I wholeheartedly concur with most anything you mention here! Carol Kaye also said once in an interview: "Learn your chordal notes" and like you was opposed to the scale-centric approach to learning Jazz. So yeah! I'm with you and freagging cool playing along and breaking it down! I subscribed, looking forward to exploring more of your content here, awesome! (I must have sensed that the approach all my former teachers followed was off for me; today you and Carol Kaye before more or less confirmed my hunch from back then, thanks guys)
I think Beato is a Genius..but The problem I have with him and others is information vs Application..he has Great info,but he needs to teach more application.
I purchased the book call Note Grouping ..it Cost me 35.00! (Small book)But the two things I got from it were 1.Play(solo) and read in Phrases. No scales.Don't play and read within bars ..play and read statements words phrases like a singer. 2.The author studied and transcribed loads of classical pieces ,compositions,solos and many other styles.He also listened to numerous recordings and found the one thing in common was Great players accent the WEAK BEATS..or the Ands..not 1 2 3 or 4...
@@ChrisGill-s4s Thanks for the feedback, Chris. It seems like you're not so subtly implying that I'm being divisive, which I may be, although there is no hostility in my video or purpose here. Here's the gist of how I understand it...Rick has around 5 million subscribers and is putting forth an approach that I strongly disagree with. My reasons for disagreeing are presented in the video, and my purpose in specifically calling them out in contrast to Rick is that he has a massive audience that is listening to him and taking in these bad ideas, in my opinion. Why do I think they're bad? Because, I've seen firsthand from many of my students how this approach wastes years of their life, causes endless frustration, and sometimes makes people quit learning guitar. If you thought someone's approach to something was wrong and causing people to not achieve the goals they want, wouldn't you say something? I would, and so that's what I present in this video. It's because I have integrity with myself and in my ideas that I need to address them publicly, regardless of any backlash.
Totally agree with teaching scales. I remember when I worked for Jimmy Bruno editing his videos. He hated the over analysis of his solos. He doesn’t like it when people analyzes his lines and say he used the melodic minor scale. He was playing language, not scales. He would go, “how the f**k would you know what I’m thinking about?!” That was quite a lesson for me.
Thanks for sharing that example 🙏 I think there can be value in analyzing the details of what notes/scales make up the vocab a guitarist uses, but we can’t lose the fact that those are descriptions of the vocab, not the language itself.
@@ChaseMaddox When it comes to tune analysis, though, my main guy is Barry Greene! Totally opened my understanding of the melodic minor and the diminished scales. Love your channel! More power!
Who cares what Jimmy (love him) cares about how others analyze his music? Some people derive joy and understanding relating how Jimmy thinks about things to how they think about things.Just because Jimmy might not have been thinking about the melodic minor scale does not mean he was not using the melodic minor scale… or that what he did is not described by the melodic minor scale.
I think it's pretty safe to assume when talking about guys from that era, like George Benson, Joe Pass or even Joe Diorio that they had no idea what a "bebop dominant scale" is. Joe Pass didn't even know modes, those guys mostly just thought about major/minor/dominant sounds and then added whatever extensions on top. And the blues. They also thought much more in terms of chord sounds than scales, which is a way more practical approach.
@12:52, I totally agree. Even in Rick Beato’s interview with Benson, George talks mostly about his influences, the people he listened to, the people he “stole” ideas from. Rick tries, with no success to exact from George, Benson’s theoretical/ harmonies approach. I had the great pleasure to hang with George a few decades ago, and not once did he talk about scales, harmony, arpeggios etc, he always mentioned those that gave him the ideas to explore. So Chase is bang on. In the case of George, he delves into the musical language and vocabulary he learned and acquired in his life rather than thinking about playing this scale or that arpeggio”.
Those guys didn’t think in those terms. Music theory is useful in hindsight for figuring out what people did but none of the best players use theory in the moment to plan out a solo. It’s internalized and they feel it or hear it. The best music that resonates is not so analytical and more emotional.
The actual lines and vocabulary is where it's at. You're right - I mean it is important to learn the theory, arpeggios, scales and all that, but the actual lines are what really connects us to the tradition and the language of the music. The theory is good to explain it but is usually some kind of oversimplification of the reality of the melodies. Thanks for the video Chase!
Many jazz players I know would think of the Fm7b5 arpeggio here as a Abm6. Just another perspective. Also that Charlie Parker lick is more similar to a diminished phrase (such as from donna lee) not harmonic minor. But yeah vocabulary is where it's at.
Man, you're so right about "real" jazz feel involving starting lines on the upbeat. One day it hit me and I started to listen for this and sure enough, it's something that separates the men from the boys.
Maddox, As much as I love Rick B and the way he teaches I don’t believe that he is above correction and I am sure that he has the best that he can do posted for us to learn from. I also think that you post the best that you have to offer and together you and Rick B have helped me improve vastly. Thank You 🙏😎🎸
I agree with you that great musicians are not using theory when they create music. On the contrary they are using their ears to hear sounds and then imagining how to make these sounds as sweet and interesting as possible. There isn’t any theory involved in this creative process because it’s not relevant at that moment In fact, good theory texts emphasise that the theory of what great musicians comes later, often much later, as it begins to be understood that there were certain structural changes that made musical sense For instance, you have the inversion of melodies used in counterpoint. It’s not that the musicians developing these melodic inversions are applying the rule of inversion. Instead they are learning from experience of the sounds that inversions are sweet sounding and meaningful. And this is important because if this were to be done theoretically it would be too rigid, predictable and meaningless
I love Rick, and I love you. The debate / disagreement you’re (politely) engaging in makes us all learn and think more, which is a win win. Thank you ❤
Thanks for saying that. I hope it’s clear my purpose here is to help people come to a greater understanding and ability to play guitar. Sometimes the best way to do that is discussing very popular ideas being put forward that I strongly believe are wrong.
