Knappsack by Steve Vai is a great example of music over picking style

Harmony & Theory
#21

The thing I don’t like with shapes is it’s ignoring the simplicity of the scale. It’s the whole challenge I faced in trying to learn the guitar. It’s a mess. But only because I was never showed how simple it really is.
I know you know this so not implying you don’t, but for sake of argument,
All that on the neck is just a very simple scale in lots of octaves. Shape playing blinds you to this, as you’re not thinking about the scale anymore, you’re visualizing various chunks of the guitar as isolated patterns to play, like that classic bb king box pattern. The way the guitar is laid out is a massive trap if you’re thinking in patterns.

The only pattern that should be on your mind, and ofcourse eventually automatic and not thinking of a pattern at all eventually. Is the single whole whole half etc… or whatever scale you’re using, a high level player on any instrument should be able to talk with their instrument.

A perfect example is the keyboard, the one for computers, none of us learned patterns to communicate using it, and we don’t look at it as a bunch of patterns. It becomes second nature. An instrument to communicate.

1 Like
#22

One could argue that the words we are typing on the computer keyboard are the “patterns” we are utilizing. It’s improvised in the sense that you may be coming up with what to say in the spot, but your hands already have that worked out on the keyboard. I think if you truly want to be improvise on the fly, it’s a combination of knowing some shapes and having an insanely good ear. I’m positive even the best players have musical vocabulary worked out on their instruments ahead of time because that’s the only way to really play it with confidence in the heat of the moment. I don’t have a link for this, but I’ve definitely heard it before that Eric Johnson (who is very creative on the guitar but definitely uses shapes) only plays licks he’s confident playing live because that allows him to play assertively and not fumble around guessing on the neck. That’s not verbatim and I prob messed up his quote, but it’s something along those lines lol

1 Like
#23

That’s a lot to think about when improvising. Even on piano, sight reading, you don’t read every note as such. There isn’t time to do that. You memorise shapes and intervals.
Also improvising on piano, you don’t play shapes the same way as on guitar, but do tend to memorise how many and where are the black keys in this scale or key.

#24

That’s a great point. In piano, when playing scales/arpeggios there are a defined set of rules as to when to “cross” fingers. [considering the right hand] The thumb either tucks underneath the other fingers to shift when ascending, and when descending the other fingers will cross over top of the thumb to shift. There are different rules as to where in the scale/arpeggio this has to happen, due to the black keys. So, linear as the piano may be, we’re really back to geometry. There are a lot of patterns that get reused, like we have in guitar. But then, some are outliers that have to be refingered. Ex: C major and D major have the same fingerings, but C# major has a different set of fingerings because it starts on a black key BUT D# major has yet a different fingering

(C major is at 4:10, D major is at 6:10, C# major is at 12:26 D# major is at 14:28)

Arpeggios will have similar considerations, where there are groups of the same fingerings, and outliers. So there are rules. You can’t just play whatever fingering you want at a high tempo or you’ll hit a brick wall. When the musicians improvise (or sight reading as @jptk mentioned), they are visualizing shapes and executing what they’ve practiced.

What I’m really interested in is how elite musicians that play instruments where there’s no concept of geometry (or I guess a wildly different concept of geometry than I’m thinking of) actually “think” about all this stuff. For example, trumpet. The little bit I know about that instrument is that you have 3 valves and notes are made by various combinations of pressing (or not pressing or partially pressing) the valves, combined with how tight the embouchure (mouth) is. For example, if you’re pressing no valves, you can still get several different pitches by just changing the pressure of your mouth. Ug. So how on earth would a jazz trumpet player “think” when they improvise? Do they just have a huge bucket of licks, in all the keys? Because unlike guitar (or piano, with the caveats mentioned above), you wouldn’t “finger” an ascending three note chromatic lick the same in all keys, just starting on a different spot. Each would be a totally different combination of keys and embouchure.

1 Like
#25

Words on a keyboard are not patterns, it’s a language, a syntax. The same as music.

Sure there are patters there, but that an incrediblely superficial way to look at it. There’s an actual fluid alive nature to this that goes beyond the construction of words or musical phrases.

The whole is greater than the sum of its parts right…

#26

I think we’re talking about the same thing.
It’s not a lot to think about as you don’t think about it, you learn it correctly and it becomes second nature. Just like you said basically. But it’s still not a pattern when put into use, it’s a language.

#27

Well, as I typed in the other replies it’s still not patterns, it’s a language. Yes you learn a basic pattern or structure at first, thats the first beginner level, but such a huge number of guitarists literally stay at that level, without thinking about the underlying concepts. Licks are a perfect example, we learn them, but we don’t have a clue whats going on beyond just repeating a pattern. Licks, patterns, boxes, positions, they are all lazy ways to not actually learn music and just jerk off. And I’ve done a fair ammount of that and it gets you nowhere. Fun tho.

#28

What’s not patterns? Scales and arpeggios on the piano? Or whatever a jazz trumpet player is doing?

#29

All of it. When you use your voice are you playing a pattern? Or are you communicating a deeper meaning? With an intuitive grasp of the language you don’t play patterns, you amplify the thoughts and concepts, emotions in your mind into a communication.

Looking at language or music on a surface level of patterns is just like when Bruce Lee points to the moon and the student looks at his finger.

Elite musicians are talking, not playing an A major pattern. Their inner voice is connected to the instrument.

It’s also why we forget patterns and songs so much, because that pattern that you learn to play a song intro or lick has no deeper connection, it’s literally just memorizing some random pattern that you don’t understand. It’s not got enough connections/associations in the brain to stick around.

