3 notes per string vs CAGED

randomhandclaps

Gru said:

Now I'm confused. Ha ha.

OK, to look at it really basically, most teachers (should be all but there's going to be some nutters) on any instrument advocate scales moving in one direction.  On most instrument where each note only appears once this is the only possibility.  So for example on a piano an Em scale would start on E - F# - G - A - B - C - D - E, going neatly up the keyboard in on direction and then back down again. On instuments like the guitar the same note appears in different fretting positions, so we have a choice.  We can either 'flow' in one direction, or backtrack slightly to grab notes.  Most tutors and technical players believe that working backwards slows us down (which it undoubtedly does) or is bad scale technique.  The belief is we should always be aiming to work diagonally across and up the neck as we ascend and vice versa.  They also prefer the balance on equal number on notes on each string and also each position gives you a larger range.

As a slight aside a distinct advantage of 3NPS is that 7 positions mean you can start a scale off of any root within that key which is an incredibly handy skill for modal playing.

If you look at the two examples I posted above.  To make it easier to follow I will compare them string by string starting at LOW E -

CAGED version Em (Aeolian) in RED, 3NPS version in BLUE at 12th fret -

Low E String -

12 (E) - 14 (F#) - 15 (G)

12 (E) - 14 (F#) - 15 (G)

A String -

12 (A) - 14 (B) - 15 (C)

12 (A) - 14 (B) - 15 (C)

D String - 12 (D) - 14 (E) 12 (D) - 14 (E) - 16 (F#)OK, so before we move to the G string the CAGED system has dropped a note costing us speed and also breaking the balance/flow of equal notes per string.  Also when now going to the G string in the CAGED system we will have to stretch backward to catch the missing F# which again is costing us speed and breaking the natural flow.
G String - 11 (F#) - 12 (G) - 14 (A)12 (G) - 14 (A) - 16 (B)
B String - 12 (B) - 13 (C) - 15 (D)13 (C) - 15 (D) - 17 (E)Now before even hitting the High E we have covered 2 whole octave on 3NPS, gaining speed.
High E String - 12 (E) - 14 (F#) - 15 (G)14 (F#) - 15 (G) - 17 (A)Then obviously by the time we finish you are a note the CAGED system is still a note down.






Don't know what happened to all the nice spacing in this post.

frankus

Megii said:

frankus said:

patterns 1,2,3,4 and 7 are CAGED.

Fair point, I guess I was just trying to say that I started from a 7 pattern  system and then developed from there. As I understand it, the CAGED patterns generally go for a change of position up or down where needed, rather than stretching for a note with the first or 4th finger. The basic 7 patterns I've adopted use finger stretches where needed, and the alternative places to find a note (shown in blue) allow for the position change approach. But I'm quite happy to agree that the CAGED patterns are all in there, no argument.

I think (as someone raised on the 3nps) that a downside of it is it's a technique to generate certain sounds through fingerings, CAGED is simply a method of visualisation. I fought CAGED for a long time

It's a bit like all martial arts sharing stuff - some were knowingly copied, others were simultaneously evolved - the simple reason beign the human body can only move (or be moved) in so many ways. Same is true of the fretboard and a guitarists fretting hand - there are only so many places to play a note and only 4 fingers (or a thumb) with which to play them.

3NPS and CAGED is a bigendian, littleendian type debate. I think if we move beyond the myth of their mutual exlusivity, we can explore the strengths of each...

Like stretching, there are two stretches to touch toes and most people say one is easier, an expert figured out the one most people find easiest is only easier till people can properly stretch further then it's more likely to cause back injury - but for the first stages of stretching it was great. So maybe theres a similar wisdom to be found here habout how to implement these.

Gru

randomhandclaps;435765" said:

Gru said:

Now I'm confused. Ha ha.


Don't know what happened to all the nice spacing in this post.

It all fell to the bottom. Lol.

Many many thanks to you and everyone else that has explained it. I need to go though this step by step and with a guitar to hand and associate the sound with the position.

Time to spend more time learning than scanning the classifieds.

Megii

frankus said:

Megii said:

frankus said:

patterns 1,2,3,4 and 7 are CAGED.

