#1
So I take weekly guitar lessons, my teacher only covers theory and technique he wants me to apply it on my own and only introduces me to concepts. Currently I'm being cross trained in piano as it will supposedly help my guitar playing.

Can someone help me out here, I've been practicing my lesson material diligently but I'm feeling stuck in rut in regards to my guitar playing. I'm probably answering my own question here but it seems like I'm stifling my progress by not actively trying to learn songs. Whether it's tab or by ear. I'm just not even attempting to learn any songs, I just don't know why. I've been improving in my soloing and practicing my chops a lot. For some reason I feel "wrong" trying to learn songs by tab but I recognize by doing so I'll be exposed to techniques and patterns I can use in my own playing. Any have any thoughts on this?
#2
There is absolutely nothing wrong in trying to learn songs by tabs. That's how I started. Slowly your ear will be able to tell if the tabs are wrong and slowly you start learning songs by ear, which is very rewarding. Find music you like and try to learn it, it is a whole different thing than practicing scales.
So yes, you are kind of answering your own question.
Gear pics

Quote by Cathbard
Bugera cloning Blackstar is a scandal cloaked in a tragedy making love to a nightmare.

#3
Learning songs is good. I don't find tab useful. I started out with tab at the very beginning and found I needed to listen to the music anyway, and they were often wrong, so I gave up on that pretty quickly. I find roman numerals or chord names a better way to learn songs from a written resource. By ear is obviously good also.

Piano is a good instrument to visualize the basics of theory on, but beyond that, I don't find spending time learning piano will really significantly help your playing. It's different muscles, and a different interface, where the patterns work differently. For instance, in the key of C on piano, every diatonic chord is the same sort of shape, or pattern, whether is is major or minor, or diminished. On guitar a major chord has a few different voices you can use, but they are always consistent. A major chord voicing will never be a minor chord, no matter where on the guitar you play it.

You get out of ruts with work and practice. If you're not learning any songs, that's definitely one way to go. I think it is a poor philosophy of your teacher's though to teach theory without songs.

That would be like teaching a cook by going through all the ingredients in a dictionary, without ever tasting them.
#4
Quote by fingrpikingood
Learning songs is good. I don't find tab useful. I started out with tab at the very beginning and found I needed to listen to the music anyway, and they were often wrong, so I gave up on that pretty quickly. I find roman numerals or chord names a better way to learn songs from a written resource. By ear is obviously good also.

Piano is a good instrument to visualize the basics of theory on, but beyond that, I don't find spending time learning piano will really significantly help your playing. It's different muscles, and a different interface, where the patterns work differently. For instance, in the key of C on piano, every diatonic chord is the same sort of shape, or pattern, whether is is major or minor, or diminished. On guitar a major chord has a few different voices you can use, but they are always consistent. A major chord voicing will never be a minor chord, no matter where on the guitar you play it.

You get out of ruts with work and practice. If you're not learning any songs, that's definitely one way to go. I think it is a poor philosophy of your teacher's though to teach theory without songs.

That would be like teaching a cook by going through all the ingredients in a dictionary, without ever tasting them.


Perhaps I should expand a bit, my teacher has apparently been doing this over 30 years and supposedly trained a lot of local teachers in the Vegas area. He's definitely a good teacher. My playing has increased leaps and bounds studying under him. What I mean by not teaching me songs is he won't walk me through a song I like. He'd rather I do it on my own. He takes excerpts from all kinds of songs, to elaborate on the concepts he introduces me to.

For example he gave a snippet of an Imagine Dragons song to show me how Dominant 7ths work. Or a short lick from Yngwie Malmsteen's "I Am A Viking" to give a chops exercise.

The problem is not really my lessons themselves, I suppose it's how I'm using my practice time outside my lessons. Essentially kinda like weight training I feel like I'm stuck in a plateau. I'm grinding away at sight-reading, chops exercises, scale runs, and connecting the scale patterns when I improvise. The problem is that's all I'm doing. I'm not gonna get as good as Mastodon, Malmsteen, ACDC, ETC. if I don't practice their material right? Really the only song I've learned in its entirety by ear is Day Tripper by The Beatles lmao.

