Fretboard Mechanics

[Ernest_W_Retallack]

So, I’ve noticed there’s some controversy out there about fretboard organization, CAGED and 3nps camps arguing about which is best. Personally, I find this whole thing being a bit silly, since if something works for someone then this is self evident.And also whatever works for me might not work for someone else, and vice versa.
I wonder, then, what works for you guys? How you apply all the stuff you need on the fretboard? Are you faithful to one system that gets you through every time or you feel there are certain shortcomings that make you modify, expand or switch to another type of organization?

Here’s my tale: when I first started, I was taught what we now call CAGED. I remember spending a whole summer when I was 15 going up and down the shapes in every key. I had great time with those for a few years. Later, as I was getting deeper into jazz I remember I had the feeling that something was missing. I believe it was after getting a Ted Green’s book about single note playing that I started practicing what eventually was the 12 position system. By the time I stumble upon Advancing Guitarist I was already deep in that, but Goodrick’s book added still another dimension-that of playing up and down on a single and pair of strings. So, for many years I practiced all the material I was dealing with in positions-all scales, all arpeggios, patterns, intervals, playing through changes-while at the same time being aware that an entire wave of players used to great effect the 3nps approach, something that initially seemed just like another way of navigating the fretboard, but progressively I realized there were some advantages in the mechanical domain. Hmmm, how interesting…
Eventually, observing how my picking technique was coming together-what worked and what didn’t-and having a wide variety of fingering options for all material-12 position system and playing up and down on single strings does that to you-I started selecting those that made my picking hand feel natural. I realized that, the more consistent my picking hand mechanics were-in terms of string crossing-the easier and faster I could play. So, I started aiming for that consistency, sticking with fingerings that enable my pick to operate in a predictable, symmetrical fashion-2,3,4nps depending on the line at hand and often switching from one to another.
So, the way I see things now, I let the material dictate the fingering. Say, if it’s a descending bebop scale, I’ll do it 4nps. If it’s a series of 3 note quintal arpeggios, I’ll finger them in adjacent string shapes and move those around using hybrid picking. If it’s pentatonic I’ll do 2 or 3 nps, depending on the line. And so on…

So, what’s your tale guys?

[JakeEstner]

Hey Ernest

It’s a good topic

I strongly think we have to divide up the issues you presented into two pieces:

1. Knowing locations of notes/keys/arpeggios etc

2. Efficient ‘location selection’ for the physical (speed/technique/whatever you want to call) execution of the material we are playing

And then our ‘fretboard system’ would help us with these two separate issues, and they are two very different things.

In improvising, especially over key changes and such, we have to know where the notes we want are, so that means we need a system that allows us to ‘see’ all the keys (or whatever it is we are looking for.) To me, this is independent of playing techniques; we need to see this stuff whether we’re tapping or playing with one left hand finger or using a slide or sweeping or whatever

Then in terms of executing the line, whether it’s 3nps or 2nps or cage or what have you, that consistency only holds up in a playing context if what we’re playing is really predictable scale patterns…and EVEN then, scale patterns often don’t have the same number of notes per string anyway (unless we arrange them that way or are intentionally trying to make them that way, but that depends a bit on what kind of melodic material you play when improvising. If there’s a wide mix of intervals and directions (say in something like a charlie parker solo) then I feel like the fingering system is going to change line to line, measure to measure, just to adapt to what sounds best and is easy to play on each line.

Personally I use CAGE as a jumping off point for the issue of knowing locations but for #2 above, I don’t advocate a fingering system but rather finding what makes the particular line sound best and be easiest to play, and I’ve found that can vary quite a lot, not just with notes-per-string but also ascending/descending issues and interval width.

For example, here’s a jagged line based on “three notes per string” but because of the ascending/descending and interval width i’m not sure if the 3nps layout really helps us in the way we normally think it does

Not saying any system is better than any other system, more so just saying that we need a system for fretboard visualize and probably different sets of systems for ‘location arrangement’ for actual execution of lines. And then of course those things have to be merged together in real time for improvisation where we have to both find our notes and execute them effectively at the same time.

