Soloing over scales

[SnowRose]

Hi all, I'm trying to strengthen my music theory in soloing over scales, especially at my church where I play for Sunday Worship.
If the notes in C Major = A minor
What is the equivalent to C Blues Scale?

[dvenetian]

Hi all, I'm trying to strengthen my music theory in soloing over scales, especially at my church where I play for Sunday Worship.
If the notes in C Major = A minor
What is the equivalent to C Blues Scale?
Eb Major. The Relative minor to a Major scale comes from the 6th interval of the Major scale.
Example: Eb Major scale = Eb-F-G-Ab-Bb-C-D
The C Blues scale - C-Eb-F-Gb-G-Bb
The Gb is considered a passing tone and is noted as a b5 in the C Blues Scale.

[R. Shackleferd]

Not sure if this will be helpful or just confusing, but similarly you can quickly find the notes of any major scale using the Circle of Fifths.
Note that the 6th interval for the relative minor will always be at a 90 degree right angle (clockwise) to the Major root chord. So for Eb major, it's relative minor is C. Or to find another...for B major, it's relative minor is Ab. And obviously, if you're starting with the minor, to find the relative major, go counterclockwise 90 degrees.
http://www.folkblues.com/images/circle_5th_3.gif

[Jolly McJollyson]

Hi all, I'm trying to strengthen my music theory in soloing over scales, especially at my church where I play for Sunday Worship.
If the notes in C Major = A minor
What is the equivalent to C Blues Scale?
Ok, I always find this a sensitive subject to handle, because if it comes across the wrong way, it can throw off your entire sense of music theory.

C major has the same notes as A minor, yes, but they're not the same scale. Let's say someone's playing a C major progression. If you play the licks you normally solo with in A minor, they're going to sound very strange and out of place because they emphasize notes which one would not normally emphasize in C major. Understand?

It seems you do, since you phrased it "The notes in C major = A minor," which is great because normally people say "C major = A minor," which is not true.

C Blues, I assume you mean C-Eb-F-Gb-G-Bb-C, the minor pentatonic plus that flat fifth? It's actually the relative minor of (aka same notes as), I believe, the Eb Major blues scale, Eb-F-Gb-G-Bb-C-Eb.

[CSchlegel]

C major has the same notes as A minor, yes, but they're not the same scale.
Excellent point.
Let's say someone's playing a C major progression. If you play the licks you normally solo with in A minor, they're going to sound very strange and out of place because they emphasize notes which one would not normally emphasize in C major.
Dude, this sentence nails it.

I've heard this at least a million times. It's painfully obvious that such a solo sounds like someone that knows a fretboard pattern yet has NO CLUE what a scale or a chord is.

You actually can use the exact same licks and patterns in different contexts but you really need to be aware of the scale degrees.

C Pentatonic major:
1st - C
2nd - D
3rd - E
(no 4th)
5th - G
6th - A
(no 7th)

A Pentatonic minor:
1st - A
(no 2nd)
3rd - C
4th - D
5th - E
(no 6th)
7th - G

Adding the E-flat is a minor 3rd in C major and a flat 5th in A minor. Some people call this the "blues scale", some call it a "hexatonic blues scale" (because it has 6 notes of course).

Consider this classic "blues-pentatonic lick":

|------------5--------------------------|
|---------5-----5--8-b-(10)-------------|
|-5-b-(7)-------------------------------|
|---------------------------------------|
|---------------------------------------|
|---------------------------------------|

Bending that G up to A at the end sounds great if you are playing chord with an A in it, or a part of the melody that exphasizes an A. But if you are playing in C major and doing this over a C major chord, it's like "Huh?" LOL.

On the other hand if you are in C major but an F major (the IV chord) comes around, this can be a great, tasty sounding choice - because the F major chord has an A in it!

[Kevin Taylor]

blah... I think totally oposite than this way of thinking.
I make up a melody in my head that fits the music and then just use the scales to find an easy way to get around the fretboard.
The idea of using scales to make up leads to me just ends up making all your leads sound like a bunch of scales.

