well.


This.

I know Sean teaches a method similar to this: learn the notes on the fretboard so well that you can escape patterns. It's obviously been a good method for him to teach, but I think your expectations are a little high. Even if you knew the notes to a scale that was otherwise foreign to you, it would still require your practice to feel comfortable playing it. Thankfully, there aren't many you need to know.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#12
Quote by Eastwinn
This.

I know Sean teaches a method similar to this: learn the notes on the fretboard so well that you can escape patterns. It's obviously been a good method for him to teach, but I think your expectations are a little high. Even if you knew the notes to a scale that was otherwise foreign to you, it would still require your practice to feel comfortable playing it. Thankfully, there aren't many you need to know.


You're right I do, and I like what you said about "escaping patterns" because that is an apt way to describe what I strive to teach. Its also why I probably get puzzled looks when I say "why learn scales, just learn to play everywhere on the fretboard".

However, even with that kind of knowledge, it really does require motor skills, practice and familiarity. The best I can do, even with what I teach, is remove questions/guesswork of where you can go, but the student still needs to actually spend time playing and applying these things to ideas like Jam Tracks, or Lab Exercises etc. It's also a good idea to point out that beyond all else, a good thing to strive for is using notes and intervals and phrases to develop your own unique and melodic voice, regardless of whether you know the neck or not. Use what you know.

For advanced students, some of my favorite excursions involve leaving theory behind and playing tonally or even outside-inside from notes that aren't even a part of scale, to bend the ear.

The application of theory and even intentionally leaving theory behind at times in our approaches (I like to challenge students all the time, that just because its in the scale doesnt mean you have to play it) is a very important part in learning how to express ourselves. If we ultimately, even though we know all the rules, understand the emotional connection between tension and release, and use notes and voices as colors, then I feel we truly do begin to get closer to the ultimate goal of expressing ourselves through music.

Best,

Sean
#13
^ you'll never escape patterns. They are part of life. Better to recognize and utilize IMO.
shred is gaudy music
#15
Quote by Sean0913
I can't blame you for feeling that way. You have only what you know, to draw from.

Sean



LOL dude. You completely avoided the actual issue by shifting the focus to your assumption of my ignorance. That's so condescending and arrogant.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Aug 26, 2010,
#16
No,in a nutshell,you may know the theory and the notes,but that does not equal speed.Sorry to say this but technique and muscle memory may play some part in this and to be honest most good guitarists dont have to think what to play they just know.
There are no shortcuts to hard work and practice.

Oilywrag
#17
Quote by GuitarMunky
^ you'll never escape patterns
I disagree. Patterns are only for the guitarist and only apply if you only know how to write music with your guitar. More sophisticated musicians can write music away from the guitar and therefore away from patterns.

The need to follow patterns dogmatically seems to be a result of a lack of knowledge of music as a whole.

Quote by GuitarMunky
That's so condescending and arrogant.
Isn't it equally condescending and arrogant to only post about someone else's condescending and arrogant qualities? And yeah, I know posting what I just posted is also condescending and arrogant, but such is life.
        ,
        |\
[U]        | |                     [/U]
[U]        |/     .-.              [/U]
[U]       /|_     `-’       |      [/U]
[U]      //| \      |       |      [/U]
[U]     | \|_ |     |     .-|      [/U]
      *-|-*    (_)     `-’
        |
        L.
Last edited by demonofthenight at Aug 27, 2010,
#18
Quote by GuitarMunky
LOL dude. You completely avoided the actual issue by shifting the focus to your assumption of my ignorance. That's so condescending and arrogant.


I'm sorry matey, but even if you disagree with someone's point of view, there's no need to rely upon personal insults to argue yours.

You guys are both valued members of this forum, so I won't issue any formal warnings. Consider this an informal one.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#19
Quote by AlanHB
I'm sorry matey, but even if you disagree with someone's point of view, there's no need to rely upon personal insults to argue yours.

You guys are both valued members of this forum, so I won't issue any formal warnings. Consider this an informal one.

That wasn't an insult. I just called him out on it.


Quote by demonofthenight
I disagree. Patterns are only for the guitarist and only apply if you only know how to write music with your guitar. More sophisticated musicians can write music away from the guitar and therefore away from patterns.



