Scales, arpeggios, positions etc

nickp

oh sorry - should have said for the pentatonics - these first as they give you access to playable sounds.  Don't be in a hurry to move away from them, so practice playing them in intervals and sequences, also moving up through the shapes on pairs of strings so you know them inside out and can get from one end of the neck to the other.  I am at this point and am now on the major scale (inc caged majors) as this seems the basis for the more accessible modal sounds (dorian, lydian, aolian etc)

paul_c2

nickp said:

I'm lazy and haven't read all the other posts.  What I failed to do and am now amending is tying the chord to the scale.  So if you are playing say G pentatonic minor - always start and end on the root in each position and play the CAGED chord that fits that scale shape before and after doing the scale.  And maybe play the chord and then play around moving from chord to some scale "fills" and back to the chord so you can see the scale shapes around the chord. I think this is really really really important rather than just ripping through 5 shapes of the minor pentatonic without knowing the chord that underpins each position

Yes, agree entirely. In fact, Justin offers some good advice to consolidate scales:

1. Up and down starting and ending on root
2. Up and down, change direction randomly
3. 13 24 35 46 etc
4. Play random notes in...
5. 1234 2345 3456 etc

I learnt the major scales first, then pentatonics (2/5), then modes, then the rest of the pentatonics. So I'm still at the stage of consolidating these; arpeggios are "next" but I've basically learnt 1 of the arpeggios in one position to get me started, I didn't want to learn the rest wrong. I thought (well, still do think) there's obviously a way to consolidate the knowledge and relate the arpeggios to the scales/pentatonics so one helps the other, rather than simply being a "thing to learn" by rote.

Oh and of course, use them all the improvise or noodle around....

Brad

I went through the usual route, CAGED, 3 NPS, 5 Pentatonic shapes ect in the usual pop/rock keys. It wasn't until I started getting into Jazz that i began playing in the less 'guitar friendly' keys.

Then I was introduced to the 5 fret method and that changed everything regarding learning the fretboard. There is some cross over with CAGED/3NPS approaches which is useful, but for me at least, it gives a much more thorough coverage of the fretboard and it made learning all my chords, scales and arpeggios easier in 12 keys. I just wish I was shown this approach earlier! 

paul_c2

Any internet links to "5 fret method" - I've not come across that term before?

I've deliberately been playing in various different keys, I don't seem to have any mental block on any particular key so no worries there.

stratman3142

Brad said:

I went through the usual route, CAGED, 3 NPS, 5 Pentatonic shapes ect in the usual pop/rock keys. It wasn't until I started getting into Jazz that i began playing in the less 'guitar friendly' keys.

Then I was introduced to the 5 fret method and that changed everything regarding learning the fretboard. There is some cross over with CAGED/3NPS approaches which is useful, but for me at least, it gives a much more thorough coverage of the fretboard and it made learning all my chords, scales and arpeggios easier in 12 keys. I just wish I was shown this approach earlier! 

Yes I'd be interested in finding out about the 5 fret method. I'm always interested in new ways of thinking about things.

Brad

Internet-wise there is detailed explanation in here - http://www.practisin2play.com/ You'll have to sign up to access lessons though, but I think there is a 7 day free trial. I've been having lessons with Mike for a number of years now, so I think it's worth taking a punt on the free trial. 

Mick Goodrick talks about it in his book The Advancing Guitarist too, I think Goodrick calls it 'position playing' IIRC...

It's weighty subject but for example, learning the major scale in all 12 keys between frets 1-5. No open strings and no going past fret 5. The resulting shapes are then used across the fretboard in 5 fret areas (3-7, 5-9 etc) when learning any given key over the neck. It throws up a few extra shapes missing from CAGED and makes for a more comprehensive coverage of the fretboard (in my opinion of course!). It may seem counter-intuitive to restrict yourself to 5 frets at first, but once things get across the neck it's a real eye opener.

I work on all scales, arpeggios and most chords in this way now. I must stress, I'm not saying it's better or worse than any other method, it just works for me.

stratman3142

Brad said:

Internet-wise there is detailed explanation in here - http://www.practisin2play.com/ You'll have to sign up to access lessons though, but I think there is a 7 day free trial. I've been having lessons with Mike for a number of years now, so I think it's worth taking a punt on the free trial. 

Mick Goodrick talks about it in his book The Advancing Guitarist too, I think Goodrick calls it 'position playing' IIRC...

It's weighty subject but for example, learning the major scale in all 12 keys between frets 1-5. No open strings and no going past fret 5. The resulting shapes are then used across the fretboard in 5 fret areas (3-7, 5-9 etc) when learning any given key over the neck. It throws up a few extra shapes missing from CAGED and makes for a more comprehensive coverage of the fretboard (in my opinion of course!). It may seem counter-intuitive to restrict yourself to 5 frets at first, but once things get across the neck it's a real eye opener.

I work on all scales, arpeggios and most chords in this way now. I must stress, I'm not saying it's better or worse than any other method, it just works for me.

I've just checked my copy of Mick Goodrick's book and his description of position playing on page 27 is based on a 6 fret span. That's because the 1st and 4th finger each cover two frets of the span. I'm guessing the 5 fret method might restrict either the 1st or 4th finger to one fret of the span.

I'm curious about which shapes the 5 fret method would throw up that are missing from the CAGED method. I can see how that would happen if you view the five CAGED shapes as individual entities, but not if you view them in a joined-up way so that some patterns span more than one CAGED shape (for example three note per string scales).

Brad

You're right, Goodrick does indeed discuss a 6 fret span (been a while since I looked at that book!), but the principle remains that everything needed to cover the fretboard - any scale, chord, arpeggio can be found in frets 1-5 as a starting point. I've not found any problems regarding restriction with this approach and there is overlap with CAGED and 3NPS of course.

