Improvising - Fingerstyle

[Mr. Jelly]

Originally Posted by rick-slo

Does noodling count as improvising? Does practicing chord inversion locations and scales count as improvising? Do mistakes count if they suit your ears?
Though I do think you can take advantage of these sort of things to use later on within the context of an actual tune.

To my way of thinking I would say yes it is improvising. Only without attitude :-).

[mr. beaumont]

Originally Posted by Looburst

It's certainly not rocket science. The first thing you need to do is to learn triads, or thirds up the neck. These are three note chords that can be played up the neck by switching or inverting those three notes to where they're in different positions.

In other words, let's take an A chord, now play it up the neck, at the 5th and 6th frets by using your index finger to lay across the first three highest strings at the 5th fret, E, B and G strings, then take your middle finger and depress the G string on the 6th fret. That's a triad of A, up the neck. If you also add the third finger at the 7th fret D string, that's a fully strummed A chord too.

One more, now take the fingering you would use for a D chord and slide it all the way up to the 9th and 10th frets, that's another triad of A! There are many of these in every key, you just have to know how to find them.
There ended the lesson!

Yeah, job #1 is this.

Really, stop viewing chords as "shapes" and start seeing them as "pools of notes." It's totally liberating.

[s0cks]

Originally Posted by Looburst

It's certainly not rocket science. The first thing you need to do is to learn triads, or thirds up the neck. These are three note chords that can be played up the neck by switching or inverting those three notes to where they're in different positions.

In other words, let's take an A chord, now play it up the neck, at the 5th and 6th frets by using your index finger to lay across the first three highest strings at the 5th fret, E, B and G strings, then take your middle finger and depress the G string on the 6th fret. That's a triad of A, up the neck. If you also add the third finger at the 7th fret D string, that's a fully strummed A chord too.

One more, now take the fingering you would use for a D chord and slide it all the way up to the 9th and 10th frets, that's another triad of A! There are many of these in every key, you just have to know how to find them.
There ended the lesson!

Yes. I understand triads. Well... when I say I understand them I understand how they are constructed. I actually started messing with them last night, doing some voice-leading. I made a great chord progression using only 4 note chords (basically triads with an added bass root note).

Honestly, this is what it is all about. It's so much more fun making your own music. There were some fingerings I haven't used before, so I need to practice. But I much prefer doing in the context of my own music. It feels good to be making up my own stuff.

I think my problem was that I was too focused on 5 or 6 string chords. Probably because I've done a lot of travis picking songs which take advantage of those extra bass notes. Not to say you can't travis pick on just 4 strings, but the extra strings fill it out a bit more.

In answer to a few other questions. I'm not particularly fond of blues or jazz. I prefer more contemporary fingerstyle. It's odd, because I never actually grew up liking fingerstyle music. I just happened to come across travis picking, gave it a go for fun, and fell in love with the fact I could play any two or 3 strings at once. I'm certainly not beholden to travis style though.

[Looburst]

Right you are, Jeff! Forget bass lines and start opening up to three and sometimes four note chords. You also need to learn, (if you don't already know), where all the octaves are. This will also help you up and down the neck.

Socks, if you're interested in great finger style stuff check out Mark Goldenberg. He is a top session guy in LA and also has played live with many different artists including Jackson Browne. There's stuff all over youtube of his playing, as well with Eric Skye

Then you'll start understanding the whole ringing of notes into other notes, don't get started down that road. You have to be able to hear what it can be to go there.

[TBman]

I do a little improvising, usually in E (see below for an example). I mainly stay in E, but I've begun to branch out and dabble in C as well now. I keep it simple, using mostly I IV and V with pentatonic runs mixed in.

[Pitar]

Quick question -

Can we source, study and implement reference guides on improvisation and still be thinking improvisation?

If so, my definition must be archaic.

I used to scratch build flying balsa wood R/C airplanes. I drew my own plans, cut out my own parts from those plans and then assembled the airplanes. From there I'd fit my radio gear and control surfaces, and install the engine, etc. I'd make all my own hinges and linkages and in the case of one particular airplane, designed and machined my own retractable landing gear. This was the old days when scratch building meant, like grandma's buttermilk biscuits, truly made from scratch. These days people in the hobby buy pre-cut kits of parts cut from plans they buy and assemble, and call it scratch building.

Improvisation is truly a singular person's take on a piece of music that exhibits his own sense of melody utilizing the skills set he's developed and all without outside influence involved to effect the piece.

With outside guidance and influence it's like taking a trip across country following your nose to blaze new trails with a map in the car.

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by Pitar

Quick question -

Can we source, study and implement reference guides on improvisation and still be thinking improvisation?

Of course. If we want to claim that one is only improvising if you've done zero prep, then you'd need to hand an instrument to someone who has never played, and never listened to music. Then they could truly make something up with no previous reference. I tried to make the point in my earlier post that there's a broad range of what people consider improvising - it can mean anything from varying a few notes in an otherwise learned piece, to total free form flow-of conciousness. So you'd have to know what someone means by the word. I'm not sure what the OP meant by it.