Great explanation. When I learned solos from Dickie Betts and Duane Allman, I don't analyze them in terms of scales/modes etc., I "hear" their references to other musicians I know they admired, along with their own takes on those licks/riffs/bits
I like the way you could see a B major7 arpeggio within the Ab Dorian lick; a nice way of looking at it because it does fit perfectly well over the Db7. Lots of enharmonic coincidence/convenience going on.
Hello Chase, As always you give good insights into playing. I understand completely your analysis and its comparison to Rick Beato's analysis. However I have a slightly different take on what you are saying that I find to be more general, and more la encompassing of chords against scales. I have no doubt that you understand this, but I find it curious that I never find a complete analysis that this gives of chords and scales. Some preliminaries that we all have to learn: The harmonic basis of the diatonic scale is the Do, re, mi, fa , sol, la, ti, do. (You can call it how you like such as C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C or 1 root, 2M, 3M, 4P, 5P, 6M, 7M, 8 Octave). We then are shown how relationships between these notes in various ways. 1). Up and down the scale its in minor and major seconds. 2) the scale in thirds to create triads (only 3 notes) and seventh chords (only 4 notes) plus a few with extensions with the 9ths, 11ths, & 13ths. 3). The scale in 4ths or 5ths to give us the cycle of 4ths and 5ths. But the analysis bogs down with extensions of 9th, 11ths, 13ths. Because the extensions are seen en triads or 7th chords build over roots higher up the chord,; For example: The chordal idea a Db7 or an F half diminished, or a B Maj7th.???? The thing is to see all the upper partials as resulting to the root, and that is based on the sound from the root with the chordal tones. So a F half diminished over Db7 is the 3, 5, 7, 9 of the scale . And B Maj7 over Db7 is the 7, 9, 11, 13 of the scale In a way I agree more with Rick's vision of playing over Db7, because that is George's harmonic base over which he hears to play. ( I like you, do not agree with his idea of the scale being the bebop scale. He would probably not disagree when he sees your more complete analysis of The solo..) The idea is to understand (when hearing) what are chordal notes and the extensions over the root of the chord. So, you play the scales for two octaves in thirds: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13. If you think about it, evreyone probably already knows all the scale degrees of any note of any mode of the the diatonic scale. That is, if they know all the degrees of the 7 modes of the diatonic scale. (The best organized way to study them is in the order of the cycle of 5ths starting with the mode built on the 7th degree of the major scale and ending on the 4th degree. This way going from one scale to the next has only one note that is different, making it easier to organize in the mind). This all simplifies down the ideas of lots of great musicians like Joe Pass, where they see types of 3 chords: major, minor and dominant seventh. Joe, like many others, did not learn in university classes, so he did not know all the terminology used here. But the terminology is just to get to the same place as Joe Pass, of hearing notes over chords and knowing (sound wise) what those notes are, from the root to any diatonic note, and to any augmented or diminished note played over any chord. I find playing the scales in thirds for 2 octaves is great to help see this. And also doing this with other scales like the minor scale with the major 6th and 7th, which gives some great altered chords with altered upper partials. A very good example is playing this minor scale over a dominant 7th chord using the major 7th of the scale as the root of the dominant 7th chord. Here again, play the scale and listen to the intervals over the chord. Also play the two octaves of the scale in thirds to also see and hear all the diminished and augmented notes of the scale and listen for those intervals from the root of the chord. Also look at the 7 note arpeggio and see what are the triads and 7th chords are according to what note you are starting on; again this is just seeing what you already know if you know the chords of the scale; the only difference is here the chords are built vertically on top of each other in thirds and not up and down the scale or chord progression. I have no doubt you know all this, but explaining the ideas this way I think is very helpful to learn to play and hear the sounds. I went into more preliminary ideas, but thought it good for those who read this and are just learning. The goal is to hear the sounds in the mind and know where they are on your instrument. The theory is just a tool to get there. As Charlie Parker said ( more or less), "You have to learn all that, and then you just forget it and play". I loved Joe Pass and I think a great idea he gave when asked by a student who was worried about making mistakes was "Mistakes? that's part of my style.".😂😂👍👌💪🎸🎸 😅😊❤❤
I'm a bass guitar player that plays jazz. Jeff Berlin was one of my instructors @ M.I. Berlin taught me about chord tones, approach notes & transcribing & not be scale like. That way you can spell out the harmony. When you just play scales, it's hard to hear the harmony when you solo without chords behind you.
Not starting phrases on the downbeat is literally the greatest improv jazz/blues hack of all time. I literally independently did this a week ago on harmonica, and every vocab sounds hip, same phrase on the 1 sounds brutally amateurish......its literally the most valuable thing you have to do.
Beato is a Berklee graduate and uses the Berklee system to explain this stuff...which is just one of the ways to communicate amongst musicians...how Benson thinks about it? We'd have to ask him.
Sure, but for all the reasons I present in the video, Beato’s not even accurately describing what Benson is doing. I’m not talking about getting in Benson’s head.