Why don't you guys just hum a melody to the background music and then find the notes.. then you can use your knowledge of scales to find the best finger positions?

[Drew77]

how about progressions though. Shoul I change the note I emphasis which with the chord changes? like if I am playing over an E-A-B progression I could play E major pentatonic and just change the notes I emphasis with the chords that are played?

I have always kinda had a hunch that this is wat yu should do but what about soloing over complex and fast progressions that change key? Maybe it's just casue my ear still isn't great that I think it would be extremely difficult to play over these, maybe it actually is.

BTW I don't ever get to play with other ppl, but last night I got to jam with another guitarist for the first time, I have only really jammed once with aother person and he was a keyboardist and I was in way over my head. but last night was fun i just gotta get better at playing with others. :)

[dvenetian]

how about progressions though. Shoul I change the note I emphasis which with the chord changes? like if I am playing over an E-A-B progression I could play E major pentatonic and just change the notes I emphasis with the chords that are played?

I have always kinda had a hunch that this is wat yu should do but what about soloing over complex and fast progressions that change key? Maybe it's just casue my ear still isn't great that I think it would be extremely difficult to play over these, maybe it actually is.
The reason you're finding this progression difficult with pentatonic scales is that E minor pentatonic is a better fit because the A chord is not in the E Major pentatonic scale. To play the E minor pentatonic scale over your E-A-B progression, the chords would be played as minor chords because the are Perfect Intervals and perfect follows perfect (Em-Am-Bm).
If you wanted to play E-A-B as a Major progression with the emphasis on E you could play the E Ionian mode (E Major Scale).

[CSchlegel]

blah... I think totally oposite than this way of thinking.

LOL. Fair enough. But...
I make up a melody in my head that fits the music and then just use the scales to find an easy way to get around the fretboard.

Yes, I do that also. But I think the point here is there is a time while learning guitar that you can't just pick up a guitar and play what you hear.

The problem for many beginners is even if they can "hear a melody, lick or solo in their head" they just don't know what the scale degrees are that they are trying to play. And they don't know how to accomplish what they want to hear because they don't know how those scale degrees form patterns on the fretboard.
The idea of using scales to make up leads to me just ends up making all your leads sound like a bunch of scales.
There is always that danger, of course. Walk into any music store on Saturday morning & instead of guitarists playing melodic ideas it sounds like the "World of Scales".

But again, learning and running scales is like working out. A heathy idea to prepare for playing music. If it becomes an end in itself, then the music will of course suffer.
Why don't you guys just hum a melody to the background music and then find the notes.. then you can use your knowledge of scales to find the best finger positions?
But this is just two different ways of approaching the problem. What if you are unable to think of anything new or satisfying? Why not try to play the scale degrees that fit the chords or melody of the tune to find out if you can come up with something new you might not have thought of before?

I still use both approaches. Obviously since I've played for so long I more frequently know what I am after and just play what I want to hear. You (Kevin) are a very experienced, talented player that has already built up a lifetime of knowledge about guitar and music. But I try to remember there is a time for beginners before they have that acquired knowledge. And as teachers we have to think about how to get them to that level.

[CSchlegel]

If you wanted to play E-A-B as a Major progression with the emphasis on E you could play the E Ionian mode (E Major Scale).
Exactly. Good point.

Never miss or forget the obvious! If you are in E major ... then play in E major! :)

To try and address a little of this I created a new theory tutorial on how to use pentatonic shapes to learn the scale degrees:
Pentatonic Scales Lessons (http://www.guitartricks.com/lesson.php?input=10347)

Hope this helps someone out there.

[Kevin Taylor]

>> But I try to remember there is a time for beginners before they have >>that acquired knowledge. And as teachers we have to think about how to >>get them to that level.

Yeah, I agree. I guess it's just that for about the first 15 years I played, I did everything by ear. Didn't have a clue how to play scales... didn't know the names of chords.... didn't even know how to read tab until I started posting at GuitarTricks. It seems like some students want instant answers.
Like .. "What notes do you play over these chords?"
I feel like saying "Any notes you want as long as they sound good... just screw around for a few days and come up with something. Music is about feeling things, not doing math"

It's kinda like, when I was a beginner, there was very little information available about how to play guitar. You couldn't afford to buy books or take lessons so you either figured it out for yourself or you were out of luck.
The good thing about that was that it forced you to develop your listening skills and use your own intelligence to figure out how to play things.