Fair point, I guess I was just trying to say that I started from a 7 pattern  system and then developed from there. As I understand it, the CAGED patterns generally go for a change of position up or down where needed, rather than stretching for a note with the first or 4th finger. The basic 7 patterns I've adopted use finger stretches where needed, and the alternative places to find a note (shown in blue) allow for the position change approach. But I'm quite happy to agree that the CAGED patterns are all in there, no argument.

I think (as someone raised on the 3nps) that a downside of it is it's a technique to generate certain sounds through fingerings, CAGED is simply a method of visualisation. I fought CAGED for a long time

It's a bit like all martial arts sharing stuff - some were knowingly copied, others were simultaneously evolved - the simple reason beign the human body can only move (or be moved) in so many ways. Same is true of the fretboard and a guitarists fretting hand - there are only so many places to play a note and only 4 fingers (or a thumb) with which to play them.

3NPS and CAGED is a bigendian, littleendian type debate. I think if we move beyond the myth of their mutual exlusivity, we can explore the strengths of each...

Like stretching, there are two stretches to touch toes and most people say one is easier, an expert figured out the one most people find easiest is only easier till people can properly stretch further then it's more likely to cause back injury - but for the first stages of stretching it was great. So maybe theres a similar wisdom to be found here habout how to implement these.

You've said nothing that I would want to disagree, and well put. I suppose when I first started learning scale shapes (about 35 years ago), it was more with books that used CAGED, or a 7-pattern system. But it used to annoy me that different books did not always seem to be compatible, in terms of how they advocated fingering a pattern or whatever. In the end I found there are situations where I might favour one approach or the other. And indeed sometimes I find it preferable to use 3NPS for certain phrases. So what I showed above is just my way of visualising things, to allow for all the options and tie it all together. Agree with your "simply a method of visualisation" comment as well - for me, that's what all the "systems" are. Anyhow, I wasn't trying to be flash - just I did those diagrams a while ago for my own use, and thought I'd bung them up in case they were of any interest/use to someone else.

frankus

Thing is my first teacher was out of the Musicians Institute and taught economy picking and 3NPS ... fast forward to 2003 and Justin Sandercoe pulls at all that stuff and says - play strict alternate picking and learn CAGED..

It might be my time of life or the fact that I'd wanted to play jazz and thats less speed, more timing accent, more chords and changes and no doubt his skill as a teacher -- it worked better.

I think theyre some of the better diagrams for 3nps - encompasses a lot, but I wonder if its like some urge many get to generate the diagrams - I'm left handed so I flip the images.

Megii

frankus said:

Thing is my first teacher was out of the Musicians Institute and taught economy picking and 3NPS ... fast forward to 2003 and Justin Sandercoe pulls at all that stuff and says - play strict alternate picking and learn CAGED..

It might be my time of life or the fact that I'd wanted to play jazz and thats less speed, more timing accent, more chords and changes and no doubt his skill as a teacher -- it worked better.

I think theyre some of the better diagrams for 3nps - encompasses a lot, but I wonder if its like some urge many get to generate the diagrams - I'm left handed so I flip the images.

Interesting to hear about, cheers. I do kind of get what you're saying re the diagram obsession - and in the end, I do think it all needs to be in one's head anyhow...

randomhandclaps

Without wishing to sound cynical, and baring in mind I like Justin Sandercoe and think he does a great thing, but it is naturally advantageous for him to push both CAGED and alternate picking as they are easier for the vast majority of his target audience to pick up, progress quickly and feel confident in him and his methods. 

Most people still tend to view the ability of a teacher on how fast you pick stuff up, not the level you can ultimately reach.   Justin is undoubtedly a skilled teachers but also from the point of view of self promotion (which ultimately is his understandable goal) his methods make sense. 

Megii

randomhandclaps said:

Without wishing to sound cynical, and baring in mind I like Justin Sandercoe and think he does a great thing, but it is naturally advantageous for him to push both CAGED and alternate picking as they are easier for the vast majority of his target audience to pick up, progress quickly and feel confident in him and his methods. 

Most people still tend to view the ability of a teacher on how fast you pick stuff up, not the level you can ultimately reach.   Justin is undoubtedly a skilled teachers but also from the point of view of self promotion (which ultimately is his understandable goal) his methods make sense. 

I think it's a tough call to say anyone teaching CAGED is "wrong" and that 3NPS is better in all circumstances. If that is what you're saying, then I'd politely have to agree to disagree. My basic point was that one doesn't have to choose. Although, in the end, as long as we are all able to play the things we want to!

frankus

randomhandclaps said:

Actual cannibal, Shia Le Beouf

hmm ... now there I have to disagree with you.

