The CAGED system

[tbeltrans]

Though I did learn the CAGED system and wrote a paper on it back around 1995 that is floating around the internet, I have found (not "discovered" or "invented" since most people know this after playing for a time) a much more obvious and flexible approach to the fretboard that isn't a "system" at all.

Learn where all the notes on the fretboard are so you can plop your finger down on a note anywhere on the fretboard and name it.

Then, Learn how to "spell" scales and chords.

With these pieces of very basic knowledge of your instrument and the craft of music, you can create any chord in any inversion and any scale, anywhere on the fretboard with no limitations.

You don't need to buy any books or DVDs to do this because the information is everywhere for free.

An easy and painless way to learn the fretboard I got from Ted Greene's "Chord Chemistry:

1. Plop a finger down on the fretboard anywhere at random. Identify that note.
2. Starting at the lowest position that note occurs on the 6th fret, find it along each string going up to the highest position of that note on the first string and then retrace your steps back down to where you started on the 6th string.


Writing this out probably makes it all sound more complicated than it actually is. The actual exercise I described above consists of only two steps and it only takes a few minutes to do. Just pick one note per day at random and find it all over the fretboard, and over a few weeks you will have the entire fretboard mastered.

I do the exercise every day to keep the fretboard fresh in my mind. I timed it and it takes me only about 30 seconds. At the beginning, it probably took me about 5 - 10 minutes.

You can then practice spelling and finding triads all over your fretboard by simply using the note you picked as the root note. This is best started once you are becoming familiar with the notes on the fretboard. You can expand this to 7th chords and then to adding color tones.

The goal is to have facility on the fretboard so you can find whatever you need without the need for any books to show you chords, scales, etc. This is MUCH more useful than viewing the fretboard as a series of boxes. With this approach, the entire fretboard is one whole thing rather than being split up.

Why make it any more complicated than that, and why buy anything that claims to teach what you can find for free?

Tony

[jklotz]

I ran across this today, thought it might be helpful to the OP:

https://www.premierguitar.com/beyond...nd-the-v-chord

[Mr. Jelly]

I might add that I perfer playing along the neck as well as up and down the neck. The CAGED system appears to teach playing a scale up and down the neck.

[tbeltrans]

Part of my daily routine is the note finding exercise I described earlier, and then I use that randomly chose note as the root to play the major scale along each string, going up and down.

Rather than limiting myself to the CAGED major scale forms with each form covering all six strings in a box, instead I will play that major scale in one octave ranges all over the fretboard.

Personally, I find that I get the most flexible knowledge of the fretboard by working with smaller bits than having one chord form or scale cover all 6 strings.

Having a firm grasp of being able to play any triad type all over the fretboard in both closed and spread voicings, and then being able to build on that to create whatever chord I need, is far more flexible than being able to play 5 shapes that each cover all 6 strings.

There seems to be a mindset and attached way of seeing the fretboard that each approach provides. I have found that being able to readily see smaller pieces that can be built into larger pieces if desired, is the most flexible approach. However one decides to approach the fretboard, there is effort involved, so for me expending that same effort on being flexible seems to work best.

Edit: I forgot to add that there is no really "best" way to approach the fretboard, but instead a whole bunch of different approaches that yield different perspectives. So all we can do in a thread such as this is to provide ur own approach along with why it works for us. CAGED is certainly a valid approach and I did use it for quite some time, but found the approach I use now to be much more flexible for my purposes. I didn't get my current approach from a book (except the note finding exercise from Ted Greene), but instead just seemed to work it out as needed.

Tony

[Gordon Currie]

Tony nailed it while talking about the CAGED 'system'. I'm also a devotee of Chord Chemistry.

His criticism of CAGED is spot on. While it can 'feel' useful to use boxes, and it certainly simplifies some things (esp for beginners) it can (and does) limit some people later on when they want to break out of the box.

I can often hear evidence of 'boxes' in people's playing. It is not a musically pleasing artifact to me.

CAGED is training wheels for the fretboard. Only these training wheels become hard to remove over time.

There is no substitute for learning the entire fretboard. You may only be able to handle the first five frets at first (the 'money frets') but over time you keep extending your knowledge.

Learning the fretboard leads to an inner mental map/image of the fretboard. This then facilitates escaping the crutch of needing to watch your fingers all the time.