The chord numeral thing (I, IV, V) always show up in everything he gives me haha. We're working our way through list of concepts under functional harmony right now. I'm studying intervals, so far I've gotten a basic understanding of 3rds, and 5ths.
Last edited by anthonymarisc at Dec 5, 2015,
#5
The way I would suggest learning songs is by using both tabs/sheet music and ear. First try figuring out some parts by ear and if some parts are hard to figure out, use tabs for them. For example they may use some more complex chords or something. Tabs are not cheating, neither is sheet music. They are just ways of communicating musical ideas. Tabs are great for chord voicings that you don't know or if you want to know the part of the fretboard that would work best for a certain lick or riff. Notation is good for rhythms and all in all for visualizing music. But always use your ears, even when reading notation or tabs.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#6
Quote by anthonymarisc
Perhaps I should expand a bit, my teacher has apparently been doing this over 30 years and supposedly trained a lot of local teachers in the Vegas area. He's definitely a good teacher. My playing has increased leaps and bounds studying under him. What I mean by not teaching me songs is he won't walk me through a song I like. He'd rather I do it on my own. He takes excerpts from all kinds of songs, to elaborate on the concepts he introduces me to.

For example he gave a snippet of an Imagine Dragons song to show me how Dominant 7ths work. Or a short lick from Yngwie Malmsteen's "I Am A Viking" to give a chops exercise.

The problem is not really my lessons themselves, I suppose it's how I'm using my practice time outside my lessons. Essentially kinda like weight training I feel like I'm stuck in a plateau. I'm grinding away at sight-reading, chops exercises, scale runs, and connecting the scale patterns when I improvise. The problem is that's all I'm doing. I'm not gonna get as good as Mastodon, Malmsteen, ACDC, ETC. if I don't practice their material right? Really the only song I've learned in its entirety by ear is Day Tripper by The Beatles lmao.

The chord numeral thing (I, IV, V) always show up in everything he gives me haha. We're working our way through list of concepts under functional harmony right now. I'm studying intervals, so far I've gotten a basic understanding of 3rds, and 5ths.


It depends on what you want to do. If you want to learn fucntional harmony, then just learning a lot of songs is necessary, imo. Just one example, is not necessarily the best. Lots of songs make use of chords differently, and just learning a lot of them is important.

It's good that he teaches you stuff in context as part of a song, but you should be learning songs as well. A song, as the structure of a song, matters. Intros, verses, pre choruses choruses bridges etcetera are all important, and come about in different ways.

For me, every single thing I could show you in theory can have a song that teaches it to you. I think it is better to learn whole songs that way.

As others know here, I'm not big on intervals either to be honest. I'm more about scale degrees.

But if that's your teacher teaching you your style you want to learn, and they are capable in that style, then follow their instruction obviously. What I think doesn't matter, and is conducive to my style of play, which might not be what you want to do.

If you hit a physical plateau, then you either need to just grind it out, or you need to improve your technique.

I don't think you need to learn songs by X in order to get as good as X. As good as, is a weird thing. Different players are good in different ways. You can definitely get as fast and agile as any player without learning their exact licks. You can learn all of the theory you need to know. You could even have superior ideas. Being as good as X is not knowing all their licks and cookie cutting them together.

That said, if guitairst Y, has a really great technique you want to learn from, it makes sense to learn his songs that use that technique so you learn it. But after that, you're on your own. Their ideas are theirs. You could rip licks off them, and homage them every once in a while, but the creativity is all you, not in which guys you emulated, imo.

I actually prefer not learning not for not from others. I prefer just learning the theory patterns and then doing my own thing. Every once in a while if I find something is particularly cool, I'll ear it out, but I don't generally learn licks or solos note for note. It's not my thing. I don't find that a shortcoming.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 5, 2015,
#7
I'm very much into intervals for speeding up the learning process ... they are physical sounds that everything stems from.

The only reason to study concepts and technique is to put them into practise musically. Exercises are great for coordination, but not so for music (unless you're taking musical licks / lines / chord progressions you like that are challenging for you to play).