Thats simply not true. patterns are part of all music. When I say Patterns I don't mean the scale charts for guitarists showing where to put your fingers..... though they are a visual representation of part of what I'm talking about.

Scales, chords, intervals, phrases, structure...... it's all patterns.

Quote by demonofthenight

The need to follow patterns dogmatically seems to be a result of a lack of knowledge of music as a whole.


no, you seem stuck on this "need to follow" thing.

What you're not realizing is that the ability to recognize and understand patterns comes with experience. its an advanced musician that can do this.
Quote by demonofthenight

Isn't it equally condescending and arrogant to only post about someone else's condescending and arrogant qualities?


No, when its an insult aimed at you, It's an called defending yourself.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Aug 27, 2010,
#20
^You warn non-regular people for flaming but you wouldn't warn a regular? What the hell? Warning people for flaming is bad, making a distinction between "regulars" (or "valued members") and non-regulars is worse. Why are you a mod?

Honestly sorry to everyone else for not making a constructive post.
        ,
        |\
[U]        | |                     [/U]
[U]        |/     .-.              [/U]
[U]       /|_     `-’       |      [/U]
[U]      //| \      |       |      [/U]
[U]     | \|_ |     |     .-|      [/U]
      *-|-*    (_)     `-’
        |
        L.
#21
Quote by demonofthenight
^You warn non-regular people for flaming but you wouldn't warn a regular? What the hell? Warning people for flaming is bad, making a distinction between "regulars" (or "valued members") and non-regulars is worse. Why are you a mod?

Honestly sorry to everyone else for not making a constructive post.



I didn't flame..... I was responding to the flame (that was a reply to my legitimate point). Why not leave it alone since it doesn't involve you. You can respond to my post about patterns if you want.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Aug 27, 2010,
#22
Quote by Cjk10000

If a guitarist who knows theory perfectly, and knows where every note on the fret is without a second thought, would that guitarist suddenly be able to play some weird scale if he suddenly knew the intervals needed to play them?


If a guitarist knew where every note on the fretboard was without a second thought, was given the intervals for some new scale, and had a perfect knowledge of theory then he would be know and be able to map out instantly the notes of that new scale across the fretboard.

But none of that means he would actually be able to play the guitar nor would he necessarily know how the sounds of those scale degrees would sound.

Theory is one part you also need to develop some dexterous fingers and a good ear.

And patterns ARE everywhere - they are not just on the guitar but on every instrument and in almost all music. Any method you use to learn the notes of the fretboard or scales in general involves patterns of some kind, it is a matter of fact not opinion.

***
I offer moral support to Guitar Munky I think he was hard done by having that post singled out. The post he was responding to did in fact appear to have a rather condescending tone I wouldn't know how else to describe it.

The fact is Sean put forth an argument that not all fretboard and scale knowledge involves patterns, but in a way that pretty clearly implied ignorance on the part of another member and assumed a position of superiority (arrogance).

I personally think this is an absurd argument to begin with, you simply can not learn scales and the notes on the fretboard without learning patterns since scales themselves ARE patterns. Whatever method you use the result is that you are learning patterns.

But it is difficult to have a proper discussion since Sean's stated position rests on information that he will not share without receipt of payment. He has built an insulation around his point of view by claiming some secret body of knowledge the rest of us cavemen have yet to figure out. This is a logical fallacy called argument to authority where the argument rests solely on the fact that it is coming from someone who is in a position of authority. It has no substance whatsoever.

The worst part in this case being the position of authority is created by Sean himself through deference to his advanced revolutionary method of learning. A method he will be happy to enlighten us with - after he has enlightened our wallet.

We must simply take him at his word that he is smarter than the rest of us unless we cough up the do re mi.

In all sincerity this is not meant as a personal attack but as an observation. Though I could care less how it is taken to be honest.

Have a look at his posts in this thread and tell me I'm wrong. He talks about what he teaches and how it will achieve what the TS is wondering is even possible. He then goes on to generalize about UG members not being able to help the guy. He tells the TS it is possible to do what he is asking but that he won't find out how to do it at UG.

Then later with very little encouragement in the way of a passing comment he goes on to post further advertisement I mean, statements about how what he teaches is really useful and the benefits his students get from learning under him.

