5 Patterns of Major & Minor Pentatonic Scales using CAGED (or EDCAG)

Clarky

although I know and understand the CAGED system.. personally I've never really got along with it that well..

ok that's not 100% true.. I guess I could say I use bits of it on occasion..

but I certainly don't use it as my principle means of navigating the neck

MazzaG

I'm a bit ignorant with benefits of the CAGED system and haven't really felt the need to study it, but am I right in saying that if I know every note of the fretboard by heart I do not really need the system? For example I could play you a C chord or the C Major scale in various places because I know where all the notes are.

close2u

MazzaG said:

...  am I right in saying that if I know every note of the fretboard by heart I do not really need the system? ...

I don't see how you can make that leap to be honest.
It's great to know where the notes are.
But CAGED is so much more.


Try this thread for some of the potential:
http://justinguitarcommunity.com/index.php?topic=2459.0
or this:
http://justinguitarcommunity.com/index.php?topic=27463.0

MazzaG

close2u said:

MazzaG said:

...  am I right in saying that if I know every note of the fretboard by heart I do not really need the system? ...

I don't see how you can make that leap to be honest.
It's great to know where the notes are.
But CAGED is so much more.


Try this thread for some of the potential:
http://justinguitarcommunity.com/index.php?topic=2459.0
or this:
http://justinguitarcommunity.com/index.php?topic=27463.0

I read through both threads and I'm still unsure as to why this would benefit me. I promise I am not being difficult, I love learning new things but I really don't see what the caged system gives to someone who already knows the fretboard and can play any chord or scale without using a 'system'.

I do understand the caged system and how it works, but the benefits? Not so much.

viz

I think that, more useful than CAGED, is to know the root and 2 inversions of the E-style and A-style chords.

So, for the E-style chord:
E (root)
E over G# (first inversion, basically the C-shape chord starting on 4th fret) and
"E over B" (2nd inversion, basically A-shape chord, starting on 7th fret).

And for A-style chord:
A (root, x0222x)
A over C# (first inversion, x4222x)
A over E(2nd inversion, D-shaped chord on 7th fret, x 7 7 9 10 9)

GuyBoden

Good stuff, in the end, after years of playing, the fretboard becomes one whole pattern with links to every possible location in all keys, but to achieve this I feel it's easier with a systematic approach, but also it's easier in the long term if you learn the notes of the fretboard not just patterns.

I've used the CAGED system and I've aIso used the 3NPS method, both are good methods.

Below are my diagrams for C Major using the 3NPS method for symmetrical P4 tuning on a 7 string, they can easily be adapted to use for standard tuning on 6 string, my main point is that they show the repeating notes on the fretboard.

matt1973

^ yup - what he said. That's how it's done.

Barney

Iv never really saw the benefits of the caged system unless im missing something...

frankus

it's a matter of order of learning stuff Barney. If you found your own way already then there won't be anything to get from the CAGED system.

Clarky

MazzaG said:

I'm a bit ignorant with benefits of the CAGED system and haven't really felt the need to study it, but am I right in saying that if I know every note of the fretboard by heart I do not really need the system? For example I could play you a C chord or the C Major scale in various places because I know where all the notes are.

just from my own perspective / experiences, it really depends upon the nature of the music that you're playing over…

if the music you're soloing over is in one key throughout, or spends a long time in a key before changing, then I prefer to use a more linear [3NPS] approach.. because this enables me to easily 'view' the neck though out it's entire length based around the 7 interlocking fingerings of the man / min scale, or 5 interlocking pentatonic fingerings…

however, if the music changes key with greater regularity [like in jazz for example where you can change key on each beat of the bar] I find that there's not enough time to settle into that linear view of the neck.. so it makes more sense to learn the chord progression and solo around the chord shapes themselves.. so it's like having a more compact 'view' of the neck locally around the chord..

this makes for much faster / easier visualisation of the fingerings as the musics goes charging through a raft of keys in quick succession…

so which method is better??? for me, I'd say neither overall.. but one method will sit better for me at a given moment..

generally though, I like to view the fingerboard in terms of pentatonic fingerings..

and the scale / mode I'm using tends to determine where the pentatonic shapes are located with respect to the key's tonic, and how I choose to fill in the gaps.. this method sits somewhere between the CAGED and linear view

GuyBoden

Clarky said:

if the music changes key with greater regularity [like in jazz for example where you can change key on each beat of the bar] I find that there's not enough time to settle into that linear view of the neck.. so it makes more sense to learn the chord progression and solo around the chord shapes themselves.. so it's like having a more compact 'view' of the neck locally around the chord..

Very good point, most of the old Jazzers played chord based CAGED type fingerings. The chords can be visualised using 3NPS, but it's not as easy, you have to see the notes that make a chord not a chord shape.