@@PeteCalandra thank you for the clarification. NEC has often shared tutors with Berklee (at least when I was there!) that's why his way of analysing and communicating things always feels familiar to me
That's what I thought, too, then I rememberd he never was at Berklee. but still I think you americnas are very much infiuenced by "the Berklee" system. I attended a very good music academy here in Europe and we hardly ever spoke about scales. And I don't think Dizzy, or Bird, or Thelonious did. It's all about approaches. Aproache the note that you want to emphasize. We had a whole course that was only focused on "chromatic approach to a note" which was great. I still don't think about scales when playing (I'm a pro guitar player today) but much more how to embellish notes. And I teach that to my guitar students today...
I'm coming back to this because you gave me a lot of food for thought (which is good, I appreciate it!). Here's the thing: I noticed how your language analogy instantly resonated (!) with me. Because I have a linguistics degree and particularly when you go about saying that the scale describing the notes of the phrase is _not_ the equivalent of _what's_ being played, being "said", i.e. it is _not_ the phrase. This then had me think "why not"? (not from a questioning perspective but from needing to know _why it isn't_ and why one can't automatically be equated with the other) This is my suggestion: As you said, we use language by using sequences of words and phrases that are meant to convey something, i.e. a melody, a statement of sorts. The scale might describe what the "words" and phrases consist of, but it doesn't say much or anything about that which we're trying to say and express, i.e. the content (or "semantics" in linguistics). And that is actually reflected in linguistics in a very similar or conceptually the same way: You can describe a certain part of a sentence as the verb or the subject, entire subclauses as e.g. a participle or an ellipsis or a gerund or any such categorial denotation. However, that doesn't say _anything_ about the actual content, the semantics of the phrase. I'm just offering this because it seems now more obvious to me, why students have such a hard time with scales (as did I ): How is one supposed to _apply_ that description of vocabulary and actually start "speaking"? (hint: When learning to speak, we _listen_ first, then _emulate_ what we heard until facial expression of those addressed signal back that we got it right ;-) ) Anyway, for all those who may have wondered, I'm hoping some of it makes sense.
Hey Chase, Great content! I agree with your assessment of Rick's video. However, In my years of teaching, I've noticed that every student learns differently and eventually develops their unique style as a player based on how they approach and absorb the material. Notes, arpeggios, scales, chords, and all the theory in between ultimately depend on the individual-how their brain works and how they think about music. I completely agree with the idea of keeping things simple; the path of least resistance is often the most effective. That said, it’s not the only path. When you sit down with George, he doesn’t just want you to copy him; he encourages you to find your own way of doing things, which is invaluable. Thank you so much for putting out this content. The value you're adding to the guitar community is truly immeasurable.
Thanks for your comment and support! I think the big thing I have an issue with here is that Rick doesn’t even mention the idea of vocab or phrases here. I’m not anti-scale because I agree with you that it can be useful to know them and some people find them helpful. However this presentation of the material was missing that very important piece. We’re coming at it from different sides and you all get to enjoy the benefit of our different perspectives 🤘
I understand and appreciate the need for clarification, but I need to dig deeper into both your and Rick's video. I agree that the wider context of the isolated part of the solo would lead to a better understanding. But your video seems to want to address a perspective/opinion that Rick was not trying to make. I am going to give a very close listen for better accuracy.
Db9 without the root = Fm7b5 from the third and Abm6 from the fifth. So the F makes the crucial difference, wheras Abm7 would demand a Gb. You could just switch between Gb and F, to outline Abm7 and Db7.
Thank you so much for your analysis and breakdown…. There’s countless theory heads on social media that make you feel like you have to learn a boatload of theory to be able to play like a Benson or some aspects of people like Benson’s style…. Definitely respect Music theory, but these people are Monday morning quarterbacks doing a analysis of greatness and trying to make you feel like this is what the artist themselves were actually thinking when they put the stuff together, so I’m glad you exposed that fallacy. ! Thanks again
I don't want to be a hater, but Rick knows about theory, modes, scales, arpeggios and production... but he over-analyses everything when the composer/improviser might not be thinking about that AT ALL. I remember there was a Blink182 video when he was talking about Csus4 chord when it was just a F melody over a C5 chord, he was almost implying that they were thinking about Csus4 when most of the time you play a note over a chord, sounds great, and that's it. In another video he talks about a Rolling Stone song (I think it was Angie), and he talks about a chromatic line because the song goes something like G Gsus4, A Asus4 (B C C# D line) when in reality it can be that they use G and A and they fool around with suspensions.
I can’t speak on what he’s said in other videos and I don’t watch many other RUclips videos in general, because it takes so much time to make content for my own channel. Thanks for watching 👍
@@ChaseMaddox To make it short, Rick goes "X thought about Lydian here" when there's a chance the artist is just using something he liked or going for try and error until he finds something. My best friends likes to make songs, he knows NOTHING about theory. A lot of his songs are en Dorian mode or Lydian, impossible for him to think about that. Good video.
Great video! I was struggling with that arpeggio after watching Rick’s video, so I sat down with my guitar thinking, there has to be an easier way of playing this, and I actually figured it out by myself. Nice to see that I was right. It felt so much more fluid and natural this way. Again excellent video!
If you ever get the chance to ask these questions to Rick directly, the internet would greatly benefit from both of you speaking freely about how you interpret these types of melodic ideas.