~And GuitarMunkey is the one that get's called out!!!
Si
Last edited by 20Tigers at Aug 27, 2010,
#23
Quote by GuitarMunky
LOL dude. You completely avoided the actual issue by shifting the focus to your assumption of my ignorance. That's so condescending and arrogant.


No, it's not - I supported your perspective, and since you don't know what I teach or know, thats all you have to draw from. I really have no need to respond to this, but that's in essence what ignorance is, it's not being willfully stupid. And it's not condescending, its a straight fact from my perspective, and that's that. Now, if you don't like that, there's nothing I can do about it, but calling me condescending because I poseess knowledge about something that you don't, even when I give room for your point of view, is additional ignorance. But while I disagree with your opinion, I gave it full respect and validity in my brief post. Your opinion, however does not need to be made into my conviction, and vice versa.

You've made it a habit of calling me out in topics, lately and I would respectfully ask that you deal with me one on one if you have something against me, otherwise kindly steer clear of your insults and personal attacks from here on out.

And 20t - your comments are patently unfair about what I do as I am intentionally steering clear of anything that may look like promotion in my posts, and when you do that, you leave me without a defense without appearing like Im promoting myself. The fact is, your so called assumptions on what I know or don't are legitimately effectively pulverized by the vast amounts of press and testimony that is and has been going out nationwide from the things that I teach.

If you want to investigate my claims of the above, and expose me as a fraud, do so, otherwise dont bait me and try and place me in a corner where the deck is unfairly stacked against me. Lose the fallacy and insulation talk, you're outnumbered by the sheer facts and evidence I have in support of what I do. Ask DiminishedFifth if you don't believe me, why he certainly is no doubter of my legitimacy, any longer.

If you want to grant me a pass to make my case, I'll happily do so, without fear of criticism of being self-promoting. The fact is that all claims to the veracity of what I teach are fully documented, and if you want to scrutinize that go right ahead, but don't cast dispersions on me when I have no chance to defend myself in this particular forum without also risking the accusations of being self-promoting. It's not fair.

Best,

Sean
Last edited by Sean0913 at Aug 27, 2010,
#24
Quote by Cjk10000
but if someone said "okay do C# dorian... and... GO!" I'd have to:

a) stop
b) write out the interval pattern on a sheet of paper
c) write down the notes for each piece
d) figure out where they are on the keyboard
e) play it a few times to get a feel for it


this might help you, i don't know.
https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=1355290

If somebody said C# dorian to me I'd quickly find the C# on the low E string and bust out the dorian formation in that graphic. If I wanted to run up the fretboard I'd seamlessly (yeah right, ha) slide up 2 frets to a D# and run through the Phrygian pattern, then slide up to an E and run through Lydian, etc etc etc on up and down the fretboard.

I'm not great and my theory knowledge is spotty since I'm self taught, but remembering the patterns as I put down on that pic has made it really easy for me to traverse the fretboard on the fly, or quickly find a scale that goes well with a chord progression. Then I let my ear take over in finding nice melodies and phrases within that scale
Last edited by whitmell at Aug 27, 2010,
#25
The disagreement is with the word pattern. When Sean and I said pattern, we meant stuff like this. It's clear that there are abundant patterns, in the sense the Munky describes, in music, and I doubt that anyone would disagree that knowledge of these patterns, consciously or otherwise, is valuable. However, knowledge of shapes like in my link are not the most ideal way of internalizing the major scale, minor scale, or whatever. Knowledge of these shapes will come naturally as you practice anyway.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#26
I just read the rest of this thread and I definitely agree that the preferred method SHOULD be to learn the neck of your guitar and learn theory and not learn scales as shapes

That being said, visualizing shapes (the ones I showed in the link I posted above)
is how I naturally learned modes, for better or for worse. It made it easy for me to quickly learn modes, and through reading and experimentation, it wasn't long before I was able to apply them on the fly to different situations. I can figure out what notes I'm playing by thinking about the intervals in the scale I'm playing as related to the root, not the reverse (figuring out the scale by knowing which notes to play). I wish it were the opposite, and that's something I'm working on, going back and backfilling my theoretical knowledge and learning the fretboard better. But I think it is a lot harder to learn the notes of your fretboard and the theory behind the scales than to learn the notes up one string (low E) and how to form a scale rooted off that string. The extra work pays off though.
#27
Quote by Sean0913
And 20t - your comments are patently unfair about what I do as I am intentionally steering clear of anything that may look like promotion in my posts,


really??? you're steering clear of what may look like promotion in your posts. --Actualy, I agree - you're steering clear of what may look like promotion by finding ways to promote your course without having it look like promotion. -You really do think everyone else is an idiot don't you.