I think the best bet, if you're curious, is to check it out and share your thoughts/findings. 

stratman3142

Brad said:

You're right, Goodrick does indeed discuss a 6 fret span (been a while since I looked at that book!), but the principle remains that everything needed to cover the fretboard - any scale, chord, arpeggio can be found in frets 1-5 as a starting point. I've not found any problems regarding restriction with this approach and there is overlap with CAGED and 3NPS of course.

I think the best bet, if you're curious, is to check it out and share your thoughts/findings. 

The figure on the left (at the end of this post) shows how I play F major as a 3NPS pattern starting on F at the 1st fret 6th string.

The pattern itself spans 6 frets, which seems incompatible with a 5 fret method. Also, my first finger transitions 3 frets in playing the scale. That seems incompatible with the Mick Goodrick approach, in which the 1st finger covers two frets of a 6 fret span. But I'm probably misunderstanding something about the method(s), so perhaps someone can set me straight.

Btw: I see 3NPS scale patterns as just being selected from two adjacent CAGED patterns. In this case that's the E pattern (diagram in the middle) and the D pattern (diagram on the right). So I'm still thinking 'CAGED system'.

http://i.imgur.com/qF7F5H1.png

Brad

stratman3142 said:
 

The figure on the left (at the end of this post) shows how I play F major as a 3NPS pattern starting on F at the 1st fret 6th string.

The pattern itself spans 6 frets, which seems incompatible with a 5 fret method. Also, my first finger transitions 3 frets in playing the scale. That seems incompatible with the Mick Goodrick approach, in which the 1st finger covers two frets of a 6 fret span. But I'm probably misunderstanding something about the method(s), so perhaps someone can set me straight.

Btw: I see 3NPS scale patterns as just being selected from two adjacent CAGED patterns. In this case that's the E pattern (diagram in the middle) and the D pattern (diagram on the right). So I'm still thinking 'CAGED system'.

http://i.imgur.com/qF7F5H1.png

The pattern is incompatible with 3NPS, because it's not 3NPS. I'm saying there is crossover with 3NPS (as there is with CAGED) as the shape is almost the same, it's just that the F on fret 6 of the B string is located on fret 1 of the E string instead. That may seem irrelevant for some, but had important implications for me learning the fretboard.

I guess it can be thought of as a amalgamation of CAGED and 3NPS. I see that whole area as one piece of F major rather than 1 3NPS pattern and two CAGED patterns but I know they're there as for about 12 years I used CAGED and 3NPS. The 5 fret method really helped me learning all things F related (or any key for that matter) than either CAGED or 3NPS. 

Page 30 of Goodrick's book discusses 3NPS (amongst other things) and how it breaks out of the idea of position playing. What I meant about the Goodrick approach was more about the amount of information that can be found in one position. Whether it's over 5 frets or 6 isn't the point, the only difference is that the range is two octaves and perfect 4th spanning 6 frets compared to two octaves and a major 3rd over 5 frets (with a lot less doubling up of notes).

I found the 5 fret method made it much more streamlined learning a lot of information...

http://i1323.photobucket.com/albums/u585/BradGuitar/5B69CB14-DA9B-4373-8FB3-579722688E25_zpsgupzugfp.jpg

I've not included diagrams for m7b5, Dim7 arps, Pentatonic, Harmonic Minor/Major, Diminished and Whole-tone scales etc...

Again, not better nor worse just another option that really helped open up my fretboard understanding. If it works for other people that is for them to give it a try and find out :-)

paul_c2

It makes sense to me. Looking at it another way: there's 7 notes in a (normal) scale, but with CAGED there's 5 positions, ie you start with your 1st finger at 5 different frets to cover an octave's worth of scale/positions. Thus, there must be 2 positions which don't fall in the CAGED system where you can place your starting 1st finger. Also out of the 5x CAGED positions, there's 2 where it all fits neatly under your fingers without shifting, but there's 3 where at least 1 shift is required, because the notes aren't under your fingers. So every time a shift is needed, there's always 2 variations, one where you go up the fretboard and one where you go onto the next string (and go down the fretboard).

Having said all that I'm still on just CAGED (not looked at 3nps properly yet) so I don't know whether the "extras" are just another way of doing the same thing, or genuinely enhance the ease of doing certain things to make them super-useful (of course, its always useful to know about them in itself though).

Its a shame I never properly studied/was taught how to play the bass, since a lot of the stuff transfers over between the two and alternate positions for playing the same lines would be very useful to study as a mini-subject in itself, especially applying it to sight-reading, where you want the easiest most non-complicated approach at the tip of your fingers.

stratman3142

Brad said:

...Again, not better nor worse just another option that really helped open up my fretboard understanding. If it works for other people that is for them to give it a try and find out :-)

I find it interesting to look at things from different viewpoints. Different things work for different people and different thought processes are good to experiment with and open up new ideas. Although we may talk about the same scales and chords etc, the way we think about them might be quite different and have an influence on individual style.

I haven't found anything yet (or any shapes) that can't be explained in terms of the CAGED system, or a least my way of applying the CAGED system. But I probably bend things to fit my way of thinking.

To steal a phrase from @viz. I love the banter.

stratman3142

paul_c2 said:

...It makes sense to me. Looking at it another way: there's 7 notes in a (normal) scale, but with CAGED there's 5 positions, ie you start with your 1st finger at 5 different frets to cover an octave's worth of scale/positions. Thus, there must be 2 positions which don't fall in the CAGED system where you can place your starting 1st finger...

In my way of looking at things the two positions you refer to also fall within the CAGED system, provided the shapes are not viewed as 5 constrained boxes but viewed in terms of merged shapes. Perhaps I should draw some more pictures (oh no! I can hear people saying).