When you talk about the upbeat part it is because when you use triplets is easier to "feel" the tempo and come up with the phrase linking the scales having a fluid play. Funny to think about that because most of players would do it by feeling in it and not thinking of it...
@@ChaseMaddox oh I see it is just because you talked about the upbeat and that was great because most people do not realize how that part you mentioned is so important...thanks for bringing that out. the patterns used on this particular song is so good to hear it and he is singing as well with it (the solo). awesome work Chase.
I like what you said, "VOCABULARY" I learned theory and how to read at 9 yrs old. Then at 12 I started listening to music, meeting some the greatest A-List guitarists many of whom knew less theory that I did, or none at all. However, All I can say, is when they played Guitar, I was floored by the creativity, skill, vibe, phrasing, articulation, attack, release, emotion Vocabulary, whether they used 3 chords or 12.. This changed me more than theory, it inspired to to create and forget thinking about theory, or being like anyone else.
Great vid, great insights. I‘m personally a big zero at improvising solos, can’t play a single scale but I do have a tip for everyone. Rhythm is the elephant in the room everyone is missing and if you were only allowed one note (like if you had one drum), would you be able to complement the rest of what’s going on in the groove the sum of the other instruments are making to make yourself and the audience to bounce to it? I think that‘s the hugely overlooked element most people are missing when approaching and trying to reach these great players. Rhythm and groove.
I totally agree. Scales are a good foundation; but also a pain in the arse in the long run. It is difficult to get them out of your system and finger memory in order to develop your own phrasing. Playing linear running scales over chord changes says nothing Its just like the letters of the alphabet in a certain language. Phrasing means building words and sentences. Listen to the first 7 notes of Joe Pass Solo in Cavalerie. That was an eyeopener for me. Very simple. Very effective.
I think you might have slightly missed his point on “feel”. Your points made are correct, but it was a response to an entirely different topic it seems. Your whole video is great, not complaining by any means. I believe what Rick was talking about with “feel” is less about whether to start phrases on upbeats or not. It’s more about knowing when to be behind or on top of the beat especially regarding placement of upbeats. In other words, “the variable amount of swing chosen on a note per note basis”. Natural push and pull given the context of surrounding lines. Consider that many players don’t comprehend beat divisions, the difference between straight and swung, swung 8ths vs swung 16th and the various degrees of swung time feel within those parameters. Even when many players begin grasping this, they simply act as if you choose the amount of swing and it can only be that, the whole time. My point is, I think Rick was talking about Benson’s mastery in weaving in and out of not only different melodic concepts, but time-based concepts as well. Your dive is deeper and completely well done. Just felt that one particular moment was kind of misrepresented.
Appreciate you sharing thoughts on this. It's totally possible he was meaning it in that way, but I think that's assuming a lot when he didn't specifically say any of that. Maybe we're talking about different aspects of having good 'feel', with Rick talking about general pocket and I'm talking about how the rhythm of his phrasing leads to a good feel.
@@ChaseMaddox For sure, but it’s not that big of a leap. Just as you’ve shown how Benson’s mindset can be further understood by comparing similarities in his other works you’ve studied; I’m pretty dang confident that Rick is talking about what I’m mentioning given he’s specifically discussed it in other videos for several years now. In fact, I’ve had one private conversation with the guy and this was one of the topics we discussed, however we were speaking on Pat Martino instead. You also should put into context, Rick is a career producer that happens to have jazz as one of his many backgrounds. Chances are, what he’s discussing has something to do with his worldview and directly something to do with his place in music historically, that is production. These are things a producer would care about more than the performer would in most cases. Usually, the performer can’t even grasp what this might mean, therefore the producer will do it himself with editing. I’m just providing background context. He also comes from a world of producing that, as far as I know, is mostly not jazz related. His “jazz guitarist” hat is a separate hat from his “professional music producer hat”. Again, not saying you’re wrong by any means. Wonderful presentation and great work!
@@ChaseMaddox A modern producer has the tools to measure what average human senses alone cannot. Milliseconds can make all the difference in the world to “feel” in ways that most performers don’t even grasp. They usually are never made aware to begin with because producers can get the job done faster by nudging and editing. When producers are used to doing that over and over for years, they generally become hyper aware of how millisecond differences change “feel”. Sometimes, the performer alone can have that greatness, George Benson is a great example. In other words, it sounds like you’re talking about feel on a phrase by phrase basis. Rick, I believe is zooming in on the feel within a given phrase. (As a producer would). If you notate a single-phrase straight melody for 100 jazz players, give the instruction to swing, it will be interpreted 100 different ways. That’s why I say, I think we’re just describing different things here. Same ballpark, different seats.
Great video Chase ! Totally agree with your analysis. Rick is a great guy, but makes a mistake a lot of people with music theory knowledge do : using theory as a recipe to improvisation. Theory is a very valuable tool, but using it like this to create music is a very dangerous path (Bach might be the only successful one), that leads to nonsense such as bebop scales. Barry Harris demonstrated how bebop musicians were doing their thing, using chromatisms with rhythm, arpeggios and scale fragments, and there is no bebop scale in this, it is way richer than just a series of notes you're supposed to use to sound bop. People tend to forget that rhythm is the key when playing melodies, written or improvised.
I totally agree. I’ve seen many students who have bought into this approach waste years trying to make it work and eventually get frustrated and quit. When I heard a few of my CGA students mentioning this video I knew I had to present my take so they didn’t get caught in this same trap.