None of the posts in this thread so far have been without what is nothing short of thinly veiled promotion. Let's look at that recent most recent post...
Quote by Sean0913
...vast amounts of press and testimony that is and has been going out nationwide from the things that I teach...

...you're outnumbered by the sheer facts and evidence I have in support of what I do.

...The fact is that all claims to the veracity of what I teach are fully documented, and if you want to scrutinize that go right ahead


If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck it's a duck.

Im not buying into your argument. You're asking me and consequently any other doubters to check out the validity of your programme by actively seeking out testimonials. If you really weren't promoting you would be pointing me to the posts in which you don't mention your teaching or school or explaining how your posts in this thread aren't advertising instead you suggest we check out the validity of your teaching - have you any shame??

You have worded in such a way that it looks like you're a victim of my vitriol and simply defending yourself, and further that you can't defend yourself without indulging in self promotion. I illustrated what I see as self promotion in this and my last post. You could have addressed this head on by showing that it isn't advertising, but you didn't - instead you turned the focus onto the "credibility of your course".

If you read my previous post you will notice that my issue isn't so much focussed on the credibility of your course but the way in which you try to establish yourself as an authority and the way in which you take any opportunity to talk about the benefits of your course.

You've made out that I have somehow put you in a position where you can't defend yourself without self promotion. This is bullocks. You should be able to make a claim and back it up with a valid argument WITHOUT reference to information you're not willing to share freely. If you can't do that then STFU. Don't try to push yourself up by knocking other's down.

You are not the only teacher that is a member on this site but you ARE the only one that consistently and frequently talks up his course as being better than anything else offerred on this site, or better than what anyone else on UG might offer, who regularly spouts the benefits their students experience from participating in their course, and that isn't willing to share their knowledge FREELY with other UG members.

So no I have no interest in seeking out testimonials and I would encourage other's not to waste their time. I see your posts, in this thread at least, for what they are - shameless self promotion. It is there for anyone to see if they care to look. So don't try to tell me that I'm painting you in a corner or stacking cards against you. If you didn't self promote and try to place yourself as having superior knowledge to others then there would be nothing for me to argue. It is you who have placed yourself in a position where your only defense is to self promote - don't try to put that on me.

Quote by Sean0913
If you want to grant me a pass to make my case, I'll happily do so, without fear of criticism of being self-promoting.
Did you seriously just ask to have a chance to promote the benefits of your course without being accused of self promotion??

Quote by Sean0913
...but don't cast dispersions on me when I have no chance to defend myself in this particular forum without also risking the accusations of being self-promoting. It's not fair.
BooF'nHoo. Don't make statements disparaging the views of others without giving them the chance to defend themselves. That's not fair.

You have the opportunity to defend yourself by

A) showing that you're not making arguments that reference your "proprietary" teaching method that you will not share.
or
B) by showing that you're not interested in self promotion by no longer referencing the benefits of your course in these forums.

You do NOT have the opportunity to defend yourself by stating a case for the validity or supposed benefits your course offers. I'll make you a deal. If you don't mention or allude your course - I won't mention it or accuse you of self promotion. - do we have a deal?
Si
Last edited by 20Tigers at Aug 27, 2010,
#28
I made life simple for myself and just use pentatonic positions for everything and add in accidentals that I know by now will sound good.
Sue me.
#29
No we don't.

You're asking me to somehow divorce what I am and what I've committed my life to teaching and in helping others, just so that it doesn't come across as promotion, and I don't know of a way to deny what I believe and am fully convicted of in my sincere responses to stay true to that, and please the likes of you.

There's a saying that even bad publicity is good for publicity, and you've left an opening large enough for me to drive a Mack truck through. Every fibre in my being wants to take it and bury you in your ignorance and scoffing. But, I'm not going to bite.

