Reg's Fingerings

[Donplaysguitar]

If you were to play that exact pattern, from 5th fret on 6th string, to 8th fret on 1st string, low A to hi C, without using pinky:
- on strings 6 and 5, there is stretch btw index and middle
- on string 4, you can play without stretching, fingers 1 and 3.
- on string 3, you shift position one fret lower and have stretch btw middle and ring finger.
- on string 2, you shift back to original position and have stretch btw middle and ring finger.
- on string one there is stretch btw index and middle.

My Band camp

Thanks. But why would anyone do that?

[Donplaysguitar]

If you define "shifting" as a hand move that also moves the thumb position,
and if you define "stretching" as a finger moving outside the hand position,
then you don't need to do either if you fix thumb position and move the hand.
Doing so lets each finger span 5 frets, so the whole hand may span 8 frets.
The hand moves so different fingers move opposite the fixed thumb as needed.
Thumb is fixed, until you move it (you can move it in advance of a hand shift).
If that seems like unreachable span, reduce it to 3 frets for fingers and 6 for hand.

OK. But we don't define it that way. That doesn't mean we can't do what you've described, it's just not how it's defined.

In both traditional and contemporary formal guitar studies, each finger is "assigned" to one fret. So it's "one finger per fret". "Position" is defined in terms of the placement of the first finger. William Leavitt slightly modifed the traditional definition of position as being "one fret lower than the second finger" (paraphrasing). A classical guitar department head who I briefly studied with said "what's the difference and why define position that way?". I replied that it was because some of Leavitt's fingerings used the first finger to cover two frets lower than the second finger, while leaving the 2nd finger anchored (i.e. not shifting).

A "shift" is when we move the hand higher or lower to another position, where we again assign one finger per fret. In Leavitt's fingering approach, the 2nd and 3rd fingers are anchored to assigned frets while the 1rst and 4th fingers can cover two frets, using stretching.

A "stretch" occurs when we alter the "one finger per fret" placement by using any two adjacent fingers to cover a span of more than one fret. This typically occurs with the 1rst and 4th fingers.


As was stated above, this doesn't apply to chords, and much of what is played in terms of melody involves shifts.

[pauln]

OK. But we don't define it that way. That doesn't mean we can't do what you've described, it's just not how it's defined.

In both traditional and contemporary formal guitar studies, each finger is "assigned" to one fret. So it's "one finger per fret". "Position" is defined in terms of the placement of the first finger. William Leavitt slightly modifed the traditional definition of position as being "one fret lower than the second finger" (paraphrasing). A classical guitar department head who I briefly studied with said "what's the difference and why define position that way?". I replied that it was because some of Leavitt's fingerings used the first finger to cover two frets lower than the second finger, while leaving the 2nd finger anchored (i.e. not shifting).

A "shift" is when we move the hand higher or lower to another position, where we again assign one finger per fret. In Leavitt's fingering approach, the 2nd and 3rd fingers are anchored to assigned frets while the 1rst and 4th fingers can cover two frets, using stretching.

A "stretch" occurs when we alter the "one finger per fret" placement by using any two adjacent fingers to cover a span of more than one fret. This typically occurs with the 1rst and 4th fingers.


As was stated above, this doesn't apply to chords, and much of what is played in terms of melody involves shifts.

That doesn't look any different from what I wrote except:

- why claim a finger is assigned to one fret and then immediately resend that claim for stretches?

- if the meaning of position is limited (to 5 or 7, etc. other than anywhere), that limits your definition of shift

- if your definition of stretch is corrected to, "using any two adjacent fingers to cover a span of more than two frets". (A span includes both its ends)

[Vladan]

We are talking this pattern right?

Hmmm.

That's just a CAGED fingering pattern, position V. It includes a shift to position IV on the 3rd string. No stretches involved.

If you were to play that exact pattern, from 5th fret on 6th string, to 8th fret on 1st string, low A to hi C, without using pinky:
- on strings 6 and 5, there is stretch btw index and middle
- on string 4, you can play without stretching, fingers 1 and 3.
- on string 3, you shift position one fret lower and have stretch btw middle and ring finger.
- on string 2, you shift back to original position and have stretch btw middle and ring finger.
- on string one there is stretch btw index and middle.