I tend to think of improvising in a way that is a lot like giving an extemporaneous speech, whether that's a formal speech, or just when someone strikes up a conversation with you or asks a question and you have to answer on the spot. Unless you have pre-rehearsed the exact words you use, then you will be "improvising" what you say. That doesn't mean you don't have an idea of the point you want to get across, it doesn't mean you haven't studied grammar in school. In fact, you will likely use words and even entire phrases you've used many times, but will be improvising the exact order in which you say them, the emotion and emphasis you place of various words, and so on, all in an effort to communicate an idea (which has probably also been previously formed).

But that's just how I think of musical improvisation, and clearly there can be many definitions, since it's an art. But I think most improvisors who are interesting to listen to have a set of things they have studied and that they can draw on - improvisers often refer to having a "vocabulary", phrases they know how to apply and manipulate to get across what they want to "say" in their performance. Players who don't have a vocabulary tend to sound random, just as someone who hasn't learned the rules of grammar (formally or informally), and can be hard to listen to because they don't make much sense (to me, at least)

BTW, thanks to an earlier poster for the link to the book on improvising for classical and fingerstyle. Seems to be back ordered, but I have it on order. It'll be interesting to see what it has to offer.

[SprintBob]

This thread is an example of why I enjoy this forum, lots of great info here.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Of course. If we want to claim that one is only improvising if you've done zero prep, then you'd need to hand an instrument to someone who has never played, and never listened to music. Then they could truly make something up with no previous reference. I tried to make the point in my earlier post that there's a broad range of what people consider improvising - it can mean anything from varying a few notes in an otherwise learned piece, to total free form flow-of conciousness. So you'd have to know what someone means by the word. I'm not sure what the OP meant by it.

I tend to think of improvising in a way that is a lot like giving an extemporaneous speech, whether that's a formal speech, or just when someone strikes up a conversation with you or asks a question and you have to answer on the spot. Unless you have pre-rehearsed the exact words you use, then you will be "improvising" what you say. That doesn't mean you don't have an idea of the point you want to get across, it doesn't mean you haven't studied grammar in school. In fact, you will likely use words and even entire phrases you've used many times, but will be improvising the exact order in which you say them, the emotion and emphasis you place of various words, and so on, all in an effort to communicate an idea (which has probably also been previously formed).

But that's just how I think of musical improvisation, and clearly there can be many definitions, since it's an art. But I think most improvisors who are interesting to listen to have a set of things they have studied and that they can draw on - improvisers often refer to having a "vocabulary", phrases they know how to apply and manipulate to get across what they want to "say" in their performance. Players who don't have a vocabulary tend to sound random, just as someone who hasn't learned the rules of grammar (formally or informally), and can be hard to listen to because they don't make much sense (to me, at least)

BTW, thanks to an earlier poster for the link to the book on improvising for classical and fingerstyle. Seems to be back ordered, but I have it on order. It'll be interesting to see what it has to offer.

When I ordered it, I was also informed that it was "back ordered". However, when I got it, it certainly looks like one of those print on demand books. I think it took about 2 or 3 weeks to get it.

By the way, I fully agree with your assessment of improvising. You have to have a vocabulary to speak in every day conversation, or post in these forums. Music truly is a language and we use it to improvise in the same way as casual conversation. In fact, when playing in a musical ensemble in which the players are not playing strictly from sheet music, the performance is a conversation between the musicians. I am currently in that situation, and have been many times in the past. I never liked those strict musical situations in which every note played is dictated. Instead, give us a lead sheet (at most) and trust us to have the vocabulary to interpret it. Out of that comes the musical conversation between players. that is the situation I do best in, and fortunately, I seem to have no trouble finding those situations to participate in.

Tony

[Seby]

Hooray for this thread! That is all : )

[Seby]

Hi!

Just dropping in to say that his thread is still awesome : )

Seeya!

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by tbeltrans

When I ordered it, I was also informed that it was "back ordered". However, when I got it, it certainly looks like one of those print on demand books. I think it took about 2 or 3 weeks to get it.

I just got my ordered copy. It's not quite what I expected, but looks quite good nevertheless. I read thru the first few sections last night, looking forward to the rest.

[EllaMom]

Originally Posted by mr. beaumont

Yeah, job #1 is this.

Really, stop viewing chords as "shapes" and start seeing them as "pools of notes." It's totally liberating.

I LOVE this: viewing chords as pools of notes. Now I just have to go fishing for the right notes to create the pools I want to play.

[M Hayden]

Ted Greene's "Modern Chord Progressions" is useful for improvising, as it provides suggestions and possibilities for voice leading, and chord forms that offer ways forward.

If you prefer video, Joe Pass did a great video called "Solo Jazz Guitar" some years ago where he shows a couple of ways to play through rhythm changes, and they open possibilities in terms of chord forms and voicings you might not have gotten on your own. I really like this....