I studied jazz in college and all my professors talked about learning "licks" as a bad thing, they looked down on guitar players who learned "licks". Improvising was presented as a mythical thing that is always totally new and creative that you can only do after you develop your ears, not by learning music, but by using computer programs. Then, once you can identify all the intervals and chords, you are worthy of creating music. Oh yeah they also all loved modernist and 12 tone, or pretended to.
@@ChaseMaddox @ChaseMaddox I think approaching jazz theory from a classical perspective is a hindrance. As is the modernist notion of individuality in art. Studying Coltrane through chord scale theory, just like carving a spoon out of a slightly larger spoon. Then we get to call it "folk music" and feel very cool and detached. It took me to long to stop trying on different theory methodologies, reading endless arguments of what a chord function actually is in context and what the correct scale is, boring and not useful. If you are young and reading this, learn cool phrases that excite you and play them over different things. Eventually you will start tying them together like the video says. You don't need to transcribe Bird solos in order to be legitimate, only do that if you hear something you love enough to play it hundreds of times. As another youtuber said in a recent video - learning to play one phrase convincingly in multiple situations is far more valuable than learning an entire solo note for note that you can only play on one tune. I still basically suck at jazz, due to laziness, adhd, and working memory problems, learning repertoire is hard. Ironically, my playing is A LOT more free when I'm playing a phrase I've used a million times. I can focus on the tone, phrasing, feel, building variations on a theme. I hear so many jazz legends who are clearly finding cool patterns and superimposing them over different stuff.
I think I get what you're saying. As a student learning improvisation, I have noticed that arpeggios lead to melodic phrases outside of the formal arpeggio.
Great video, I think the hardest thing is how we learn the jazz vocabulary! Thinking about that so many scales is overwhelming to me....I really like learning phrases or licks, as a vocabulary. I like also a concept that a teacher told me before, relating arpeggios (3-4 notes), with the pentatonic with the full scale (7 notes). Always thinking chords and adding some notes plus chromaticisms now and there
Analyzing Music is beneficial because it shows you Why a Melody, Chord, Chord Progression, Rhythm, Tone, Phrase etc., sounds the way it does. At the same time, it's important to remember that Improvising Musicians, especially in Jazz, are usually not thinking about a particular Scale, Arpeggio, or Chord when they're Improvising. Instead, they're playing what they are Hearing and Thinking at that moment. This is what George Benson said on his Hot Licks Instructional Video. A more Beginning Jazz Musician will be thinking about Scales and Arpeggios, but not a more Advanced/Experienced Jazz Musician. Thanks.
Third figure correction - 'the interesting arpeggio' - you've notated F-flat and the TAB is stipulating 5-8 (F-natural) - @ChaseMaddox. Then the next figure about Fm7b5 had it right. Thought you'd wanna know.
I appreciate what you have done. You are right. He starts on the up beat. That's bebop Jazz. Benson can take these Bebob solos and incorporate them into urban pop music.
This was extremely useful! I especially like the comparison to words and the letter and order is what makes it the distinct word - otherwise anagrams would be just as readable as the original!
Thankyou. That was a great explanation of that amazing solo. I think about things a lot in intervals. Am I right in thinking that the song is in key of Gb, the modulation from Ab to Db7 is a 2-5 that doesnt resolve to the root. The Fm7b5 is coming from the 7th interval, and the Bmaj7 is from the 4th interval? I could be right off track here :)
Thanks for watching! It’s possible you could think about it as being in Gb, but to me it really makes most sense as sounding like it’s in Ab minor since that’s the resolution, not Gb.
The Fm7b5 arpeggio can be called Abm6, this shape goes back to Charlie Christian (check out the bridge on Stompin at the savoy, em6 over A7). Bebop musicians called the m7b5 chord a minor 6 chord with the 6th in the bass. Another way to think of the Bmaj7 arpeggio is a stacking of thirds sound derived from Wes. On almost every solo, Wes will reference the minor arpeggio/shape that goes 1-3-5-7-9-11-13 in some way. Wes can be heard playing that shape you played on Four On Six over the decending iiV's. At the end of the day, names are just names and scales are an alphabet, not the grammar or syntax of the music. I appreciate you outlining what is important, and that's melody and how it lays within the geometry of the guitar. Our language is expanded exponentially when we realize that we can play our vocabulary for one chord over every other chord. Over Ab minor, we can play our Db7 language, Abm6, BMaj7. And the reverse is true, over BMajor7 we can play Abm6, Db7, etc.
Chase hey. Much enjoyed this video! I like that you are exploring and thinking about what is logical. I quite like playing with scales even though its not especially music.... but for sure if you want to play music, its like parker said, (Ill always remember) learn and forget....I love that record and Bennys back... Bebop! Great analogies its like talking to a foreigner and they recite the alphabet.
Learning phrases and playing phrased solos is way more fun and makes a lot more sense than running up and down scales -there's a place for that in your training but the language and phrasing is what your communicating to your audience. Nobody would write down the alphabet backwards and forewards and claim it was an interesting story.
I can safely say that I play with feel using phrases that I have developed over the years. I have played solos live in bands. However, my understanding of theory is pretty poor, to say the least. I therefore know all about using small phrases and knitting them together in the moment, but I yearn to UNDERSTAND them in the greater scheme of things. I would say that Rick Beato's identifying scales in which to place these ideas, or even just fragments of them, is beneficial for a player like me. I doubt that many musicians assume that great players are just playing scales.