So, definitely learn songs with material you like .. be that by ear or by tab. If you learn by tab, realise that you can learn to recognise intervals in tab (since interval sounds are dictated by relative hand positioning). Take a look at https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/columns/music_theory/drastically_cut_learning_time_with_intervals.html, followed by https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/lessons/the_basics/drastically_reduce_learning_time_with_intervals_part_2.html and https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/lessons/the_basics/drastically_reduce_learning_time_with_intervals_part_3.html.
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 6, 2015,
#8
Quote by jerrykramskoy
I'm very much into intervals for speeding up the learning process ... they are physical sounds that everything stems from.



I guess that's a matter of opinion. For me the relationship to the key is the dominant physical sound that everything stems from, and an interval itself is secondary.
#9
Quote by fingrpikingood
I guess that's a matter of opinion. For me the relationship to the key is the dominant physical sound that everything stems from, and an interval itself is secondary.


Yes, I agree with that (the intervals made with the tonal centre).
#10
Quote by jerrykramskoy
Yes, I agree with that (the intervals made with the tonal centre).


Right, but when you name an interval as an interval, on your fretboard, you are taking a pattern and naming that sound. If I So, let's say you name a fifth, well when you play a fifth, to me, that would probably only really be relevant if I was on the tonic of a major mode I guess. Or, I'm not even sure to what extent for that even. But you'll find a fifth interval on every degree of the major scale, except the seventh. If you study and learn the sound of a fifth, then you will have to sort of imagine a fifth out of context in order to access the pattern you've named for that sound, instead of using the relative nature of the notes in the key, which to me is the stronger sound, even though the sound of "a fifth" is still present.


Same thing for chord training. I don't believe in spending much time learning what a major chord sounds like, or minor chord, because although it's sort of relevant, you'll pick it up anyway, and what really matters is the degree the chord is on. So, you'd have to learn the sound of chords in context anyway. So, for me, I would just skip it. You're going to play a lot of chords, and a lot of intervals. You'll learn intervals pretty well if you learn chord nomenclature, which I think is necessary, anyway. The truly important sounds, to me, are relative to the framework you're in, not their standalone sound, out of context. So, those are the ones I would spend time naming. I just don't find much value in studying and naming the sounds of intervals themselves, because those sounds you're naming and associating with patterns, are going to be drowned out by the sound of the more powerful context of the key, once you start playing music.
#11
Quote by fingrpikingood
Right, but when you name an interval as an interval, on your fretboard, you are taking a pattern and naming that sound. If I So, let's say you name a fifth, well when you play a fifth, to me, that would probably only really be relevant if I was on the tonic of a major mode I guess. Or, I'm not even sure to what extent for that even. But you'll find a fifth interval on every degree of the major scale, except the seventh. If you study and learn the sound of a fifth, then you will have to sort of imagine a fifth out of context in order to access the pattern you've named for that sound, instead of using the relative nature of the notes in the key, which to me is the stronger sound, even though the sound of "a fifth" is still present.


Same thing for chord training. I don't believe in spending much time learning what a major chord sounds like, or minor chord, because although it's sort of relevant, you'll pick it up anyway, and what really matters is the degree the chord is on. So, you'd have to learn the sound of chords in context anyway. So, for me, I would just skip it. You're going to play a lot of chords, and a lot of intervals. You'll learn intervals pretty well if you learn chord nomenclature, which I think is necessary, anyway. The truly important sounds, to me, are relative to the framework you're in, not their standalone sound, out of context. So, those are the ones I would spend time naming. I just don't find much value in studying and naming the sounds of intervals themselves, because those sounds you're naming and associating with patterns, are going to be drowned out by the sound of the more powerful context of the key, once you start playing music.


I think we're agreeing with each other. See my previous answer!

"instead of using the relative nature of the notes in the key, which to me is the stronger sound"

... isn't that precisely what intervals are against the tonic? Intervals are relative, not absolute. The chord roots are found at various intervals from the tonic, as is the melody. But I'm sure you know that.

I hope you agree that, with a piece written using a given scale for basic note choice, and if that scale has a p5th in it, then that is found at the the interval of a p5 from the tonal centre used to apply that scale to and to create the tune, its progressions. Etc.

However, once you get into Jazz, it is also helpful to be aware of intervals found against chord types (depending what sound you're after). Often times, these chords are effectively creating their own fleeting tonal centres. Personally, at high speed I can't hear everything and recognise it immediately ... but I can certainly improvise at high speed of thought, knowing interval landing points.