But seriously, I think your original comment regarding the completeness of what's taught,  that's a pretty insightful comment.

In Karate, Kenwa Mabuni once complained that the modern Karateka studied broad and not deep whereas in his day it was depth that was important ... so in our club we'll learn 7 Kata till blackbelt but we learn what each step means and develop our own techniques from them, recognising the Kata are notes on sets of stock movements - like a Jazz solo is built of little riffs. ... whereas in I think it's 13 kata for most other clubs.... studying for the same amount of time, they focus on the correctness of the arm position - not why that arm is where it is.

Or if you like Wes Montgomery - Ted Greene is supposed to have said Wes only knew 80 chords (which is equivalent of half a page of Ted's Chord Chemistry) BUT Wes knew every way of using that chord - so all the inversions it worked as...

Justin is one of a newer breed of teachers who get people feeling bullet proof and they make music, perhaps not dream theatre, but the music they want to hear, he weened me off the nonsense I was doing with modes, because most music isn't that complicated... when you consider how much people revere Miles Davis - "I could never play like Miles Davis" ... the range of his trumpet is the same as one pattern of 3NPS or CAGED...

or if you like the guy who sorted my drains last week, I'd got good technique and the right tools ... but 5 minutes in he'd ascertained how much rod I'd used, and where the blockage would probably be, fixed in 20 minutes because he understood the drains outside mine.. the fall-away mechanism, it's problems... and what took me 7 hours to admit defeat at, he'd groked in 30 minutes and fixed. It's not a complex system, but the interplay of any system has nuances and he understood those.

I think the mistake I had in music was I expected complexity and so I found complexity, then I heard someone was impressed but they could explain that easily. Victor Wooten says talk as you play, if you're trying to be too complex that's impossible.

Or the Knuth comment: maintaining code is 50% harder than writing it, so if you write code to the utmost of your ability, you're writing something you explicitly are not smart enough to maintiain.

I don't think there are that many guitar teachers who know more than Justin, I think he finds what people need to know and explains it well (as do Dario Cortese and Lee Hodgeson) ... he's not like Ade Clarke, dabbling with Reginald Smith Brindle or Slonimski but if it interested him, he'd be great at communicating it

randomhandclaps

frankus said:

I think the mistake I had in music was I expected complexity and so I found complexity,

I actually think for people seeking to advance this is a really common stumbling block. 

Your comment regarding Justin - "I think he finds what people need to know and explains it well" is spot on of what his great talent is, making him a great teacher.  As his main portal is YouTube he seems to have looked at it, understood the limited timeframe or concentration span people realistic have and trims away the excess fat. 

Barney

I dont really understand the CAGED system ...iv never really looked that much into it either ...the way iv done it is learn the scales in 5 positions then link them together with 3NPS then learned ..or still learning the diatonic arps within all them scales...

GuyBoden

I've seen many players over the years who can play each pattern, from the lowest note to the highest note and back, but don't know how the use them. Knowing each note and being able to play from any note in the pattern is a good starting point, but IMHO I don't think they're needed if you just want to play simple riffs or simple solos.

daveww

Never really understod the benefit of the CAGED system or really learned the three note per string thing.  I think it's best to learn one octave, two octave and three octave scales anywhere on the finger board.  Then also learn all your arpeggios.  Not saying I'm quite there yet but I'm getting close.  I think you need to know all the main chords in at least five postions though, which helps with arpeggios, and I guess that's somewhat similar to CAGED.

frankus

anything sensible with 2 octaves probably fits in CAGED and 3NPS.

ChrisMusic

If I am reading your question right, including your comment on pentatonics, then hopefully this will be helpful to you.  If I’ve missed the point, please just ignore it  

I quite like this guy’s approach.  (that’s him personally, Brett Papa, not the channel IMO, YMMV)

(each video is around 15 mins long)  For his other videos, keep a lookout for his pink Strat.

Using The Minor Pentatonic Scale - How To Solo In Each Position

This relates target notes (chord tones, or resolution tones) to chord shapes

How To Find The Target Notes To Improve Soloing

How To Construct A Melodic Solo - Soloing- Guitar Lesson

Hendrix Inspired Rhythm Style

Well, I hope that’s helpful, and will give you some insight and something to build off