You’re in a great position, which the majority of intermediate guitarists trying to get better don’t find themselves. I’ve taught hundreds of students and most of them start with the perspective that they would solo better if only they knew more scales or could play them better.
@ChaseMaddox watched a few more of your videos, good stuff man. Most guitar content is shockingly bad. It's bad really, there are a lot of people who put hours of practice in following terrible advice, anyway you got a sub. Keep going man
Chase: thanks for the analysis, and I have a question: I am an amateur jazz student and I often feel that it is not appropriate to use licks such as the Donna lee one you mention. Even if many others do that all the time , I feel bad about it (like: i'm not being "creative"). Any idea on how to let go of that feeling? Also : I purchased a long time ago the Beato book and although I like his videos very much, his book is just horrible, and pedagogy is nowhere to be found.
Thanks for the question and for watching the video! I think the first thing you really need to understand, which it sounds like you don't quite believe yet, is that all master improvisers are building from language they've learned from others before them. Great authors don't re-invent every word to express a new story; they use existing vocabulary in a new WAY, sometimes discovering new words along the way. The second thing I would say is you need to learn vocabulary one piece at a time and really 'play' with it. Sing the phrase, play it on different strings and positions, work it into different songs, see where it fits and where it doesn't, vary the rhythm, add some notes, take some out...explore the phrase to really understand how it functions and how you can use it. That takes a lot of work but it's worth it because then that phrase is really yours and it will authentically be part of your improvisations as you continue to build new vocab into your playing.
There’s a reason barry harris hated and never used or talked about anything called a “bebop dominant” scale. There’s just the dominant scale with years of vocabulary built off of it. Great vid bro.
Hey Chase, and another great video from you. You always do an amazing job and your tutorials have helped me occasionally to take new approaches to teaching my students things in a different way. But with all the respect you show Rick, Mr. Beato has unfortunately shown a few times that he is not that receptive to other points of view. 😆
Thanks for your comment, and I'm honored that you use some of my approach to teach your students. I'm not looking for a response from Beato because it's not really about him, it's about the ideas he's presenting. He may take it the wrong way, but I feel like I presented him in his own words and was explicit about not knowing why he might have said things in the way he did.
@@ChaseMaddox My approach is not that a student simply has to understand the subject matter. If I see that a student has musical understanding and at least a little talent, I see it as my job to find a way for the student to understand the contents. It's usually a question of perspective. And your tutorials are really good inspiration. So.... Thank you very much!
It´s a little like "Both Sides Now". I guess that after watching the two videos you can see a lot of truth on both. Of course, Benson wouldn´t be constrained to either the scale or the arpeggio approach. The two-octave arpeggio I see as a superposition of a minor arpeggio over a rootless dominant chord, but still working as the dominant. I think you´re absolutely right about the fact that Benson mechanics - fueled by his amazing talent and honed over years and years - approached this little section more efficiently as a repeated arpeggio having "upper notes" from the base harmony than entirely from a root harmonic view. But that doesn´t negate a root base approach as Beato suggests. I would tend to agree that you have probably dedicated a lot more time to finely study Benson´s technique and precise execution and can teach that particularly well, but that doesn´t take anything from Beato´s general knowledge and his comments about this particular piece. In the end, none of us, not me, not you, not Beato would ever get to play "like Benson" no matter what we all do or say, and after all, none of us knows what was exactly going through his head, and Benson - as the great Joe Pass did - won´t describe it. So let´s not be like the blind Hindu philosophers describing the elephant as a vine, a tree or a hanging snake and enjoy seeing the elephant. 🙂
This is illuminating. I wish to take nothing from Rick and what he does; he seemed to be giving ballpark approximations in his tutorial that weren't explicit enough. Kinda like 'here are some scales and arpeggio ideas that might work over this 2-chord vamp, try it for yourself...' Your analysis is focussed without being unnecessarily burdened with theory details, and when you do provide these insights they are correct; as you admit this was in response to Rick's errors. It is one thing to lay out some scales, arpeggios etc., over chords. It is another thing entirely to describe their contextualisation and other nuances like timing/feel, economical fingerings, and phrasing/line contour, extensions & substitutions, tensions & resolutions and how these contribute to what we are hearing. I'm a forty years of playing Jazz and Classical guitarist (although I prefer 'musician') and one thing I adore about RUclips and the like is the ease of access to different modes, no pun intended, of evaluating and teaching creative musicianship. Indeed, everyone learns, thinks, and teaches differently... yet some swords are sharper than others. Thanks for this. Shalom ❤🙏🏼
@@ChaseMaddox you're very welcome. I shall check out more of your stuff including memberships etc., very soon. Great teaching and personal (musical) development material will be found, I am sure of it.
I haven't watched your entire video yet. So far the thing that you both missed is that Benson SINGS EVERYTHING he plays! He's playing along with the voice in his head. Playing along on the guitar and his physical voice. That voice in your head is what GB has that so many other players don't.
He doesn’t always sing along with his solo though? Idk that saying he’s “singing along” in his head is worth commenting on because to me that just means really hearing what you’re playing. For example, I can’t sing well, but I “sing along” with my solo in my head. How does knowing that help you understand his solo?
Not sure I would consider any of that teaching to be honest. It’s like opening a fire hydrant of information on someone’s head and expecting them to not feel thirsty afterwards.