For example, if you listen to Charlie Parker, it's very clear that quite a bit of his playing centres on chords of the moment.

It's all just tools in the toolbox. Whatever works for you.
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 7, 2015,
#12
Quote by jerrykramskoy
I think we're agreeing with each other. See my previous answer!

"instead of using the relative nature of the notes in the key, which to me is the stronger sound"

... isn't that precisely what intervals are against the tonic? Intervals are relative, not absolute. The chord roots are found at various intervals from the tonic, as is the melody. But I'm sure you know that.


Sure, but we're talking about interval training, which I don't is a useful exercise given that fact. You're naming a sound, and giving it a pattern, but it's never a sound and pattern I will want to access when I play, because I always play within the context of a key.

I hope you agree that, with a piece written using a given scale for basic note choice, and if that scale has a p5th in it, then that is found at the the interval of a p5 from the tonal centre used to apply that scale to and to create the tune, its progressions. Etc.

However, once you get into Jazz, it is also helpful to be aware of intervals found against chord types (depending what sound you're after). Often times, these chords are effectively creating their own fleeting tonal centres. Personally, at high speed I can't hear everything and recognise it immediately ... but I can certainly improvise at high speed of thought, knowing interval landing points.

For example, if you listen to Charlie Parker, it's very clear that quite a bit of his playing centres on chords of the moment.

It's all just tools in the toolbox. Whatever works for you.


Right, I personally don't like that sort of jazz, because it changes context too quickly and often, which to me misses the point of music. Or, one of the best parts of music. Like trying to watch tv but someone switches channel every mid sentence.

But even if I did like that sort of music, I would still take a modal approach, and treat every chord like that as its own sort of key, using a scalar framework rather than intervals.

If i go from degree 3 to 7 in C major key, thats a fifth, but that fact is not really pertinent to me. What matters is that it was a 3 and then 7. so naming a fifth did not help me, but naming C major scale did, if you know what I mean. The pattern of the interval from 1-3 or 1-7 also doesn't matter because I never used that fingering. I didn't play 1-3 and 1-7, so that pattern is also not pertinent. I played the 3rd and then 7th note in C major. That's the important part to me.

In that sort CST jazz, I would do the same but on a chord by chord basis, giving each chord its own scalar framework, rather than using the key, but I don't like to play that style of music, so I don't practice that.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 7, 2015,
#13
I say either try to work on songs you like more on own, or you can simply ask him if he will walk you through a song you like. The worst thing that is likely to happen is he will say no. I have students that ask to learn songs all the time. That isn't all we do of course, but I think it's important to keep things fun, learn techniques that they like, and to give the player a sense of accomplishment.
"In the end, it's not the years in your life that count. It's the life in your years."-Abraham Lincoln
#14
@fingrpikingood: I feel like you are not understanding what Jerry is saying.

When Jerry is talking about intervals in his post, he's referring to intervals in relation to the key or the chord. As he said, chord functions are also intervals between the chord root and the tonic. IV chord is a fourth above the tonic. When we talk about scale degrees, we refer to them with interval names. G is the perfect fifth in the key of C. Eb is the minor third. Or in relation to chords - Eb is the minor third of C minor chord.

Also, just because somebody is thinking in chord tones rather than scale degrees, it doesn't necessarily lead to anything strange sounding. I would guess most jazz players think in chord tones. It's not the same as treating every chord as a new key.

To me sometimes it's much easier to think melody in chord tones than in scale degrees. For example if the melody goes like C E G F D B C, I may think it as "C major arpeggio - G7 arpeggio", not as 1 3 5 4 2 7 1. Or I may see it in both ways. But thinking it as two arpeggios is more about thinking the big picture and not just the individual notes.

I rarely think in intervals between two consecutive notes. But harmonic intervals make more sense to me. If there are two melodies, the harmonic intervals between them are quite important.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#15
Quote by MaggaraMarine
@fingrpikingood: I feel like you are not understanding what Jerry is saying.

When Jerry is talking about intervals in his post, he's referring to intervals in relation to the key or the chord. As he said, chord functions are also intervals between the chord root and the tonic. IV chord is a fourth above the tonic. When we talk about scale degrees, we refer to them with interval names. G is the perfect fifth in the key of C. Eb is the minor third. Or in relation to chords - Eb is the minor third of C minor chord.