My Band camp

Thanks. But why would anyone do that?

I do not know. I certainly would not do it.

It's only that in context of what was discussed, starting scale pattern with ring finger from C/ 8th fret/ 6th string, you said, as quoted above, that there are no stretches.
I just listed stretches as I would probably do it, if I ever would. I use pinky. I find 3 finger playing highly uncomfortable, exactly due 1st finger and 3rd finger stretches.
My fingers are rather short, on hands not particularly large.

If you wanted to say that stretches are not needed if pinky is used for 8th fret while position is shifted on 3rd string, I can only agree with you.
That is the way I would do it and the way, I think vast majority of player would chose, for that particular pattern.

[Donplaysguitar]

That doesn't look any different from what I wrote except:

- why claim a finger is assigned to one fret and then immediately resend that claim for stretches?

Good question. The classicist that I reffered to wasn't crazy about Leavitt's definition either. But it's not really so much about his definition as it was his approach to playing, was it?

- if the meaning of position is limited (to 5 or 7, etc. other than anywhere), that limits your definition of shift

I'm not following your point. Nevertheless, if we assign one finger per fret and are in the fifth position and then move up one fret (still with one finger per fret) we are in the sixth position. Moving from position A to position B or vice versa is considered "a shift".

Span vs. distance etc. etc. Whatever, I'm certain that you understood what I meant. If the distance between any two adjacent fingers is greater than one fret, it's a stretch.

I don't mind clarifying a bit, as long as we're not playing some kind of a game. They're not my definitions, of course.

[Reg]

Is it possible to agree on anything.

Position.... usually uses 1st finger as reference, yes?
We usually also expand that to imply fingers at rest with one finger per fret using 1/2 steps. Yes?

You could say playing A min, Dorian in 5th position could be... starting on low 6th string

Fret.......fingers
5 7 9 ....1 s2 s4
5 7 9 ....1 s2 s4
6 7 9.....2 3 s4
6 7 .......2 3
5 7 9.....1 s2 s4
5 ..........1
5th position with stretches, Yes?

But why.... The point of fingerings is to make playing the guitar easy, based of hands as well as performance.

Old days.... performance was the point, rehearsed performance. Over and Over etc... We don't perform jazz in that tradition. So fingerings have evolved to reflect the jazz tradition. You can still use whatever you choose.... but there is organization behind the changes.

If you look at fingerings as reflections of playing chords on the guitar, like caged.... just expand that approach to playing Jazz chords. That's how I organized my approach as a kid...And because I've always had notation and sight reading as part of my playing, performance... that's where I ended up. I generally always thought my 2nd finger was the strongest and 1st finger most mobile etc...

And I always liked playing pentatonics back in the 60's and 70's...LOL

[Donplaysguitar]

If you wanted to say that stretches are not needed if pinky is used for 8th fret while position is shifted on 3rd string, I can only agree with you.
That is the way I would do it and the way, I think vast majority of player would chose, for that particular pattern.

Yes that's what I meant. Interestingly enough, people/books often show those CAGED fingering patterns wihout showing assigned fingers. It's well established that all four fingers with shifts and without stretches is the convention.

[Vladan]

If you were to play that exact pattern, from 5th fret on 6th string, to 8th fret on 1st string, low A to hi C, without using pinky:
- on strings 6 and 5, there is stretch btw index and middle
- on string 4, you can play without stretching, fingers 1 and 3.
- on string 3, you shift position one fret lower and have stretch btw middle and ring finger.
- on string 2, you shift back to original position and have stretch btw middle and ring finger.
- on string one there is stretch btw index and middle.

My Band camp

If you define "shifting" as a hand move that also moves the thumb position,
and if you define "stretching" as a finger moving outside the hand position,
then you don't need to do either if you fix thumb position and move the hand.
Doing so lets each finger span 5 frets, so the whole hand may span 8 frets.
The hand moves so different fingers move opposite the fixed thumb as needed.
Thumb is fixed, until you move it (you can move it in advance of a hand shift).
If that seems like unreachable span, reduce it to 3 frets for fingers and 6 for hand.