One thing I been intrested in is how fast I learnt to type, I might not be the best at it and use it to talk nonsense regularly I’m sure. But it took a few weeks to get pretty comfortable. Vs guitar which is taking years. And thats because I already understood the basics of language, where as with guitar I picked it up the same time I started learning music, and the guitar is a terrible instrument to learn music on. There’s too much going on, just like that picture of Alan’s neck, and thats why people go for patterns and boxes etc, to make it easier to play, but it’s the totally wrong way to go about it, music is sooo simple if it’s explained correctly and in the proper order. Far more simple than English.

If I learnt music the right way before picking up the guitar, I’d be so much of a better player right now.

Can’t go fast if you don’t know where you’re going.

#30

Here’s a relevant excerpt from a very old Chick Corea article entitled The Myth of Improvisation, emphasis added by myself.

'There’s a mysteriousness that surrounds improvisation. There seems to be some element present in the playing of the music that isn’t known about. But it’s really very sim­ple. A musician learns his instrument and his art form, learns about melody and harmony and rhythm, and this gives him a certain knowledge of music. But for him to be able to con­trol his music, he has to be able to imagine a piece: he has to be able to conceive how it will sound before he ever plays it. This is the only way he can make that piece of music be that piece of music, and not some other piece of music.

So with improvisation, he conceives of and controls some of the aspects of what he’s going to play before he starts, but other aspects he decides to not know about. In bebop, for example, there is a chord progression which follows, say, a 32-bar form. The chords are very predictable, so that’s not improvised; and the player knows that there are certain notes that fit into certain chords, and he knows he’ll use those notes, so that’s not improvised. What happens is that he takes certain fragments of melodic phrases and strings them together. And they’re usually fragments that he already knows. If he didn’t, he wouldn’t be able to execute them on his instrument. Obviously, those fragments are what people started referring to as licks.

The thing I’ve discovered is that the better the improviser gets at what he’s doing, the more he’s able to predict the shape of the longer phrase. He can predict whole four or eight or sixteen bar units before he plays them. He just decides before he starts a particular chorus that he’s going to do such-and-such.’

3 Likes
#31

“You have to know where you’re going”

Good music has intentionality. A telos. A purpose. Hal Galpert called it Forward Motion.

This is far afield from mere left hand mechanics, but of course coordination is contingent upon this intention. I.e. if you don’t know what you’re trying to say, the words won’t come out right.

A few other thoughts:

If A.I. has taught us anything, it’s that hands are hard.

The major practices that have improved my music have been meditation, and “practicing in my head”, especially in bed before falling asleep.

There is a video titled “my first week learning touch guitar” that has some golden exercises for the left hand. As a 20 year neck-squeezer, they helped me quite a bit.

#32

I agree.

Tho I disagree with the lick idea as being improvisation, most people, me included right now, don’t understand whats going on with a lot of their licks and just mindlessly play it. There’s a disconnect between legit improv and lick playing, people run out of licks fast. True improvisation in my opinion is what most of us can do with our vocals. We are all high level vocalists. Perhaps we can’t all sing well, but I’m pretty sure most of us can vocalize whats in our head to a far greater degree than we currently can on the instrument.

Improvisation isn’t planned, it’s felt. Mike Tyson said it well, everyone’s got a plan untill they get punched in the face.

#33

I need to start doing practice in my head again, my discipline is pretty poor… I have read that you learn things best just before bed too, what do you do in your head?

#34

Practice.

I don’t mean to sound glib, that’s just the best way to describe it. “Imagine” isn’t quite the right word because it seems to evoke an imagistic process, but it’s mostly feeling and hearing for me. Usually it’s just a piece I’ve been working on that day.

You can find scholarly work on this concept by searching for “mental practice”. I read an old book on it years ago.

1 Like
#35

I’ll have a search. One thing I struggled with a lot is it often felt like waving your hands around in the dark trying to grab onto nothing you know. I think it’s just because I started this later in life I’ve no foundation for ear training, got to build it just through repetition like you say.

One technique I did was doing the practice while riding my bike, apparently going through environments increases memory associations. Plus the cardio does that too, apparently just like before bed, if you do cardio after studying it helps solidify the memories.

Also on phycadelics and at times weed it massively increases my playing but also note recognition, or more relative pitch. Increasing neurotransmitters really is the key to learning. Shame it’s often so hard to get.

#36

I agree with Tom 100%.

Not because I’ve taken lessons from him - but because his lessons work.

I agree that right hand technique allows more gains than left hand.

But once the right hand is dealt with…the left hand lags behind right quick. Like the world before CtC, traditional left hand teaching ignores many basic realities and some of it is flat out wrong.

Tom explained the myth of finger independence. He can articulate it much better than I ever will. Simply put - it doesn’t actually exist because at the structural level (the way the hand is build), it can’t.

Some of what Tom teaches flies directly in the face of long-standing tradition.

All I know is that by listening to Tom, I made more progress in two months with my left (and right) hands than I had in the previous two years the ‘normal’ way…and that is not an exaggeration.

1 Like
#37

I’ll join you at his trial, testifying on his behalf, when he’s prosecuted for heresy. Sometimes conventional wisdom isn’t really all that wise after all lol! Much like I follow Troy in most things, I’ll listen to what Tom says and stop only at the point either of them tells me I need to drink some Kool Aid to really progress. These are smart guys that have, in my mind, clearly proven theories that do work.

2 Likes
#38

What do you mean about finger independence? The tendon that connects the middle and ring?

#39

As I said, Tom explains it far more thoroughly.

Every finger is connected to the other by a tendon. The affect varies, with the pinky and ring fingers the most obvious. Additionally, the ring and pinky share the same nerve (ulnar), limiting them even more.

#40

As far as I’m aware only the middle and ring are connected, the rest are separate. Is there’s any link you can point me to that says they are all connected?

And I think they are only connected in one way, that being the extensor muscles. I’ll have to search again to confirm that, but I’ve looked into this years ago