If the notes in C Major = A minor
What is the equivalent to C Blues Scale?
Originally Posted by: SnowRoseHi 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?
Originally Posted by: SnowRoseHi 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?
Originally Posted by: Jolly McJollysonC major has the same notes as A minor, yes, but they're not the same scale.[/quote]
Excellent point.
[QUOTE=Jolly McJollyson]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.
Originally Posted by: Drew77how 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.
Originally Posted by: schmangeblah... I think totally oposite than this way of thinking.
[/quote]
LOL. Fair enough. But...Originally Posted by: schmangeI 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.
[/quote]
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.
[QUOTE=schmange]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.
[QUOTE=schmange]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?
Originally Posted by: dvenetianIf 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).
Originally Posted by: SnowRoseHi 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?
Originally Posted by: CSchlegelExactly. 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
Hope this helps someone out there.
Originally Posted by: dvenetianGreat link!!!![/quote]
Thanks! From what I've seen so far, dvenetian, you already know this type of stuff. So, I appreciate your favorable feedback.
[QUOTE=dvenetian]
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.
Originally Posted by: CSchlegelThanks! 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.
Originally Posted by: schmangeI 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.
Originally Posted by: PlatonicShredI 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 listen 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.