Isn’t the answer really all of the above? I was lucky enough to take some lessons from Mike Stern during the Covid lockdown. He recommended knowing the arpeggios, scales and licks - and he uses them all. But most important is making music - tellling a story. Victor Wooten has a video where he plays the wrong notes with a great grove and contrasts that with playing the right notes with no time feel. The good grove sounds better every time. And maybe I should have started by saying Any of the above. Because there are people who creatively string licks together, and there are other people who embellish arpeggios while targeting chord tones, and there are people who primarily use scales. And they can all sound great - if they’re creating interesting music. Now I would argue that Benson and Stern have an advantage because they know it all. But a good ear combined with some creativity should be able to tell a good story with any of the approaches. My thought.
rick without discounting his talented contributions relates all compositions to musical theory; scales, modes, in example to the creative process, he has a hard time understanding that a solo or song is either an artist hearing from the source, whether god and or the unconscious theoretical history in the inspiration of the moment. In other words, studying theory and practicing SHOULD NOT be in the moment of composition and soloing; you are hearing what to play without presupposing music as a mathematical multiple possibility for effect. Beato can analyze the music theoretically AFTER the composition and after the solo but that often was not the intended effort at that time. Yes, the soloist might think quickly " I'll put a a min7th flat five arpeggio- but the soloist cannot construct every part of the solo that way. A Benson blues lick line (to me ) can be interpreted as a scale but analyzing that after the event serves no purpose because improve is an art of tension and release and is a mini melodic composition in the spirit of your soul. Like many revered jazz artists have said, if you have to think what you're going to do, you can't play.
I really agree with this concept when thinking about Benson. I don't think his playing is at all from a "school" approach. He comes up with lines "vocabulary" and never throws away his ideas. This is why Benson himself cannot articulate what he's doing exactly, he's just making music. He's no doubt learned many musical concepts along the way from other people, but his strength is not his understanding of theory it's his musicality.
Great video, but you and Rick are both wrong. The secret to playing like George Benson is being George Benson. All you need to do is be George Benson. It's that easy. Also a Fm7b5 and a Db7 or Db9 are the same thing and T-Bone Walker has known that before all of us and Benson. Fight me.* *Not really, this was a great video and I get a lot from both your and Rick's explanations!
lol thanks for this comment! F-7b5 and Db7 are not actually the same thing though. One has a Db and the other doesn’t. You can use them as substitutes for each other in many cases, but not all. What I described in this video is the process of how George Benson became a master improviser, which agrees with the point you’re trying to make?
@@ChaseMaddox I'm just being needlessly difficult of course because this is the internet! As I said, enjoyed the video (and your others) and explanations. And also of course, the transcriptions. I know those take a lot of time and work so thanks for making them available to all of us in these videos!
Haha all good! I think this is an important area to be super clear about because it really does confuse many well-intentioned people who want to learn to play guitar but get overwhelmed by the chaos of seemingly conflicting information and advice. I appreciate your comments 🤘
Ok so ik he definitely can't speak on what benson was thinking you are right but i think it's more of that scales are taught wrong cause i have definitely tried to transcribe solos and copy and paste the phrases into other songs but then it's just ok I'm done with this phrase next phrase and so on but when i think scales and arpeggios and throw in some licks from a song everything flows better
Thanks for this comment as it’s something I should probably clarify in another video. Improvising is not just connecting a full phrase to another full phrase. There is also musical “connective tissue” in a solo such as scales, arpeggios, enclosure, chromaticisms, and more that unite the phrases. Those things I call Essential Jazz Patterns.
George you're right he doesn't and he probably didn't study scales like that back in the day you know he is going off of musical phrases that's why he sounds so good all the time and his stuff does not sound like a scale that's number one number two I have heard that he actually builds for his solos especially on the breezing album to select pieces or I guess his improvisations that sounded really good on that section and peace mailed them together as the final product and then he went back and memorize that so he could always play when he's playing if you noticed when he plays a lot of his tunes live he plays the solo from the album which is also very amazing you know he has an amazing memory for Music that's for sure. If you see him on his George Benson I mean and he's trying to explain what he's doing he doesn't explain it at all in terms of any scales he said you know it's like this… It's like that and he licks that he he lick his licks simple licks most of the time yes they are blue licks but they're not just like a four lick you know it can go on for eight beats or something like that. I like that new GB guitar want to hear that plugged into the amp and sounding like GB guitar
@@ChaseMaddox it's run-on because I was dictating it from my parked car ha ha and I couldn't edit it because I had access RUclips from another app my Gmail and apparently it won't let you edit it so I redid it I edited it but you know I have a lot to say I'm sorry and I have I have met him and played with his sidemen Stanley Banks and Mel Davis and you know I'm almost one of the cats you know.
And I have had four George Benson guitars the GB 10 blonde the GB 112 iced tea burst and a GB 112 cherry burst and now I have the cheap model sounds as good as all of them which is amazing to me
you gotta know how to pick the George Benson guitar you have to put the pic at a slight angle and it has to be almost in between the pick ups maybe a little towards the bridge up to get that bell tone
Yes and no. I think people tend to view “licks” as isolated ideas whereas “vocab” connects with other vocab, just like in speaking a language. Talking about licks without also talking about how they relate and connect other ideas has its own issues as just talking about scales.
