Guthrie Govan Discussion :: View topic - Soloing all over the neck
Help support this site by shopping at Amazon through our link.
Guthrie Govan Discussion Forum Index

Guthrie Govan Discussion
The Official Guthrie Govan Discussion Board

www.GuthrieGovan.co.uk

 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

 

 
Soloing all over the neck
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Guthrie Govan Discussion Forum Index -> Techniques, Theory, and Musical Education
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
RD



Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 293

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I forgot to mention that I'm not saying you shouldn't learn any theory at all. It can definitely clear things up. It's just that some people seem to over-value it and think that people who don't know much theory are "not worthy", at least so it seems.

I think that's some kind of snobbism, wich I also encountered from other musicians towards guitarists.

I also met this dude at a Gambale concert (yes Gambale knows theory alright). We talked about guitarists and I asked what he thought about "this" player (forgot the name). The guy said he liked the player, but then he said "but he doesn't know much theory". So here's this dude, who likes someones music, but after he finds out the guitarist doesn't know much theory, it's like he's not worthy to listen too. What a bunch of crap.

It's bad enough that we have to obey other people's rules in modern society. For gods sake let it be different for music. If someone is able to make nice music, then who cares whether that musician knows any theory but rather speaks the language of music.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
RD



Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 293

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

antonis wrote:
RD wrote:
shapiro wrote:
PLAY YOUR GUITAR, dont worry about the theory! How do you think you learned to speak English??


Extremely good point.

Another question would be:

What was first in this world, theory or music? If the answer is "music" (and that is the answer for me), then theory is not the source of music and thus highly overrated by all music nerds.

Also: people who treat music as math sound like it.

I think the most important thing is to be able to convert emotion into sound and to be able to interpret it visa versa. If you can do that and are able to get it out of your instrument with the necessary technique, then you can make music.

Ofcourse if you're required to read notes and required to write stuff down, like when playing in an orchestra for instance or when working with freaks like Chick Corea, then you'll have to be able to read music and know the notes on your instrument. But it's not the source of musicianship.

Giving something a name doesn't change the essence of that something. You can call a whale a mammal, but to me it's still a big fish swimming in the ocean. Same with music: you can call it an F# or a Gb, but the sound stays the same. So if you can think in sounds and again, are able to play it, then you can make music. Ofcourse it might help communication between certain musicians if they're all familiar with the music terminology.

I really don't think people like Hendrix, Van Halen or Reinhardt were all too concerned with all that theory stuff.

I also think that Guthrie isn't creating from theoretic knowledge either. He is able to give it all a name since being a teacher requires you to know that stuff. But I think he's using his inner creativity rather then creating from theoretic knowledge persé.

When you're thinking about modes, chordnames, etc., I doubt you can really feel and "be" the music at the same time.


i agree but it's very important when you play something to know what it is


How can you say that and agree with my post at the same time?

Also: important for who exactly? For the listener? Why? If you are capable to play what you want by thinking in shapes and sounds and there's no need for you to write something down, then what's the point to know what mode you're in or what the chord is called?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mirth



Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 160
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 2:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think he can agree with you. What you are saying "RD" is that by knowing the english language, and learning grammar, and knowing what the parts are, and what words are what, is really useless, because if you can speak it then you don't need grammar to help you communicate.

No one wants to sound like they are reading out of a book when they talk, just like know one wants to sound like they are playing modes or patterns from a book. But they want to become better "speakers" so they study the material until it becomes second nature.

Do you think what each word is when you speak? Meaning what are verbs' participles, nouns etc... as your speaking? of course not, because you have gotten good at it. Do you think you would be able to communicate as well as you can if you didn't know grammar? or some grammar? do you think you could become just as good of a speaker, writer, etc... if you didn't learn grammar?

The same completely holds true for music. Music is a language, and by learning the theory you are trying to understand what you are saying. Maybe you can get by without learning some words, but in the end you are only hurting your playing. That doesn't mean you couldn't come up with something prolific and startling, or that you might not write the "bill of rights' or something. But by learning how to become a better communicator in your language you start by finding out how to communicate most effectivly. Maybe you listen to others who make sense, or read a book by someone who inspires you, etc...etc...