[jpmist]

I guess I would like an explanation of why this is considered an important thing to know. What is it good for?

For me it comes in handy when I'm trying to figure out the chords of a song I want to learn. I do a lot of folkie type fingerstyle so I'll put a capo on and try out various keys to play it in that lets me work out the melody notes within the chords.

So lets say I start with figuring the chords in the key of G. Just by putting a capo on the 3rd fret I can work it out in the key of E to see if I can pick out the melody better from there.

Similarly with key of D, a capo two frets up and I can try it out in C.

I'm a long way from knowing any of the notes on the fretboard, but knowing the chord shapes comes in handy with moving a capo around and trying which key a song works better in.

[sprucetophere]

Wow! Thanks for mentioning Chord Chemistry!!

This is what I’ve been looking for. What a great resource. I Love the way he lays all this out. One could spend a lifetime learning this stuff, and while this is a phenomenal book that I am starting to devour, I certainly have a lot of questions as I dig deeper.


I’ve often wondered why we don’t have a theory section here at the forum. Is there an enough interest?

Robert

[Tytlynz]

Originally Posted by BKinBWa

You know, I’ve been trying to understand, explore, study the CAGED system, but I gotta say, I’m just not getting it! I understand about movable chord shapes up the neck, but I just don’t see the purpose, the value of knowing this stuff. Can someone point me in the right direction? I’ve looked at a couple of YouTube videos and done some reading. I guess I would like an explanation of why this is considered an important thing to know. What is it good for? Maybe some of you could direct me to a good learning source?
Thank you,
BKinBWA

I was struggling with understanding it as well until I tried playing Brown Eyed Women from a tab. It requires a C#m to E. I was thinking in the traditional cowboy chord mindset of how can you make that big of leap down the fretboard when it hit me. You can get to E from C#m by simply moving your pinkie up a fret and over two strings from the Am shape to the C shape. Voila! Then it started looking at other songs I struggled with to see the most efficient way to play the chords.

The real benefit comes when you see the scale shapes and have the ability to play the notes of the chord tones. I am not there yet but hopefully will get there someday soon. FWIW.

[sprucetophere]

Thanks to Tony and Doug and all for sharing your insights and thoughts. This is exactly what I’m looking for. I’ve been working through Ted’s great book and am wondering about Doug’s comment that with Fingerstyle he finds inversions more useful than CAGED.

Could you guys please elaborate/share your thoughts regarding the nuts and bolts? Is it as simple as when composing or learning a tune the more choices in the form of different voicings the better? And if so, please hit me over the head with as many details and nuances and suggestions as possible.

Thanks!!!

Robert

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by sprucetophere

Thanks to Tony and Doug and all for sharing your insights and thoughts. This is exactly what IÂ’m looking for. IÂ’ve been working through TedÂ’s great book and am wondering about DougÂ’s comment that with Fingerstyle he finds inversions more useful than CAGED.

Could you guys please elaborate/share your thoughts regarding the nuts and bolts? Is it as simple as when composing or learning a tune the more choices in the form of different voicings the better? And if so, please hit me over the head with as many details and nuances and suggestions as possible.

Thanks!!!

Robert

Well, in all cases, it's mostly about visualizing the fretboard, just how you think about it to find the notes you want (aside from knowing the names of the notes). CAGED is one approach, and I think it's fine for mapping the 5 scale shapes to different positions. I suspect where it confuses people is that many of the chord shapes aren't very usable as chords, like for strumming. So if you think that the idea is that you can play an F chord using the C shape at 887565, that's going to seem crazy. But you can mentally see that shape and the scale that fits around it, and visually see the available notes. But some of the shapes are a bit unrealistic to play as chords.

For playing fingerstyle, at least the way I do it, I'm less interested in big 6-string chord shapes. I want to find melodies, bass lines, and maybe some inner voices. For that, I find it easier to think of smaller units - triads on 3 strings, for example. So you could have A on the top 3 strings xxx220, xxx655, xxx9 10 9, and then it repeats at xxx 14 14 12 ( an octave up from the 1st one). You can do the same thing on other strings. Those give you "targets" to visually hit to find the main chord tones for any triad (or inversion). It's fairly easy to find melodies that lie around those shapes, a fret or 2 above and below the notes of the triad. And it's easy to move up and down the fretboard finding the notes of any basic chord. The shapes easily adjust for minor as well. It's just three shapes (per set of 3 strings), so easy to memorize and find.