Also, just because somebody is thinking in chord tones rather than scale degrees, it doesn't necessarily lead to anything strange sounding. I would guess most jazz players think in chord tones. It's not the same as treating every chord as a new key.

To me sometimes it's much easier to think melody in chord tones than in scale degrees. For example if the melody goes like C E G F D B C, I may think it as "C major arpeggio - G7 arpeggio", not as 1 3 5 4 2 7 1. Or I may see it in both ways. But thinking it as two arpeggios is more about thinking the big picture and not just the individual notes.

I rarely think in intervals between two consecutive notes. But harmonic intervals make more sense to me. If there are two melodies, the harmonic intervals between them are quite important.


What started the conversation was interval training. Interval training is naming intervals, giving them a pattern, and naming that interval. That's what it is. A 2 note pattern. It's not important to me for the reasons stated above. I don't see the advantages that interval training would provide me. Granted, a degree is an interval to the tonic, but that doesn't help me want to partake in interval training. I want to train by naming a pattern and its sound, as a thing I can play. Place to put my fingers that has a name and a sound. I don't play the tonic before every degree I play, therefore it is not a pattern with a sound I want to train. I will play a lot of intervals, of course, but the sound of the interval doesn't come from the interval, it comes from the position in the key. So, the pattern and the sound I want to train, is the scale pattern, and the notes within that.

I know what you mean about arpeggios, and I'm kind of like that as well, except, I won't usually think of note names, just "IV chord arpeggiated" kind of thing. For me, everything is named relative to the key, or sorry, actually the key's pattern only, as you know, my degree names are always constant through every mode.

So, I don't have much use for interval training. I never think to myself, "I want to play this interval, or this sound which is this interval." Intervals never come into consideration for me. It's always, " I want to play that note there from the pattern, because I know what that 6th note in the pattern sounds like, and I know how it will sound in contrast to the music playing." What interval away from the tonic it is, or the last note I played makes no difference to me. I know the sound I want, and I know where it is in the pattern. It's like that in any mode for me. The interval to the tonic will change mode to mode, but that's not important to me either. the 6th note in the pattern is always the 6th note in the pattern, and I always know what it is going to sound like, without any reference to any interval. Only in reference to the pattern. Will the 6th sound differently one mode to the next? Sure, in a sense, it has a different role, but that takes care of itself. Because the pattern IS the same, it's just the backdrop relative to it that changed. So it works out on its own. the 6th is still the 6th and still sounds like the 6th in a way, but the context is different.

It's hard to explain I guess, but long story short I don't care about interval training. For me, it would just be more work for gaining a named pattern/sound I would never use.

I care about chords, and the key pattern, and that's it. Aside from pentatonic and harmonic minor, and bits and pieces like secondary dominants etcetera.

Intervals, forget it, aside from chord nomenclature, which will basically teach you that anyway, but you don't need to train the sound, just know how to build the chord, and which note is which part of the chord, that's it. No interval training exercises, because the interval sounds are not useful sounds to access for me. If I play 2 notes at once, it's not a fifth or whatever, it's notes x and y of the scale pattern.

Different people have different approaches, that's what works for me.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 7, 2015,
#16
Quote by anthonymarisc
Perhaps I should expand a bit, my teacher has apparently been doing this over 30 years and supposedly trained a lot of local teachers in the Vegas area. He's definitely a good teacher. My playing has increased leaps and bounds studying under him. What I mean by not teaching me songs is he won't walk me through a song I like. He'd rather I do it on my own. He takes excerpts from all kinds of songs, to elaborate on the concepts he introduces me to.


For me that's all you gotta think about. You gotta use your own time to do what you wanna do. Use your lessons to learn the nitty gritty stuff and use your own practice time studying what you wanna learn. You'll maybe come across ideas that your teacher hasn't explained and you can take those and direct your own learning.

I'd have a good look around the lessons/posts available on here and find out how best to structure your own practice time. You want to direct your own time your own way so that the lessons will compliment your learning. You can have all the theory/technique in the world, if you don't know how to translate it into a song to play it's a pointless exercise.