[Ernest_W_Retallack]

Hey Jake, thanks for your post.
I’m totally with you, and you really nailed what I’m trying to say. The way it worked for me it’s, learning to navigate through different systems, meaning learning the location of the notes etc, made it much easier to select those that better suit a specific line and taking into account my preferred picking mechanics. And this is something that has changed a few times through the years. For me, being familiar with several systems of fretboard visualization works great in the direction of eventually using just the music as a guide.
Say, in the example you posted, I would locate the triad units-G, Dm, Em-and work the fingerings around them, depending on my technique of choice-if I was to use hybrid I would fingering them on three adjacent strings, if I wanted to go legato I would probably use a different fingering etc.

[JakeEstner]

yeah we’re definitely in agreement! It’s amazing that people get so twisted into knots over fretboard systems. Once we’re playing real music the systems go out the window fairly quickly.

[RockStarJazzCat]

yeah we’re definitely in agreement! It’s amazing that people get so twisted into knots over fretboard systems. Once we’re playing real music the systems go out the window fairly quickly.

Amen.

This came up on the Frank Gambale video announcement and I wrote at length last night about the subject. Here I am this morning, sleep deprived at work, hearing a Charlie Parker phrase in my head from a tune that I’m working on with a fellow Masters in Mechanics subscriber, ruminating about where the holes are in the phrase that keep me from joining sections efficiently and musically… Screw where it lays on the neck. If I can’t sing it (read: really hear it) and know what I’m singing, I don’t really own it.

For me, being familiar with several systems of fretboard visualization works great in the direction of eventually using just the music as a guide.

Exactly!

[RockStarJazzCat]

For example, here’s a jagged line based on “three notes per string” but because of the ascending/descending and interval width i’m not sure if the 3nps layout really helps us in the way we normally think it does

It’s these real world lines that reveal the limitations of the systems for sure.

In practice I’ll use my chromatic framework as the default for location choice, because I really don’t want to worry about where to play a note. Sometimes it won’t be the easiest way to play something, but I recognize that these decisions come up over and over again and I think there is value in working out the problems of the moment. I save the energy spent perfecting location by playing a phrase in several keys (some of which point to easier fingerings), keeping the emphasis on the musicality and facility with the same in performance.

I get more from the following than a given tab…

9 5 8 4 6 8 7 4 3

Interval sequencing 9 5, 8 4.
Ascend by thirds 4 6 8
Return to the eleventh by way of the seventh 8 7 4
Leading into the 3.

With the roadmap of a melodic fragment, I thus have scaffolding to reproduce the phrase in other contexts.

(and please forgive any typos if I’ve made any, thanks)

[AGTG]

I’m a theory newb. Here’s what I’ve found in my recent delve into trying to figure out what “system” is best:

Playing modes and 3nps scales is kind of like throwing the dart and always hitting the board. That root note tonic is always nearby to resolve to, and will get you points, but it’s not hitting the bullseye regularly, and lacks the melody of the chord progression it’s overlaying.

Playing CAGED is like hitting the bullseye with every shift of the melody, and adds an element to soloing that is very, very pleasing to the listener’s ear. This is harder for me to develop speed at as I’ve not seen the wide-open opportunities for note quantity that is available for 3nps scales, though the quality is surely higher.

Ultimately, it seems a mix of the two will bring me closer to what I want to be as a lead guitarist. My progress is slow, though, and busy chord progressions are too high for me.

I just finished riffing over a two chord backing track, though. I’ve also been working at developing chord scales in addition to practicing chord arppeggios.

[RockStarJazzCat]

Ultimately, it seems a mix of the two will bring me closer to what I want to be as a lead guitarist. My progress is slow, though, and busy chord progressions are too high for me.

Where do you want to be as a lead guitarist? The non-newbie-to-theory folks are making some observations here about the limitations of those systems with regard to advanced improvisation.

I can only speak for myself, but I wouldn’t want another guitarist to have to struggle due to an incomplete or flawed picture of how this all works.

[RockStarJazzCat]

@JakeEstner, with regard to your point about location and location selection, here’s how your example lays within the FordScales Chromatic Approach, and I’ve added extra bars to demonstrate the same phrase over Ebm7.

So in this case, the location selection is automatic (at least for improvisation practice and sight reading purposes), while the melodic shape ascends by a half-step.

And for what it’s worth, when I entered the first bar, I did so from memory based on the map I outlined previously.

And for the ear training fanatics, here is the phrase expressed in solfege terms with regard to the root of the chord. (Alternatively one may sing in the related key D dorian --> C major, in which case no syllables for accidentals are required. Or, relative to the parent key of the entire tune, whatever that may be. Whatever the need and context.)

re so do fa la do te fa me do so re fa la do

Peace out.