So, here's what I'm going to do, I'm going to exercise restraint and take the high road in this instance and leave you to your ignorance, because what you think or do not think doesn't change what's really true. I'm not going to defend myself, and in the interest of putting your tirade to rest, I'm effectively backing down. If you want to pat yourself on the back in victory because I have chosen to do this, have at it. I'm not taking the bait.

Please, 20t, take your "win" and exit graciously, and please don't try and provoke me again.

Best,

Sean
Last edited by Sean0913 at Aug 27, 2010,
#30
Quote by 20Tigers

The fact is Sean put forth an argument that not all fretboard and scale knowledge involves patterns, but in a way that pretty clearly implied ignorance on the part of another member and assumed a position of superiority (arrogance).



It's nice when people can get down to the root of the issue. thanks for recognizing this.
shred is gaudy music
#31
Quote by Eastwinn
The disagreement is with the word pattern. When Sean and I said pattern, we meant stuff like this. It's clear that there are abundant patterns, in the sense the Munky describes, in music, and I doubt that anyone would disagree that knowledge of these patterns, consciously or otherwise, is valuable. However, knowledge of shapes like in my link are not the most ideal way of internalizing the major scale, minor scale, or whatever. Knowledge of these shapes will come naturally as you practice anyway.



Exactly. Excellent points!

We cant deny that the notes are laid out on the neck and that certain things are simply the biological results of having hands and fingers, I cant play from the 1st fret and use the same hand to reach the 21st fret, but I can reach the 3rd fret. So yes, the fact that the notes are in the same place, regardless of understanding means there is some geometry to the fretboard, and Im not arguing patterns in that regard.

I'm responding to the very ideas that you are indicating above as finite pieces that are offered, that aren't necessarily showing the whole picture. So instead of that, I advocate "whole picture" playing. If its a 21 or 36 fret guitar, the principle of playing anywhere and everywhere, without cages and boxes, or patterns as you show above, transcends learning "patterns" in the way that CAGED espouses, hopscotch, boxes and even the lead shapes in Fretboard logic teach.

Eastwinn, thank you for clarifying what we refer to by patterns.

Sean
#32
^ I knew what you meant by patterns. I still stand by my point that you can't escape them. If you play in C Major.... you're playing notes that fall within a specified pattern.

without patterns.... there is no music.


Quote by Eastwinn
The disagreement is with the word pattern.


Not so much as it is about this idea that you can escape patterns.

Quote by Eastwinn

When Sean and I said pattern, we meant stuff like this.


Oh, I knew that. No confusion there. My point is that those patterns just represent patterns. They are not something to break free from. They are something to recognize and utilize.


Quote by Eastwinn

It's clear that there are abundant patterns, in the sense the Munky describes, in music, and I doubt that anyone would disagree that knowledge of these patterns, consciously or otherwise, is valuable.

I agree. Patterns are abundant in music. no need to downplay it by saying "in the sense that Munky describes"...... they are there....period.


Quote by Eastwinn

However, knowledge of shapes like in my link are not the most ideal way of internalizing the major scale, minor scale, or whatever. Knowledge of these shapes will come naturally as you practice anyway.


They certainly can be a valuable part of the process.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Aug 27, 2010,
#33
Munky: I'll revise what I said: the issue is where I said "escape", you're correct. You can't escape patterns. There's a big picture with all these scales -- the scale all across the fretboard. I think approaching the big picture in pieces is an inefficient method and I advice highly against it. Learning the big picture by learning the notes on the fretboard by heart is much better. Ultimately, as you play, you will break down the big picture in to pieces, and that's good. I insist, however, that using those patterns from the first place, you'll have trouble reaching that big picture.

Hopefully that makes sense.
i don't know why i feel so dry
Last edited by Eastwinn at Aug 27, 2010,
#34
Quote by Eastwinn
Munky: I'll revise what I said: the issue is where I said "escape", you're correct. You can't escape patterns.


Thank you.

Quote by Eastwinn

There's a big picture with all these scales -- the scale all across the fretboard. I think approaching the big picture in pieces is an inefficient method and I advice highly against it.


I disagree. like you say its a big picture. How many big things do you know of that aren't constructed in pieces?