What songs have you always wanted to learn? What started your urge to play guitar?
#17
Quote by fingrpikingood
The interval to the tonic will change mode to mode, but that's not important to me either. the 6th note in the pattern is always the 6th note in the pattern, and I always know what it is going to sound like, without any reference to any interval. Only in reference to the pattern. Will the 6th sound differently one mode to the next? Sure, in a sense, it has a different role, but that takes care of itself. Because the pattern IS the same, it's just the backdrop relative to it that changed. So it works out on its own. the 6th is still the 6th and still sounds like the 6th in a way, but the context is different.

Oh, of course I forgot this... Yes, now I understand.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#18
Quote by fingrpikingood
What started the conversation was interval training. Interval training is naming intervals, giving them a pattern, and naming that interval. That's what it is. A 2 note pattern.



Don't put words in my mouth. please!

As for writing off Charlie Parker ... Wow. BTW: he didn't play modally ... it's the antithesis of modal playing ... and part the reason why modal playing came about as a reaction.

Do you agree that intervals are the fundamental components that scales and chords are built from?

Do you agree that, if you want to play the #5 in a maj7#5 chord, it helps to know the shape of the #5 relative to the chord root. Or if you want to play a #5 in Lydian Augmented, for example, that knowing that shape from the scale root can help you remember that part of the shape?

But maybe you do just learn each different scale type and its various shapes in isolation of each other ... your call.

However, the resolution tendencies change across scale types (as in your example of a scale with a b6, versus a scale with a 6) and treating both these the same doesn't always work.

It makes no odds to me how you learn ... it does matter to me that newbies can be helped to reduce their learning.
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 8, 2015,
#19
Quote by jerrykramskoy
Don't put words in my mouth. please!

As for writing off Charlie Parker ... Wow. BTW: he didn't play modally ... it's the antithesis of modal playing ... and part the reason why modal playing came about as a reaction.

Do you agree that intervals are the fundamental components that scales and chords are built from?



What started the conversation wasn't words out of your mouth. They were words out of OPs. He said his teacher had him do interval training, I said I wasn't big on that, you said you were, and we are here now.

I actually don't know much of charlie parker specifically, you just said jazz, and the way you spoke about it, I thought you meant modal playing. If you didn't, then I would play charlie parker stuff the same way I play right now.

Do you agree that intervals are the fundamental components that scales and chords are built from?
No. I believe chords are named via intervals, sort of, but more from the pattern. I believe the pattern is a thing on its own, not built from anything, and it possesses intervals. But it is not built from intervals. I don't look at it way. You could definitely, and that's not wrong, but I don't look at it that way.

For me, the sort of most fundamental thing is the key pattern. Chords are named according to that, right? a 7th or 3rd, is not 3 or 7 semitones away from the root, it is 3 or 7 scale degrees away. It's all named relative to that pattern, which is the main important thing to me. A minor 3rd, is a flat major 3rd, but it is also the 3rd note in the minor scale, same for minor 7th.

When you go to build chords on your guitar, you will want to know what is the 7th, and what is the 3rd etcetera, because it makes chords a lot easier. But the real central thing to me, is that pattern, and the other things are drawn out, relative to that. The roman numerals are numbered by the chords that fit into it, and their chord character, like I was saying, is named by a numbering system based on that pattern again. That pattern is the key to everything. So I wouldn't say that "scales are built from fundamental components called intervals", but rather "intervals are derived from the fundamental components called scales." But it's more complicated than that because I don't think "scale" is the right word. They are not derived from pentatonic, or harmonic minor or whole tone. They are derived from "the pattern" essentially, though they are derived from both major and minor. Which I find is a little odd, personally, but it makes sense for naming chords, especially the 2 main chord shapes that are found in the pattern. They did the same with diminished, so you have a diminished fifth, and a diminished 3rd, which would be building a diminished chord with the 1st, 3rd, and 5th note out of the diminished scale. So, the 3 main chords found in the pattern. Augmented is the odd chord character you can't build out of that pattern. It had to be named also, but I don't know what the reasoning might have been for it. But the others all come neatly from the main pattern.


Do you agree that, if you want to play the #5 in a maj7#5 chord, it helps to know the shape of the #5 relative to the chord root. Or if you want to play a #5 in Lydian Augmented, for example, that knowing that shape from the scale root can help you remember that part of the shape?
Yes. The chord thing is useful to me, and for that reason I think knowing chord nomenclature is important. I never think I want to play a #5 in Lydian Augmented, so it is not useful to me for that purpose.

