Hope you guys are all well. The time has come to start writing again so the tributes will have to take a back seat indefinitely. I think it’s fair to say there has been nothing better besides EJ to keep me company during the long hiatus. I have learned a lot and it was a very necessary period in my life even if I was scared to walk away from it the first time.
Keep on Righteous!
This was fantastic! You are becoming too powerful 
At first I didn’t even realize that you essentially have no backing track, it’s just you and the drums!!
Hope you’ll still let us hear some of your stuff also in this new phase! Good luck with the new chapter!
Have a long standing question regarding EJ’s pentatonic runs: does he (do you ) usually pick the descending lines and instead hammer-on the ascending stuff?
Brilliant as always! You continue to amaze and inspire.
Thanks Tommo, and I will try to share as always.
As for your question, I just realize it’s something I never really addressed and you had asked me this before, so apologies!
The descending part has really one skeleton (the down down up atom), but my variations employ skipping two strings, repeating 3s & 4s, and sometimes veering into other boxes up or down. The important thing is the mechanical skeleton stays the same so most of the variation is in the note choice actually (and really heavily relies on what rhythm part or phrase I am going to play next- since the pentatonic run itself isn’t the song).
The ascending part is more varied in the sense that I don’t stick to a strict mechanic like I do descending, so sometimes I do consecutive upstrokes with ring finger hammer ons to quickly sweep up the scale (or line), or even employ the same technical tools as I did in descending (but in reverse). I feel more free to experiment with mechanics and more importantly, note choice and rhythm when I do ascending stuff compared to descending. However I feel more technically solid with the latter.
None of these distinctions were planned in advance, but it is perhaps a result of unbalanced technique, my stubbornness (to a large extent), and just happenstance. I also feel that I make less of a distinction between the two than I used to, but go more on feel and the mood of the song.
I always look forward to your EJ covers! Do you take requests? lol! I’d love to see what you do with Trademark. The solo near the end has been a lifelong bucket list item of mine. I just can’t play it at speed. I’ve worked out 2 or 3 possibilities for the fingerings that conform to the USX ‘rules’, I just can’t keep the speed up. I’m not sure if I’m just playing it a way that makes it too hard or what. I’ve checked various live videos to see what he does and just my luck, he always takes the easy way out on that part and doesn’t shred it like he did on the recording haha!
Anyway, I’m digressing and polluting your thread, sorry! Great playing as always!
Hey no problem It will be the first thing on the bucket list if I get sidetracked along the way
Ha I just realized how badly I skim-read things on here. I saw your thread and my eyes were drawn to “Eric Johnson Cover”…for some reason I read the first word as Latest and not Last lol! I didn’t even read anything else you wrote, I just hit play on the video. I’ll officially withdraw my request for Trademark I’ve really enjoyed your covers and I’ll look forward to your originals.
Very good indeed as always! Looking forward to see what you do next.
I 'd like to see if you know these techniques by ear, enough to freely improvise over a chord progression. After all, this Eric Johnson tune “Righteous” is basically Eric Johnson doing just that: improvising over a basically I-IV “blues” progression with some altered changes where the V7 would normally be.
I’m not totally convinced that EJ worked this tune out as a set-in-stone thing; I think there was a degree of improvisation involved, especially on the fast runs. I have that degree of faith in his playing.
So, to really impress me, I’d like to see your attempts at using what you’ve learned from “Righteous” in a different song context, in different keys. If you can juggle these ideas more organically and on-the-fly, then I’ll be even more impressed than I already am.
Nice feel!
BTW, listen carefully to the"main theme" area at 15-20 seconds; I think you’re hearing that wrong, as fourths. My ear caught that, because I’m familiar with the EJ original. EJ is doing something different, with fifths.
Thanks for the kind words.
Given all the variations he plays live, I’m sure you are correct. I have some special soundboard recordings from his near friends and family members and each one is slightly different. As for the studio comp, Ah Via Musicom is notoriously punched in so you are hearing a compilation of different improvs. That’s what he was going for and Richard Mullen even did as much for the vocals on the 2nd half of the CD. That’s the vibe they were going for and to me is not indicative of improvisational ability or anything else.
As for my own take, it’s a tribute and not really meant to be a note for note cover. While I’m not as privy to the details as you may be; I just play what I like and like what I play. So fourths or fifths, they’re all good and I don’t pay much attention to what he specifically played in the studio. What I do know is that I intentionally play it that way.