It's hard for me to say exactly how I'm thinking about this kind of thing in standard tuning, since I've played for so long, and I've learned lots of scales, both position based and linear, and can also see the CAGED shapes, etc. So it all just blends together into knowing the fretboard. But when using alternate tunings, I do usually spend some time working out the triad inversions as a way to find my way around, since I'm not going to spend the time to re-learn everything. I'll just know that, for example, I maybe need an A major harmony somewhere around the 8-10th fret area, and there's always one of the three triad inversions somewhere nearby.

I just did a lesson on this topic for my Peghead Nation course on alternate tunings, along with an arrangement that's all based around the triad shapes, which I think worked out reasonably well. Depending on the song, you can often just think of the whole tune as consisting of various triad shapes strung together, along with some connecting notes.

[rick-slo]

Originally Posted by sprucetophere

Wow! Thanks for mentioning Chord Chemistry!!
This is what I’ve been looking for. What a great resource. I Love the way he lays all this out. One could spend a lifetime learning this stuff, and while this is a phenomenal book that I am starting to devour, I certainly have a lot of questions as I dig deeper.
I’ve often wondered why we don’t have a theory section here at the forum. Is there an enough interest?
Robert

If there is enough interest in pure theory. Detailed theory on its own does not make you a better player and most people just want to be better players.

[tbeltrans]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Well, in all cases, it's mostly about visualizing the fretboard, just how you think about it to find the notes you want (aside from knowing the names of the notes). CAGED is one approach, and I think it's fine for mapping the 5 scale shapes to different positions. I suspect where it confuses people is that many of the chord shapes aren't very usable as chords, like for strumming. So if you think that the idea is that you can play an F chord using the C shape at 887565, that's going to seem crazy. But you can mentally see that shape and the scale that fits around it, and visually see the available notes. But some of the shapes are a bit unrealistic to play as chords.

For playing fingerstyle, at least the way I do it, I'm less interested in big 6-string chord shapes. I want to find melodies, bass lines, and maybe some inner voices. For that, I find it easier to think of smaller units - triads on 3 strings, for example. So you could have A on the top 3 strings xxx220, xxx655, xxx9 10 9, and then it repeats at xxx 14 14 12 ( an octave up from the 1st one). You can do the same thing on other strings. Those give you "targets" to visually hit to find the main chord tones for any triad (or inversion). It's fairly easy to find melodies that lie around those shapes, a fret or 2 above and below the notes of the triad. And it's easy to move up and down the fretboard finding the notes of any basic chord. The shapes easily adjust for minor as well. It's just three shapes (per set of 3 strings), so easy to memorize and find.

It's hard for me to say exactly how I'm thinking about this kind of thing in standard tuning, since I've played for so long, and I've learned lots of scales, both position based and linear, and can also see the CAGED shapes, etc. So it all just blends together into knowing the fretboard. But when using alternate tunings, I do usually spend some time working out the triad inversions as a way to find my way around, since I'm not going to spend the time to re-learn everything. I'll just know that, for example, I maybe need an A major harmony somewhere around the 8-10th fret area, and there's always one of the three triad inversions somewhere nearby.

I just did a lesson on this topic for my Peghead Nation course on alternate tunings, along with an arrangement that's all based around the triad shapes, which I think worked out reasonably well. Depending on the song, you can often just think of the whole tune as consisting of various triad shapes strung together, along with some connecting notes.

Woody Mann has an excellent DVD set on this very subject for standard tuning called "Take Command Of Your Fretboard" on Homespun.com:

https://www.homespun.com/shop/produc...r-fretboard-1/

Tony

[sprucetophere]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

Well, in all cases, it's mostly about visualizing the fretboard, just how you think about it to find the notes you want (aside from knowing the names of the notes). CAGED is one approach, and I think it's fine for mapping the 5 scale shapes to different positions. I suspect where it confuses people is that many of the chord shapes aren't very usable as chords, like for strumming. So if you think that the idea is that you can play an F chord using the C shape at 887565, that's going to seem crazy. But you can mentally see that shape and the scale that fits around it, and visually see the available notes. But some of the shapes are a bit unrealistic to play as chords.