Assuming you were commenting on my above post, my definitions:
- stretching is whenever you cover a number of frets with lesser number of fingers, while staying in position.
- position is defined by index finger/ Hand movement where index finger changes position is shifting position.
- You can shift with, or without moving your thumb.
- You can have stretch within hand position.

What you describe is just mad shifting, in order to avoid stretching.

[rpjazzguitar]

I learned to go to a position and play one finger per fret. I also learned 5 frets for 4 fingers, using stretches.

Much later, I figured out what 3 finger players had to know, which is that keeping the position of your hand loose (flexible, not fixed) can be an advantage. Also, that thinking one finger per fret might cause you to miss some good fingering possibilties (eg in the C major scale starting on the low E and fret 8 with the fourth finger, you play the A on the D string with your fourth finger to make a seamless shift to get the B with your first finger on the G string).

Of course, great jazz has been played every which way.

[Donplaysguitar]

Is it possible to agree on anything.

Is that a trick question? It's the internet, lol.

But seriously, at the end of the day there are a lot of variables. Length of finger, length of fretboard scale, position location, what is being played, player preferences, fingering "logic", increased/decreased probablity of performance success based upon choice, etc. And even then we all have to both shift and stretch at times.

So what are we talking about really? I can only speak for myself and say that after being influenced by Leavitt I chose his system of fingering that utilizes stretching as a default technique - but likewise found that it strained my left hand after rigorous practice sessions on a long scale guitar, so decided to use more traditional fingerings - fingerings that short guys with small hands tend to use in other words. What's the result? More shifting of course, and a few of those shifts kind of suck just like a few of the stretches kind of suck. But my left hand is happy so I just work with it.

And I'm no improv master but I think I understand that improvisation entails a lack of predictability (duh). For that reason, a default technique that utilzes stretches may better accomodate split second decision making while position shifting may lead to "misses". The counter balance to that reality as far as I'm concered is that jazz language has to be practiced, it doesn't just fly out by itself without pre-practice. So I practice the jazz language with my fingerings (occassionally involving stretches BTW). If I can play it, I can repeat it. I rather expect that's the way it works for others as well.

[pauln]

What you describe is just mad shifting, in order to avoid stretching.

I stretch... most often on the 1st string, three consecutive whole tones, using fingers 1 2 and 4. Sometimes same thing on the others.

Don't misunderstand - when the thumb is fixed and the hand moves up or down the neck a little to further place the fingers, I'm not considering that a shift of position (nor a stretch)... the "position" in this case is more defined by the thumb.

This is what I was meaning by saying earlier that I don't use a "fingering system"; I use a set of mechanical principles and let the fingers figure it out. I'm thinking this now after noticing my perspective that it is the thumb that determines the position. Seems too relative and not easily given a numeric integer label, but maybe it is more mechanically real?

[Vladan]

I learned to go to a position and play one finger per fret. I also learned 5 frets for 4 fingers, using stretches.

Much later, I figured out what 3 finger players had to know, which is that keeping the position of your hand loose (flexible, not fixed) can be an advantage. Also, that thinking one finger per fret might cause you to miss some good fingering possibilties (eg in the C major scale starting on the low E and fret 8 with the fourth finger, you play the A on the D string with your fourth finger to make a seamless shift to get the B with your first finger on the G string).

Of course, great jazz has been played every which way.

Why would "loose position" be somehow exclusive to 3 fingers playing?
That "interesting possibility" is de facto 4 fingers playing. Iin no way it is more obvious to 3 finger players than it is to 4 finger players.
There are ways to switch positions. What you described is one of them. It is one example where 4 fingers playing gives advantage over 3 fingers.

[Vladan]

I stretch... most often on the 1st string, three consecutive whole tones, using fingers 1 2 and 4. Sometimes same thing on the others.

Don't misunderstand - when the thumb is fixed and the hand moves up or down the neck a little to further place the fingers, I'm not considering that a shift of position (nor a stretch)... the "position" in this case is more defined by the thumb.