I’m not even sure what I learned from Righteous to be honest since I was just rehashing phrases I already knew how to play. The song is in F, a relatively common key in Eric’s playing and an easy way to play all the pentatonic shapes across one octave.
I don’t know why or how I would impress you but perhaps those improvs you ask of are already on my youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/user/Glpdb/videos). They are explicitly titled, “in the style of EJ.” They are almost always over a single chord drone, which is not unlike how I would approach a chord progression. There’s also an improv over Lonely in the Night which most people are familiar with as well.
Perhaps some confusion arises from how we fundamentally think of improvisation (especially in the context of this kind of playing). It’s not rocket science and thankfully so because I wouldn’t be any good at it otherwise.
I thought it was a “cover” of Righteous, per your title, not just a tribute, and I wondered if you heard the deviation from the original at 15-20 seconds. If you played that part exactly like EJ there would be no question in what you hear. I hear the difference, and it caught my attention immediately, since this is part of the “main” theme of the song which EJ does not vary from harmonically. The single note runs are where the improvisation could come in.
If this is the way you want to play it, go ahead and play it that way. I just wondered if you could hear what I’m talking about, at :15-20.
Then I’ll go to YouTube and listen to you there.
Apologies for misleading you then. To me the vernacular means just an interpretation and not necessarily a legally binding note for note obligation. Eric plays a lot of Beatles, Hendrix, and Simon & Garfunkel covers which are also harmonically vastly different (especially One Rainy Wish), and I especially enjoy such forms of freeform interpretation. I wish to do it more.
As such, the fourth change was very intentional to the degree that I deliberately chose those particular chord shapes. Another change I intended was the rhythmic swing (which was the greatest deviation actually), parts of the lead and the interpretation of the harmonica solo, which he doesn’t render live).
The more I play, the less I worry about exact note syntax, but I think that’s where patterns and common idioms and general melodic sense come in. For the most part, the phrases are easily transposable which is a big reason why I like playing the guitar. Less thinking and more playing.
Appreciate the interaction.
To me, the notes Eric used in the “theme” were important to the identity of the song, and when I heard your version with changes, I immediately noticed the difference. Instead of descending fourths, he plays a fifth.
A fourth is heard as ‘root’ on top, melodic in nature, whereas a fifth is heard as ‘root’ on bottom, harmonic in nature. Eric’s original version makes the harmonic progression clearer to my ear, no thinking involved, and I don’t consider it to be a “linear” statement, but as part of the harmonic structure. Since fourths are inversions of fifths, I see no substantial harmonic change in your version; only that you are thinking linearly where you should be thinking harmonically, because this “main theme” is essentially a harmonic statement of the implied progression.
I don’t mind harmonic deviations as long as they sound like convincing revisions and not unintentional oversights.
I subscribed to your YouTube channel.
Makes sense that you would be invested in its interpretation since you call it an important theme while I hardly considered it a theme at all, even if theory says it may be.
In the way I play, there is no “should” as long as I like it and it sounds fine, even if different. As long as I am okay with that I’m not too invested in how theory says I should play. It’s rather interesting that this stuff comes back should you mention it but at the time it was a tonal choice and I had no idea we’d be discussing this microscopically months down the road.
I would in fact just love to admit I heard it wrong and played it wrong and give you the satisfaction and closure (since it would answer the question) but aside from that I don’t know what else to offer as an explanation for those chords.
I get the feeling that you’re not satisfied with my pedestrian answer but really there is nothing more substantial than the reason that I wanted to play them differently and I liked them enough to move on. And at the time, the theoretical distinction between these two things were the last thing on my mind. I suspect such dilemmas will be treated with the same level of indifference should a similar situation arise in the future.
Probably worse sins are committed in my cover of Pavilion but I would do it all the same. That’s just how I am. I probably commit grave sins regarding efficient picking and digit cycling (I hear that’s a thing too) as well because well, I gravitate towards them for some odd non-theoretical reason.
Of course, people are free to dislike that and prefer other things. I have no problem with that at all. Where I might raise a slight objection with that is the assumption that the reason for being different was due to a blatant disregard for theory or an attempt to sabotage the original, or that I couldn’t hear it. I heard it very well then and I hear it even better now 