For playing fingerstyle, at least the way I do it, I'm less interested in big 6-string chord shapes. I want to find melodies, bass lines, and maybe some inner voices. For that, I find it easier to think of smaller units - triads on 3 strings, for example. So you could have A on the top 3 strings xxx220, xxx655, xxx9 10 9, and then it repeats at xxx 14 14 12 ( an octave up from the 1st one). You can do the same thing on other strings. Those give you "targets" to visually hit to find the main chord tones for any triad (or inversion). It's fairly easy to find melodies that lie around those shapes, a fret or 2 above and below the notes of the triad. And it's easy to move up and down the fretboard finding the notes of any basic chord. The shapes easily adjust for minor as well. It's just three shapes (per set of 3 strings), so easy to memorize and find.

It's hard for me to say exactly how I'm thinking about this kind of thing in standard tuning, since I've played for so long, and I've learned lots of scales, both position based and linear, and can also see the CAGED shapes, etc. So it all just blends together into knowing the fretboard. But when using alternate tunings, I do usually spend some time working out the triad inversions as a way to find my way around, since I'm not going to spend the time to re-learn everything. I'll just know that, for example, I maybe need an A major harmony somewhere around the 8-10th fret area, and there's always one of the three triad inversions somewhere nearby.

I just did a lesson on this topic for my Peghead Nation course on alternate tunings, along with an arrangement that's all based around the triad shapes, which I think worked out reasonably well. Depending on the song, you can often just think of the whole tune as consisting of various triad shapes strung together, along with some connecting notes.

Thank you… very helpful.

[sprucetophere]

Originally Posted by Doug Young

It's fairly easy to find melodies that lie around those shapes, a fret or 2 above and below the notes of the triad.

Depending on the song, you can often just think of the whole tune as consisting of various triad shapes strung together, along with some connecting notes.

Doug, in your reference to “a fret or two above and below the notes of the triad “, and “along with some connecting notes”. - are these two phrases referencing the same idea/types of notes?

Is the correct way to think about it that at times you would play the triad itself because you are playing an arpeggio, and other times you would play notes above or below the triad because you’re envisioning/playing the scale around the triad?

I hope I’m making sense.

Thanks again,

Robert

[Doug Young]

Originally Posted by sprucetophere

Doug, in your reference to “a fret or two above and below the notes of the triad “, and “along with some connecting notes”. - are these two phrases referencing the same idea/types of notes?

Is the correct way to think about it that at times you would play the triad itself because you are playing an arpeggio, and other times you would play notes above or below the triad because you’re envisioning/playing the scale around the triad?

That's the idea, I think. What I'm looking to play is a melody, either a tune, or perhaps improvising. The triad is just a mental image around which I can think about what I'm playing. Most melodies do emphasize chord tones, so knowing where those are is handy. Then the other notes (diatonic scale or even chromatic) are there. Basically, if you know the 1,3,5 of a scale (the root triad), then the scale, 1,2,3,4,5,6,7 falls around that triad as connecting notes.

Here's an example, this is the opening line of Have Yourself a Merry Little Christmas in A. 1st two measures, I'm playing it in first position, and I'm mentally visualizing the 2nd inversion A triad at xxx220. Measures 3&4 do it again, but here I'm mentally picturing the A triad at xx765x. This melody actually starts by playing a 4 note arpeggio, so the triad doesn't stay strictly on 3 strings, but it was the first example that popped into my head, and real music usually doesn't fit a contrived pattern, it needs to go where it needs to go!

Screen Shot 2021-11-23 at 9.39.31 AM.jpg

And of course someone could say "this melody just falls out of the A major scale", and they'd be right, so you could also be visualizing the A major scale shapes. It's all just a matter of how you want to think about how the tune falls on the guitar. Triads are just kind of neat, ultra small building blocks you can use to find your way around the fretboard.

You can also do interesting, less obvious things with them. Larry Carlton describes his soloing approach as being based on triads, and has a nifty way of using them to control how inside or outside he wants to sound in his solos. But again, in Larry's case, if you analyze one of his solos, as I've done a ton of at one time, it may not be obvious what he's doing, because he's not just running triad arpeggios. It's what he's visualizing and thinking, not necessarily what he's playing. Without being inside his head, you could easily analyze his solos a different way.