I don't know maybe you don't need to learn the language of theory, maybe you don't need the help. But most do, there are a few that have got by, but can you really play everything that's in your head? Can identify and figure out everything you ever wanted to play? I can't, but by learning more about the language, I get closer and closer. But I know now that I will never reach the point where everything will come easy to me, and I'm glad it won't. And I don't know anyone else who can play anything, as perfectly as they want. Or say something as perfectly as they want to say.

Maybe there is someone who can? But I've yet to meet them, or hear them, or read about them.

We can always do better, and by learning how to communicate better, there is no crime in learning the foundation of what you are trying to say in your language...I believe theory is very important, if you want to communicate effectively.

Maybe Wes Montgomery, and a few others got by, but I bet they wished they were better. I bet they weren't satisfied, and it has nothing to do with technique. I guarantee it...
_________________
www.timmirth.com
www.myspace.com/redsidevisible
www.myspace.com/mirthfulmusic
www.reverbnation.com/timmirth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
antonis



Joined: 02 Jun 2007
Posts: 45

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

RD wrote:
antonis wrote:
RD wrote:
shapiro wrote:
PLAY YOUR GUITAR, dont worry about the theory! How do you think you learned to speak English??


Extremely good point.

Another question would be:

What was first in this world, theory or music? If the answer is "music" (and that is the answer for me), then theory is not the source of music and thus highly overrated by all music nerds.

Also: people who treat music as math sound like it.

I think the most important thing is to be able to convert emotion into sound and to be able to interpret it visa versa. If you can do that and are able to get it out of your instrument with the necessary technique, then you can make music.

Ofcourse if you're required to read notes and required to write stuff down, like when playing in an orchestra for instance or when working with freaks like Chick Corea, then you'll have to be able to read music and know the notes on your instrument. But it's not the source of musicianship.

Giving something a name doesn't change the essence of that something. You can call a whale a mammal, but to me it's still a big fish swimming in the ocean. Same with music: you can call it an F# or a Gb, but the sound stays the same. So if you can think in sounds and again, are able to play it, then you can make music. Ofcourse it might help communication between certain musicians if they're all familiar with the music terminology.

I really don't think people like Hendrix, Van Halen or Reinhardt were all too concerned with all that theory stuff.

I also think that Guthrie isn't creating from theoretic knowledge either. He is able to give it all a name since being a teacher requires you to know that stuff. But I think he's using his inner creativity rather then creating from theoretic knowledge persé.

When you're thinking about modes, chordnames, etc., I doubt you can really feel and "be" the music at the same time.


i agree but it's very important when you play something to know what it is


How can you say that and agree with my post at the same time?

Also: important for who exactly? For the listener? Why? If you are capable to play what you want by thinking in shapes and sounds and there's no need for you to write something down, then what's the point to know what mode you're in or what the chord is called?


it's nice to play completely by ears but knowing theory and what mode you have to play over a chord etc it helps you to know what you have to do in more difficult situations were your ears are not familiar with the sound of a chord or a scale or something else

i apologize for my bad english Embarassed
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
antonis



Joined: 02 Jun 2007
Posts: 45

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 7:48 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

shapiro wrote:
PLAY YOUR GUITAR, dont worry about the theory! How do you think you learned to speak English??


Playing the same things all the time won't help you improve. You will only get faster and cleaner
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail MSN Messenger
Mirth



Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 160
Location: USA

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 12:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

antonis wrote:
RD wrote:
antonis wrote:
RD wrote:
shapiro wrote:
PLAY YOUR GUITAR, dont worry about the theory! How do you think you learned to speak English??


Extremely good point.

Another question would be:

What was first in this world, theory or music? If the answer is "music" (and that is the answer for me), then theory is not the source of music and thus highly overrated by all music nerds.

Also: people who treat music as math sound like it.

I think the most important thing is to be able to convert emotion into sound and to be able to interpret it visa versa. If you can do that and are able to get it out of your instrument with the necessary technique, then you can make music.

Ofcourse if you're required to read notes and required to write stuff down, like when playing in an orchestra for instance or when working with freaks like Chick Corea, then you'll have to be able to read music and know the notes on your instrument. But it's not the source of musicianship.