When students have everything spelled out for them, I think they lose out in the long run. They develop their reading and math skills, but their natural musical abilities take a back seat because they expect instant answers.

[solidwalnut]

Hi all, I'm trying to strengthen my music theory in soloing over scales, especially at my church where I play for Sunday Worship.
If the notes in C Major = A minor
What is the equivalent to C Blues Scale?
Hi SnowRose--

Please tell us how long you've been playing so you can get some specific answers.

My first instinct to say is to remember that the notes come from chords. Don't think of soloing and using scales as something separate from them. Begin by recognizing the 1, 3 and 5 notes of the chord structure. Take the open C chord. The first scale degree note will be the C found in the third fret of the A string. The third scale degree is the E note, found in the second fret of the D string. The fifth scale degree note is the G note, which can be played with the open G string. At this point, concentrate on knowing where the 1, 3 and 5 are only. You'll figure out the rest in due time when you have these anchors down.

Ok, that's the beginning of the mechanical and theory part of it all. To begin soloing, start simple. Think melody. Some of the best solos out there remind you of someone singing.

When thinking about which notes to use, you can get deep into theory and find a large pool of possible notes to play. This doesn't mean you have to play all of them. They are but tools available. Do yourself a huge favor and begin by practicing and understanding the major scale and the intervals thereof. All other scales come from this.

When thinking about soloing, think about finding the 1, 3 and 5 notes of the chord of the moment. So if you're playing a song like Shout to the Lord in the key of D major, think of finding the 1, 3 and 5 in the key of D major (D, E, F#) and then think about playing the melody notes of either the verse or the chorus (depending on which section you're playing over). Verse: 3, 4, 5, 7, 1, 2 Chorus: 8, 8, 7, 8, 8, 7, 8, 8, 7, 6 (the 1 and 8 are interchangeable. The 8 would mean one ocave above the 1).

If any of this is confusing to you, start at the beginning. Learn the components of the major scale.

But use and develop your ear to tell you what to play.

Forgive me if this stuff is too basic, but I hope that it helps.

Have fun,

Steve

[dvenetian]

Exactly. Good point.

Never miss or forget the obvious! If you are in E major ... then play in E major! :)

To try and address a little of this I created a new theory tutorial on how to use pentatonic shapes to learn the scale degrees:
Pentatonic Scales Lessons (http://www.guitartricks.com/lesson.php?input=10347)

Hope this helps someone out there.
Great link!!!!
With all due respect, there is a typo where the Am scale degrees are noted (Leave out the 2nd and 5th degrees) and I'm sure you meant the 2nd and 6th degrees. Just wanted to bring it to your attention so you can make the adjustment. Great tutorial!!!!!!

[CSchlegel]

Great link!!!!
Thanks! From what I've seen so far, dvenetian, you already know this type of stuff. So, I appreciate your favorable feedback.

With all due respect, there is a typo where the Am scale degrees are noted (Leave out the 2nd and 5th degrees) and I'm sure you meant the 2nd and 6th degrees. Just wanted to bring it to your attention so you can make the adjustment.
Ah ha! An eagle eye proofreader, too! I fixed it. Thanks sincerely for taking the time to point out my error.

[dvenetian]

Thanks! From what I've seen so far, dvenetian, you already know this type of stuff. So, I appreciate your favorable feedback.

Ah ha! An eagle eye proofreader, too! I fixed it. Thanks sincerely for taking the time to point out my error.
Glad to help out. It happens to all of us now and then.

[Benoit]

I can only speak for myself but I've been trying these past years to have the best of both worlds.