But maybe you do just learn each different scale type and its various shapes in isolation of each other ... your call.
From my perspective, there is only one shape to learn. The 7 modes are all the same pattern. I understand that there can be value, in knowing that if you switch from one mode to another, which degree gets sharpened or flattened, but I don't need that ability, because I don't play modal music.

However, the resolution tendencies change across scale types (as in your example of a scale with a b6, versus a scale with a 6) and treating both these the same doesn't always work.
Yes, but that's ok. I always know how every note sounds, if it is the sound I want, I select it. That might be resolution or not. It doesn't matter to me. I hear the sound, know what it will be, and choose it. That's all I need to be able to do. Know where the sounds are, so I can play them.

I don't need interval training for that. It's not something I would spend time on.

It makes no odds to me how you learn ... it does matter to me that newbies can be helped to reduce their learning.
Me too. For one thing, I am satisfied with my progress in music, and I don't see why others that would like to play in the same sort of style would not be also, by following the same philosophy that I followed. I also clearly mentioned in my original post, that OP should follow the philosophy of their teacher, and not listen to me.

The fact remains though, I think interval training is a waste of time, for me. It might work great for you, and the music you play, or for OP's teacher and the music he plays, or OP and the music he wants to play. But I don't find it valuable, and if I'm teaching you, we will do chord nomenclature, sure. But other than that, we will not have any interval training sessions. Precisely because I want to get to the point of freedom of expression as soon as possible. I'm sure you do as well. We just have different philosophies for doing so.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 8, 2015,
#21
Quote by T.A.Z
For me that's all you gotta think about. You gotta use your own time to do what you wanna do. Use your lessons to learn the nitty gritty stuff and use your own practice time studying what you wanna learn. You'll maybe come across ideas that your teacher hasn't explained and you can take those and direct your own learning.

I'd have a good look around the lessons/posts available on here and find out how best to structure your own practice time. You want to direct your own time your own way so that the lessons will compliment your learning. You can have all the theory/technique in the world, if you don't know how to translate it into a song to play it's a pointless exercise.

What songs have you always wanted to learn? What started your urge to play guitar?



Wanting to be a god lol, no but for real I want lightning fast fingers and to play like Yngwie, Brent Hinds, and just crazy metal/neoclassical stuff.
#22
Quote by anthonymarisc
Wanting to be a god lol, no but for real I want lightning fast fingers and to play like Yngwie, Brent Hinds, and just crazy metal/neoclassical stuff.


I'd pick a song or two that you want to learn and start learning it in your own time. Make sure you start out slow and clean and using a metronome (all the usual stuff) focus on small finger/pick movements to maximize effort (if you watch Malmsteen's playing he doesn't actually move too much or at least it appears that way) and focus on how your going to pick each note, IE on a 3 note per string run maybe use economy picking, sweep pick arpeggio licks etc.

when you go into your lessons you could maybe start asking him to highlight some of the classical scales etc that you'll see a lot of use out of.
#23
Quote by fingrpikingood
What started the conversation wasn't words out of your mouth. They were words out of OPs. He said his teacher had him do interval training, I said I wasn't big on that, you said you were, and we are here now.


In that case, my eyes need washing out, and I apologise to you! But I didn't say I was big on interval training in the sense of just learning them in isolation. Anyway...
#24
Op, you need to bring it up with your teacher. I understand not wanting you to use tab, but is he teaching you songs at all or just analyzing what you learned on you own?

Overtime you will grow out of teachers or just realize that you needed a better or just different teacher.

Also lmao jerry is on point
Last edited by bassalloverthe at Dec 15, 2015,
#25
There's nothing wrong with wanting to learn songs outside of your lessons, and you're right, it's an excellent way to be exposed to things you may not have normally thought to do, even with professional training.

I started with tabs, and over time, my ear's been getting better. If you can, try to find a software like Riff Station. It allows you to slow down a song, and to a degree isolate certain tracks to be easier to hear. I've been using this to try to learn songs by ear, and then checking my progress against other people's tabs.
BLIP