This is what I was meaning by saying earlier that I don't use a "fingering system"; I use a set of mechanical principles and let the fingers figure it out. I'm thinking this now after noticing my perspective that it is the thumb that determines the position. Seems too relative and not easily given a numeric integer label, but maybe it is more mechanically real?

I understood you well first time. As I already said, what you describe, I consider to be "shifting position by stretching the thumb". I do it all the time. I think it would benefit me to do it less.

BTW, i am more of a "stretcher" type than I am "shifter.", although it is changing a bit. Couple of years ago, in 5th position, I would always stretch pinky for B note on 4th string 9th fret.. Nowdays, sometimes I shift back to 4th position, for B note on 3rd string 4th fret. Also, I much more stretch with pinky than I do with index. Probably due fingers given length.

[Reg]

Wow Pauln... I like that ...no finger stretches... position defined by the thumb. never heard of that. I believe thumb needs to be below neck, with space etc... to create freedom of movement for fingers. So now just need someone to have position details below neck.

I'm not joking. I don't need to stare at fretboard when I play or read. And I like 7 positions because with fingering organization, somewhat of a seamless connection between positions helps with the need to stare at fretboard thing.
And the frets are the markers or what we feel as we move etc... (obviously becomes internal).

Do you have any posted vids of your playing.... would dig seeing. I'm going to checkout some of my posts.

[pauln]

Wow Pauln... I like that ...no finger stretches... position defined by the thumb. never heard of that. I believe thumb needs to be below neck, with space etc... to create freedom of movement for fingers. So now just need someone to have position details below neck.

I'm not joking. I don't need to stare at fretboard when I play or read. And I like 7 positions because with fingering organization, somewhat of a seamless connection between positions helps with the need to stare at fretboard thing.
And the frets are the markers or what we feel as we move etc... (obviously becomes internal).

Do you have any posted vids of your playing.... would dig seeing. I'm going to checkout some of my posts.

I don't have anything to show, but I think can describe what it might look like. But there is not much to see.

Audience people who were not guitarists have complimented "my playing" saying things like, "Great bass play'n, man." I have had to just smile and say, "Very kind of you to say, I'll pass that on to him, I'm actually the guitarist." I think this may be because my hand spreads out, I use four fingers and don't lift them much off the strings, and make fewer smaller shifts, more larger shifts as needed... so maybe similar to how a bass player's hand looks and move on the bigger bass scale finger board?

On the other hand, guitarists tend to more wonder where all my notes are coming from because my picking hand is virtually motionless (flexing my thumb and index - Chuck Wayne picking). If more than eight feet way it looks like my hand is just "there" without apparent movement.

The mapping of the finger board, positions, and fingerings is eminently logical, especially when approached from music reading and a practical visual, geometric, pattern correspondence to the desired "note/pitch to string/fret/finger" relationships, which becomes internalized. My approach (self taught) was not logical, but strictly aural ("by ear"). I left my hands and fingers to figure it out for themselves with just brute faith that they would. One of the results is that my thumb position itself is "shifty" in anticipation of what my fingers are about to play; my thumb positions itself in advance. That is not really noticeable since the usual place to look for stuff happening is over the finger board, not under it.

All seemed normal to me, like a sax player moving his right leg and the bell closer to each other when playing some low notes, or how a trumpet player swings his horn down between phrases.

[Reg]

Cool thanks... yea I've toured playing bass. Loved it. Obviously one the the reasons I'm always lookin for the groove of pocket

[bako]

Don't misunderstand - when the thumb is fixed and the hand moves up or down the neck a little to further place the fingers, I'm not considering that a shift of position (nor a stretch)... the "position" in this case is more defined by the thumb.

pauln,

I went to a clinic with the great French bassist Francois Rabbath.
He is a proponent of a fingering approach that sounds exactly like
what you are describing, perhaps even more extreme given the scale
length of that instrument. He conceives of the entire bass in six positions
while pivoting around a stable thumb for the higher and lower notes.
Open position//5th //octave //8ve+5th//2nd 8ve//2nd 8ve+5th.

I make use of this idea more frequently while playing cello and to a
lesser extent on guitar. Rabbath also differentiates pivoting and shifting.