When I create a song, and I'm all alone with my guitar I'll forget theory and just play by feel. Mostly because I wanna get that special phrasing that makes me sounds like me. I'll do that as much as possible up until I get stuck and can't figure out what to play. Then I'll fall back to theory and try to understand what the rhythm/melody is doing and try to figure out what I'm doing wrong. I'll jam using scales to, and that might sound weird lol, know where to go on the fretboard. I'm a very visual person and forget just about any name of scales but I see many "shapes" on the fretboard. I have to constantly go back and relearn the scales name. I might actually have a learning disorder, I always have struggled in school as a kid. That makes it a little harder to teach but made me approach the fretboard a different way.

I think the best approach a student might have is to also understand the why and not only the what. Knowing scales is great but understanding them is even better. Like the old saying goes "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime". But we all have to start somewhere, we all had to learn chords by heart before starting to understand how they are built.

[Kevin Taylor]

I don't think it's so much a learning disorder as it is a prevelance by society to reward 'visual' and 'memory' types of learning.
^^^^ huh?

I had the same problem in school. Everything was based on learning names, memorizing things and visually watching a teacher show you how something worked. I'd fail miserably cause I'd just naturally rebell against using names that people had made up for things
(stamin?? ..it's the pointy thing on a flower... who's the dummy that came up with name stamin?) I prefered reading books and finding things out for myself. I learned things by naturally understanding a topic as a whole, rather than breaking it down into memorizing small parts of it.

Unfortunately, the education system is geared towards rewarding the visually oriented type of person and failing people who think more artistically.

Anyways... I just think different people learn in different ways.
That's why some students can just naturally pick up on music while others can't even understand basic rhythm patterns.
Some of them 'get' music just by listening to it. They don't understand the mechanics of how it works, but they can figure out for themselves what sounds right and what doesn't even when they're still kids.
Others are more visually oriented... they need it spelled out for them and almost need a mathematical equation in order to figure it out.

I guess the best of both worlds is the person who can learn both ways... however I can only comment on my own personal experience and say that I'm glad I didn't learn any theory until much later. I definitely believe it gave me a deeper understanding of music because it forced me to try things that most students are discouraged from doing simply because their teachers think that it would be too confusing to them to stray from the assigned topics. I was forced into many more years of trial and error, experimentation and listening and feeling rather than reading and copying.

[PlatonicShred]

I don't think it's so much a learning disorder as it is a prevelance by society to reward 'visual' and 'memory' types of learning.
^^^^ huh?

I had the same problem in school. Everything was based on learning names, memorizing things and visually watching a teacher show you how something worked. I'd fail miserably cause I'd just naturally rebell against using names that people had made up for things
(stamin?? ..it's the pointy thing on a flower... who's the dummy that came up with name stamin?) I prefered reading books and finding things out for myself. I learned things by naturally understanding a topic as a whole, rather than breaking it down into memorizing small parts of it.

Unfortunately, the education system is geared towards rewarding the visually oriented type of person and failing people who think more artistically.

Anyways... I just think different people learn in different ways.
That's why some students can just naturally pick up on music while others can't even understand basic rhythm patterns.
Some of them 'get' music just by listening to it. They don't understand the mechanics of how it works, but they can figure out for themselves what sounds right and what doesn't even when they're still kids.
Others are more visually oriented... they need it spelled out for them and almost need a mathematical equation in order to figure it out.

I guess the best of both worlds is the person who can learn both ways... however I can only comment on my own personal experience and say that I'm glad I didn't learn any theory until much later. I definitely believe it gave me a deeper understanding of music because it forced me to try things that most students are discouraged from doing simply because their teachers think that it would be too confusing to them to stray from the assigned topics. I was forced into many more years of trial and error, experimentation and listening and feeling rather than reading and copying.

I think it's absolutely necessary to know your instrument and the theory behind it. Perhaps you do not have to know every little niche' and detail, but a passing knowledge of theory is what makes you a musician---not someone who noodles for hours on end.

Learning with a teacher or with a book, or even just attempting to teach yourself music theory is far superior than just 'doing it by ear.' The reason isn't because your ear and aural skills aren't important, it's just that they are only half the package.

People who tend to take the 'I will just learn this on my own without any outside help besides my ears' approach usually develop bad habits, such as, but not limited to---looking at their fret hand while playing, and limiting themselves to what they know and never able to venture outside of that on a whim because they don't know how to get the new sound.