When you go to school do you take 1 "big picture" class?

when they build a sky scraper, do they put it all up at once?

Quote by Eastwinn

Learning the big picture by learning the notes on the fretboard by heart is much better. .


I don't see it that way. It's all part of the puzzle. learning the notes, understanding the concepts, hearing them, seeing it visually.

I see no benefit in disregarding any of it.


Quote by Eastwinn

Ultimately, as you play, you will break down the big picture in to pieces, and that's good. I insist, however, that using those patterns from the first place, you'll have trouble reaching that big picture.

Hopefully that makes sense.


I totally disagree that ...

1) you start with the big and then break it down ( generally learning goes the opposite way)

2) learning patterns will in any way inhibit your ability to understand the concepts. I've that the opposite is true. They serve to reinforce what you learn.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Aug 27, 2010,
#35
My god guys, honestly find something better to do with your time it's been the same people here answering questions for years.. do you guys work.. play any music? Or just bust out essays about it over UG? Especially Munky and Sean, you're arguing over bullshit

Why can't you recognize the shapes are there, and also be able to play without using them at all? I know I can, it's not that hard to grasp the idea.. the shapes are clearly a useful teaching tool. I think it's important to make sure your students understand a scale is a group of notes that can be played anywhere on the fretboard, but once they get that down there's nothing wrong with learning the shape of a scale.. infact, it's the easiest way to show someone the scale for the first time, you have to start somewhere.
#36
Quote by Peaceful Rocker
My god guys, honestly find something better to do with your time it's been the same people here answering questions for years.. do you guys work.. play any music? Or just bust out essays about it over UG? Especially Munky and Sean, you're arguing over bullshit

Why can't you recognize the shapes are there, and also be able to play without using them at all? I know I can, it's not that hard to grasp the idea.. the shapes are clearly a useful teaching tool. I think it's important to make sure your students understand a scale is a group of notes that can be played anywhere on the fretboard, but once they get that down there's nothing wrong with learning the shape of a scale.. infact, it's the easiest way to show someone the scale for the first time, you have to start somewhere.


so your going to give us shit for arguing about this, yet jump in and do the same thing?


You say you can play without using them at all? play me a melody in C Major, and then explain how what you did doesn't fall into the pattern.
shred is gaudy music
#37
Let's just agree to disagree, Munky. Ultimately what we disagree over isn't fundamental at all. It's really pretty trivial.

PeacefulRocker: Currently I'm procrastinating a lot of work I have to do
i don't know why i feel so dry
#38
You're arguing with someone over something stupid every single time I look on these forums, i'm not biting the bait. Have a good day

(directed at Munky)
#39
Quote by GuitarMunky
so your going to give us shit for arguing about this, yet jump in and do the same thing?


You say you can play without using them at all? play me a melody in C Major, and then explain how what you did doesn't fall into the pattern.


In answer to the question of work, I work in music for a living, and own and operate a guitar school. I also own a music store, and Im getting ready for tonights SRV Memorial blues jam and free blues clinic at our location, as we speak.

Munky, In light of what you said about patterns I think we are in agreement. As for learning approaches, in answering your question, yes you can build a skyscraper at once, or at least rather quickly, which makes any other task of piece learning, and traditional pattern learning entirely obsolete and redundant.

Sean
Last edited by Sean0913 at Aug 27, 2010,
#40
Quote by Peaceful Rocker
You're arguing with someone over something stupid every single time I look on these forums, i'm not biting the bait. Have a good day

(directed at Munky)



There are stupid arguments on UG every day. I guess you probably haven't been involved in any of those though.

and there is no bait. I responded to your accusation, and then asked a legitimate question regarding your legitimate point.

Quote by Sean0913
, yes you can build a skyscraper at once, or at least rather quickly, which makes any other task of piece learning, and traditional pattern learning entirely obsolete and redundant.
Sean


Name me one actual sky scraper that was built instantly or "rather quickly"...... and not built section at a time.

Name me one credible college that doesn't have courses spread out over a period of time but instead just has 1 big class that teaches it all to you "rather quickly".


You don't need to refer to your method that only you have knowledge of... but real world examples. Something everyone else would be aware of.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Aug 27, 2010,
Page 1 of 2