Here's a taste (it's totally worth the cost) of what the video provides:

Basic changes:
Cmaj7: X3245X or X34343
A-7: 5X5555 (1st string hammered on to 7th fret to become an A-9)
D-11: X57585
G13: 3X345X

One variation, which moves it towards a dominant flavor
E7#9: X7678X
A13: 5X567X
D7#9: X5456X
G13: 3X345X

Another variation, subbing an E-11 for the Cmaj7:
E-11: X7778X
A-9: 5X5557
D-11: X57585
G13: 3X345X

Another:
Cmaj7: X3243X
A-9: X0200X
D-9: XX0320
G7b9: 3X3100

Another:
Cmaj7: X3243X
A9#5: XX5667 # Changes to dominant
D-11: X57585
G13: 3X345X

Lists of different chords he subs in for the Cmajor:
E-7: X7978X
E7#9: X7678X
E7#9: 0X678X

Some subs for the A7 (e.g. dominant flavor):
A13: XX5677
A+v9: XX5666
A13b9: XX5676
A13#9: XX5678
A7#5#9: XX5668

For the D-11, he subs in the following dominants sometimes:
D9: X5455X
D13: X54557 (note that this can also sub for the G dominant)


Net-net, he walks you through how he constructs his lines using chords, and it's pretty amazing, especially when he discusses how he thinks about chords and what can reasonably sub in for them.

[JonPR]

Originally Posted by Pitar

Quick question -

Can we source, study and implement reference guides on improvisation and still be thinking improvisation?

If so, my definition must be archaic.

I used to scratch build flying balsa wood R/C airplanes. I drew my own plans, cut out my own parts from those plans and then assembled the airplanes. From there I'd fit my radio gear and control surfaces, and install the engine, etc. I'd make all my own hinges and linkages and in the case of one particular airplane, designed and machined my own retractable landing gear. This was the old days when scratch building meant, like grandma's buttermilk biscuits, truly made from scratch. These days people in the hobby buy pre-cut kits of parts cut from plans they buy and assemble, and call it scratch building.

Improvisation is truly a singular person's take on a piece of music that exhibits his own sense of melody utilizing the skills set he's developed and all without outside influence involved to effect the piece.

With outside guidance and influence it's like taking a trip across country following your nose to blaze new trails with a map in the car.

Your model plane analogy is quite good, but you're ignoring how much you know/knew (maybe subconsciously) about how planes work. There are fundamental things (shape, weight etc) which dictate whether it will actually fly or not, in the first place, before any decisions about design or power. You might not have read books on it, but you know what planes look like, including the possible shape variations which can still fly, and you probably wouldn't try a new shape unless you'd seen it fly - unless you were prepared for it not to work.

Improvisation in music is really very similar. It's a combination of things we know consciously and subconsciously. We invent as we go, but always within very limited parameters, appropriate for the song or style we're playing in. We know what will sound "wrong", but we also know that a variety of things will sound "right", and we choose between any of those. E.g, you'd tune your guitar before you play, because it would sound wrong if you didn't. You take that for granted, just as you take it for granted that a plane needs wings (otherwise it's just something you throw ). Then, out of the 12 possible tuned notes, you select the ones contained in the tune you're playing over (as given by its chords and melody). You'll even make smaller selections from that 7-note selection, according to which chord you're on. Depending on genre and style, you might also bend notes, moving between pitches. And that too is governed by very tight rules (known by all blues players).

What you won't do is just play all 12 notes at random in the hope that some will fit. Most probably will, at any one point - but that's not a sensible or musical approach.

In your other road trip analogy, you stay on the road, right? You don't drive over the fields (that's analagous to playing out of tune or in the wrong key). But when you come to junctions, you can choose any road you like.
The analogy breaks down a little here, because that would be like just jamming, creating a chord sequence as you go. Most improvisation is on an existing chord sequence. The route is mapped out for you, in that sense - there's a destination you need to reach, and places you need to pass through on the way. If the chords change from C to F, you don't change from C to A. Again, that exposes the flaws in the analogy. There's nothing creative in driving on a given road (I guess you could zigzag around from side to side...). But there's plenty of creativity available in playing on a given chord sequence. Maybe it's more like walking on the road than driving. Everybody walks in their own way. You could run, shuffle, hop, skip, dance, etc. You'd be travelling in the same direction as anyone else on that road, but expressing yourself at the same time.

The map analogy is a better one, IMO (at least for composition). Music theory is a map. No harm in having the map in the car, in case you get lost. But you don't have to follow it. The map doesn't tell you where to go (it isn't a satnav!). It just shows you all the possible routes that are out there. It shows you which are the main roads, the most popular highways, the quickest and easiest ways to get from A to B (or Bb ). But you can take the back roads if you want. You might even find roads that aren't on the map. (If your map is only beginner theory.) But when you get stuck, and can't find your way home, then the map can help you out.
The mistake would be to trust the map too much - to believe that the map is always right (and complete), and the landscape somehow wrong if it contains something not on the map.