Giving something a name doesn't change the essence of that something. You can call a whale a mammal, but to me it's still a big fish swimming in the ocean. Same with music: you can call it an F# or a Gb, but the sound stays the same. So if you can think in sounds and again, are able to play it, then you can make music. Ofcourse it might help communication between certain musicians if they're all familiar with the music terminology.

I really don't think people like Hendrix, Van Halen or Reinhardt were all too concerned with all that theory stuff.

I also think that Guthrie isn't creating from theoretic knowledge either. He is able to give it all a name since being a teacher requires you to know that stuff. But I think he's using his inner creativity rather then creating from theoretic knowledge persé.

When you're thinking about modes, chordnames, etc., I doubt you can really feel and "be" the music at the same time.


i agree but it's very important when you play something to know what it is


How can you say that and agree with my post at the same time?

Also: important for who exactly? For the listener? Why? If you are capable to play what you want by thinking in shapes and sounds and there's no need for you to write something down, then what's the point to know what mode you're in or what the chord is called?


it's nice to play completely by ears but knowing theory and what mode you have to play over a chord etc it helps you to know what you have to do in more difficult situations were your ears are not familiar with the sound of a chord or a scale or something else

i apologize for my bad english Embarassed


I think your english is fine. In fact, quite good!
_________________
www.timmirth.com
www.myspace.com/redsidevisible
www.myspace.com/mirthfulmusic
www.reverbnation.com/timmirth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
RD



Joined: 27 Mar 2005
Posts: 293

PostPosted: Tue Sep 04, 2007 11:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Mirth, I understand your post, but I'm not saying you shouldn't learn any theory at all. So if you feel theory is helping you, by all means - learn what you need to know.

I think theory is sometimes overvalued and that it's stupid to think someone isn't a good musician because he doesn't know much theory. I also wrote that it very much depends on what you want to do. If I want to come up with a nice melody or a good song, then I can do that without thinking about theory. I can't play it immediately, but that goes for most people. Even the best of the best often need some time to learn how to play their own songs. Gambale also needs some time to figure out how to improvise over his own songs, so he stated. And that guy knows everything there is to know, theoretically speaking.

About language... When I was still in school I noticed that my grades for languages (including grammer) were usually alot better when I did not think about the rules. I did read, watched movies and also listened to music.

So I'm not totally disregarding theory, but I don't overvalue it either. There are enough examples of musicians who have the same attitude and have done well in the field of music. But again, it depends a lot on what you want to do and what is expected of you. In certain environments it's better when you can do everything, including reading & writing music, that's true.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Mirth



Joined: 25 Jan 2005
Posts: 160
Location: USA

PostPosted: Wed Sep 05, 2007 2:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I don't want to state that one is better or the other. Actually a nice mix is probably best.

I think anytime you are thinking of the rules when you're playing or speaking, you're only ever going to sound stale. So in regards to that you will always sound better if you are not thinking at all (at least on the rules). It should be an emotional journey, something to connect to, whether it's sad, funny, silly, mean, whatever, just like when you speak.

Oddly enough being that I'm into theory, I have always sucked at grammar and never really had much of a passion for it. But I'd still rather someone who does know, was my proof reader.

Did you know (at least from what I heard) that even though Thomas Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence, Ben Franklin edited it, from what I hear it is pretty much incomprehensible what Jefferson wrote, terrible grammar and form, etc... But Ben came in to make it a beautiful peace of art, really. Because he knew how to make it better. It still said the same thing just in a different way, more easily understood. Does it sound like noun verb, pronoun adjective, etc... no, because Ben was a master at writing from years of study and producing papers. I hardly doubt he was thinking "where is the conjuction?" or something he, but he probably could see the grammar mistakes like a sore thumb otherwise. Just like landing on the natural 7th over a dominant chord or something, it sticks out.

In the end though, it's all about the ears. That's all that really matters. Theory is nothing without sound, not the other way around. I've found that learning theory has made my ears much better, because it shows me how to create other sounds, it's kind of like a great short cut, if anything. Stuff that you could probably learn on your own, but probably wouldn't get around to on your own.