Whenever I first started at Berklee I was like that. I knew some music theory--just enough to fake my way through most things in a pinch--but not much. As time has gone on, however, I realize why it's so valuable.

Most anything I hear in my head now I can play on a whim, and now that I've practiced all these scales and arpeggios to the point of nausea---I don't have to look at my fret hand nor put much thought into 'how am I going to play this melody in my head.' Instead, I can sit back, let my fingers do the work and <b>listen</b> to the musicians around me.

So, in effect, all these scales, modes, arpeggios, etc. have been learned so that I could FULLY realize the potential of my ear.

Muscle memory, at day's end, is what carries the day in terms of translating what you hear into actual notes.

[Kevin Taylor]

I think it's absolutely necessary to know your instrument and the theory behind it. Perhaps you do not have to know every little niche' and detail, but a passing knowledge of theory is what makes you a musician---not someone who noodles for hours on end.

Learning with a teacher or with a book, or even just attempting to teach yourself music theory is far superior than just 'doing it by ear.' The reason isn't because your ear and aural skills aren't important, it's just that they are only half the package.

People who tend to take the 'I will just learn this on my own without any outside help besides my ears' approach usually develop bad habits, such as, but not limited to---looking at their fret hand while playing, and limiting themselves to what they know and never able to venture outside of that on a whim because they don't know how to get the new sound.

Whenever I first started at Berklee I was like that. I knew some music theory--just enough to fake my way through most things in a pinch--but not much. As time has gone on, however, I realize why it's so valuable.

Most anything I hear in my head now I can play on a whim, and now that I've practiced all these scales and arpeggios to the point of nausea---I don't have to look at my fret hand nor put much thought into 'how am I going to play this melody in my head.' Instead, I can sit back, let my fingers do the work and <b>listen</b> to the musicians around me.

So, in effect, all these scales, modes, arpeggios, etc. have been learned so that I could FULLY realize the potential of my ear.

Muscle memory, at day's end, is what carries the day in terms of translating what you hear into actual notes.

Just outa curiosity, do you have any recordings of your own music that we can listen to?
I'm curious to compare our playing ability and see what differences there are in terms of feel and technique coming from the two totally opposite points of view on this subject. I've been playing about 20 years and except for maybe 4 lessons about 10 years ago, I'm completely self taught... didn't even know how to read tab until about 5 years ago.
It'd be a rush to hear somebody who's had formal training in theory and compare the two.

[da_ardvark]

My explaination of music theory will be (as everything I try and explain
0 by way of analogy. It's important to know theory to make music in the the same way it's important to have a sound basis of mechanical engineering in order to build a bridge. In other words only be posessing a thorough understanding of the underlying theory, can you then break those rules.

Not sure this makes any sense but ot me it does :D

[Kevin Taylor]

My explaination of music theory will be (as everything I try and explain
0 by way of analogy. It's important to know theory to make music in the the same way it's important to have a sound basis of mechanical engineering in order to build a bridge. In other words only be posessing a thorough understanding of the underlying theory, can you then break those rules.

Not sure this makes any sense but ot me it does :D

Yeah, I totally agree. I realize now that an understanding of the underlying theory of music does nothing but help your playing.
I just think that if I'd come at it from the way of learning theory first, I would probably have given up a long time ago because it all seemed so difficult at the time. The reason I stuck with it for 20 years was because I enjoyed playing guitar without feeling any pressure from anybody to do things "right". Later on, when I really needed theory in order to teach, I realized that all the jargon I'd thought was so difficult at first was actually just technical explanations for all the things that I already knew how to do.

To me, I feel like I bypassed a stumbling block that personally would have discouraged me from learning guitar. I hated school, never did homework and hated being told what to do. If I'd been forced to learn to read music back then and learn scales I would have hated it so much, I'd never have bothered with it.