To me taking a few chord shapes, or scale shapes or whatever, is not music, it's missing so much of what's out there. You should be able to play anywhere all over the place, not by memorizing shapes, but by seeing the shapes themselves, without needing guides. Freedom as it were. I believe besides having the most incredible ears God has ever given, you could never really get as good without theory.

There is too much to experience and without a little direction you would never see most of it, but that's just my opinion.

Cheers,

Tim
_________________
www.timmirth.com
www.myspace.com/redsidevisible
www.myspace.com/mirthfulmusic
www.reverbnation.com/timmirth
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
FusionJazz4ever



Joined: 23 Dec 2007
Posts: 4

PostPosted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 9:43 pm    Post subject: Re: Soloing all over the neck Reply with quote

duggy wrote:
Hey, first post, and I've just recently got into listening to Govan and other players like him (but I haven't yet learned how to play like that kind of stuff).

Ok, so I recently realised that yes, I am a scale "box" player, with a few notes from maybe one or two different positions of the scale. Here, http://duggan.dmusic.com , that's my dmusic page Embarassed

As you can hear, I pretty much just run up and down a single position.

My questions here today are:

1. How can I learn to solo over the whole neck?

2. Do you guys memorize scales in all postions? If so, isn't it near impossible to memorize exactly the postions of all those scales? That means scales, and there modes btw.

I'll probably have some more noob questions later is I get a few replies.

Thanks Embarassed

Hey newbie here and im with you on the subjest Im taking my playing to the next step thank god finally check out Don Mocks vid Rock blues to jazz and scott hendersons both vids they opened a huge door to my playing learn arps, and not just metal sweep crap melodic arps combine with scales and modes with and without legato. This will open your brain and will enable you to run up and down the neck.

oh yea of course listen to Govan everyday(when will he make a reh dvd come on govan) the guy is the best also when you are doing scale practice with arps play them dont practice them use feeling play with the swung note add be bop feel to them get creative before you know it you will have a hand full of your own personal licks!
Take C practice that scale with all the mode in 3 4 5s ect then the arps in all postions with the arps do 3 4 5s ect then triads of C ect what I usualy will do is with band in box I know junk to some of ya here but will have chord play cmaj7 then I will run all over the neck then cmaj7add5 and so on do i hit bad notes no such thing if you use passing tones and with the right timing you can do it!!
Phrasing gents I cant stress enough Get Scott Hendersons video is the Most important part of all of this and pardon my sentence structure,spelling ect. Im not a english major lol im a guitar wanna be great someday Wink and watch youtube lots of kick ass players out there willing to help which when I get to where i want to be I will be right there paying tribute back to those that helpled!1

Good luck!!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Shreddos4Breakfast



Joined: 25 Aug 2008
Posts: 1

PostPosted: Mon Aug 25, 2008 4:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi i am new here but yeah i read about someone saying about inversion of arpeggios of the fretboard. I used to play piano for 12 years switched to guitar 10th grade high school, and i am having the same issue as the guy who started the topic . I can do the major and minor positions of the arpeggios but i believed i learned the beginner version and the root positions i need to learn second and third and fourth inversions but cant seem to find this anywhere, i am for sure gonna get a guitar teacher soon after my year of university is over i am a first year.
Does anyone know where i could find the tabs for the first second and third positions for guitar arpeggios
And dopes anyone know where i can find tabs on how to do scales in 3 octaves
ever since i started guitar i wanted to learn this but than everyone was like learn a song i was bleh guitar tech first songs later
_________________
Perfection is far from Original
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TheLydianKid



Joined: 27 Aug 2008
Posts: 3

PostPosted: Wed Aug 27, 2008 6:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

For years I was happy with my playing then about 10 years ago I started hearing about players like Guthrie. Everything suddenly became about modes this, technique that. Stuff I never thought about suddenly seemed to be everywhere. I always just used my ears but now it seemed I had to understand all this other stuff. Turned out modes I knew about anyhow (by ear) I just didn't know what they were called. I could make something sound Spanish or dark by using this particular scale or that. Then again I never thought in terms of scales ...just music. I've had to stop myself getting hung up about this as I found I was in danger of losing what 'plot' I had to begin with.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Guthrie Govan Discussion Forum Index -> Techniques, Theory, and Musical Education All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4
Page 4 of 4

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum



Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2002 phpBB Group