[dvenetian]

I guess the best of both worlds is the person who can learn both ways... however I can only comment on my own personal experience and say that I'm glad I didn't learn any theory until much later. I definitely believe it gave me a deeper understanding of music because it forced me to try things that most students are discouraged from doing simply because their teachers think that it would be too confusing to them to stray from the assigned topics. I was forced into many more years of trial and error, experimentation and listening and feeling rather than reading and copying.
I agree with taking the leap into theory later is a better approach because there are so many things you need to build strength on which takes a lot of time to master them. Focusing on too much at one time can limit your ability to advance in the many levels required to even play the instrument and enjoy it. In due time theory can help by connecting what has already been learned by feel from trial and error through your approach. Let's face it, it's all based upon intervals and how they react by the sequence you put them in. They will either sound awesome, OK, weak or terrible depending on their voicing with the Tonal Center they are built from. Take bending a note or vibrato for example, no theory in the world can make that note jump to the proper interval or pitch desired. You're on your own to make it happen and most that master this effect do it by feel, including the duration and amount of times they use it with their style. Theory definately has it's advantages and I use it continiously in my style because it's right there at my fingertips, but it doesn't create feel. In my opinion, a player with feel can create a great sound regardless of their background in theory, just by knowing what intervals sound best with the progression they're playing.

[solidwalnut]

....To me, I feel like I bypassed a stumbling block that personally would have discouraged me from learning guitar. I hated school, never did homework and hated being told what to do. If I'd been forced to learn to read music back then and learn scales I would have hated it so much, I'd never have bothered with it.

Can I get a huge 'amen'? This is exactly the way it was for me, too. I never learned any theory until one day I stumbled across a guitar book that built the bridge between basic theory and basic guitar playing and I was hooked. Now, I still don't care for a bunch of theory but it helps learning the language so I can communicate better with other musicians, and so I can teach.

Steve

[PlatonicShred]

I do, actually, think theory can impart feel onto those who learn it. I've said this before, and it's been tried and tested---cadences. If you learn all about cadences you will always be known as someone who has a great 'feel' ((provided your vibrato is decent)).

Without theory you can't truly excite yourself while playing. Try, just for once, to shut off that little singing voice in your head that hums out all your melodies just before you play them. Instead, just work your way up to a spot on the guitar and start insta-riffing.

If you are constantly playing what you hear within your mind---as in, you hear the entire phrase in your mind and then play it--your playing has a high chance of growing stale. This is just because most people have similar melodic sense, even non-musicians. And the common answer to this is 'well i can just think hard of a different this...that...' Yes, you could, but then you'd be different just for the sake of being different---blaise'.

My truest belief is that to be a perfect, unique, awesome guitar player---it cannot be just about your ear. Just as your theory skills can fail you, so can your aurals. Try to just express yourself. This involves using your ears to get a general idea of the sound your are going for---no specific notes, just the mood. Then it involves using your theory to illuminate the fretboard and show you where to go, and then it is on you to go there. Your theory guarentees that no matter what you play, it will fall into that soundscape your ears have drawn. Half the time, you play melodies that resolve with beauty and the other half, they will sound 'original' and creative.

Most of the time, players that are world-class have this almost perfect ration in their playing: 50-50. Half of what they play you can predict and follow, and half of it is 'new' and exciting.

Theory can save you from your ear, just like your ear can save you from all the pedantic theory. And your fingers save you from both, when need be. Just let them fly every now and again---fall down the stairs and try to land on your feet.

It's more about approaching the guitar in different ways than it is about becoming a boring academic.

[SnowRose]

Hey guys, I am still a bit confused. So say the song is written in 'D Major'. Which Blues scale would fit in that?

[ren]

Hey guys, I am still a bit confused. So say the song is written in 'D Major'. Which Blues scale would fit in that?

It depends on precisely which chords you're using. If we're just looking at D Major as a key generally - you could use a D major blues scale (major pentatonic with the added b5), or you could use B minor blues (minor pentatonic with added b5) as it's the relative minor. You might also consider E Dorian for a bluesy feel... You could look at any mode of D Major to be fair, adding the flat fifths.

The 5 pentatonic shapes (CAGED) with the flattened fifths would give you a fair bit of scope across the neck straight away...