Probably nothing wrong with teaching scales, that's equivalent to teaching the letters of the alphabet. But knowing letters is a long way from knowing words, which is why teaching phrases (I noticed you didn't use the word "licks") is just as important. And we need to normalize that it's ok to have an arsenal of phrases that we reuse, and it's still improvisation.
For improvisation, scales are important to know why certain notes are generally played together over certain harmony. Trying to create a good solo using scales reminds me of that story asking how many monkeys it would take typing randomly to generate the next Shakespeare. All the best players have tons of phrases they reuse. And even some they plan out for the “improvised” solo, but we’re not ready for that conversation 😅
Great video . I know your going for the click bait title and its a good 1 ! Also i think your actually disagreeing with Rick . I think Rick prob uses scales and theory to explain his ideas and other guitarists . I also agree w you that its better to listen and learn language more than using scales / modes etc . To improv and to talk about improv. Thats just it though. Its prob great to have both under the belt. Everyone that has a youtube video teaching guitar probably knows how to do both. Everyone thats good i mean lol. Like you ! Keep up the great work man ! Your videos are great ! Would love to contribute something to you. Do you prefer patreon ?
Haha I had even more clickbait titles, but I thought this one was accurate without being inflammatory. I’m definitely disagreeing with Rick. The problem is not using music theory to understand the details of what’s being played. The problem is suggesting that it’s the scales themselves that allow you to play the music. Most people miss that critical distinction. I don’t have Patreon, but if you want to support the best ways are to check out what I offer in Chase’s Guitar Academy or become a RUclips member. Cheers 🤘
Say why? What specifically is Benson playing that would be called Db Bebop Dominant scale? And, more importantly, is that actually the approach Benson is taking based on the context of his solo and past solos?
I love Beato's reverence for Pass, Martino, Benson, and Wes. But this concept of "vocabulary over scales" is a deep one that only emerges after DECADES of listening deeply to serious, straight ahead jazz (NOT smooth jazz!) and understanding WHAT the musicians are doing. If I were Chase, I might add this recommendation: If you're a guitarist and you want to play jazz, STOP listening to guitarists and start listening to horn players, particularly bebop and hard bop players from the 1950's.
Thanks for your comment! I wouldn’t recommend not listening to guitarists because I think it’s very important to be familiar with how master guitarists have approached our instrument. However, checking out other instrumentalists will also help. It’s “and” not “either/or” 👍
@@ChaseMaddox Great point, and you are absolutely right: be willing to listen to everyone. To be more clear: When I first heard Bruce Forman on Lanny Morgan's 1981 LP "It's About Time," I was left speechless: Cannonball (phrases) on guitar! OMG. Never heard THAT before. Playing guitar but THINKING like a horn player. articulation, dynamics, range, chromaticism, etc. So that's my high-water mark...and I don't hear many other guitarists over the last 75 years (except the Big Four, and please let's add Metheny to that list) playing or thinking that way.
What did you think of this video? Would love to hear your thoughts below 👇
I wholeheartedly concur with most anything you mention here! Carol Kaye also said once in an interview: "Learn your chordal notes" and like you was opposed to the scale-centric approach to learning Jazz. So yeah! I'm with you and freagging cool playing along and breaking it down! I subscribed, looking forward to exploring more of your content here, awesome! (I must have sensed that the approach all my former teachers followed was off for me; today you and Carol Kaye before more or less confirmed my hunch from back then, thanks guys)
I think Beato is a Genius..but The problem I have with him and others is information vs Application..he has Great info,but he needs to teach more application.
I purchased the book call Note Grouping ..it Cost me 35.00! (Small book)But the two things I got from it were 1.Play(solo) and read in Phrases. No scales.Don't play and read within bars ..play and read statements words phrases like a singer. 2.The author studied and transcribed loads of classical pieces ,compositions,solos and many other styles.He also listened to numerous recordings and found the one thing in common was Great players accent the WEAK BEATS..or the Ands..not 1 2 3 or 4...
@@wesboundmusic thanks for sharing that quote from Carol Kaye, and for watching! Glad to have you subscribed! 🙏
@@ChrisGill-s4s Thanks for the feedback, Chris. It seems like you're not so subtly implying that I'm being divisive, which I may be, although there is no hostility in my video or purpose here. Here's the gist of how I understand it...Rick has around 5 million subscribers and is putting forth an approach that I strongly disagree with. My reasons for disagreeing are presented in the video, and my purpose in specifically calling them out in contrast to Rick is that he has a massive audience that is listening to him and taking in these bad ideas, in my opinion. Why do I think they're bad? Because, I've seen firsthand from many of my students how this approach wastes years of their life, causes endless frustration, and sometimes makes people quit learning guitar. If you thought someone's approach to something was wrong and causing people to not achieve the goals they want, wouldn't you say something? I would, and so that's what I present in this video. It's because I have integrity with myself and in my ideas that I need to address them publicly, regardless of any backlash.
Totally agree with teaching scales. I remember when I worked for Jimmy Bruno editing his videos. He hated the over analysis of his solos. He doesn’t like it when people analyzes his lines and say he used the melodic minor scale. He was playing language, not scales. He would go, “how the f**k would you know what I’m thinking about?!” That was quite a lesson for me.
Thanks for sharing that example 🙏 I think there can be value in analyzing the details of what notes/scales make up the vocab a guitarist uses, but we can’t lose the fact that those are descriptions of the vocab, not the language itself.
@@ChaseMaddox When it comes to tune analysis, though, my main guy is Barry Greene! Totally opened my understanding of the melodic minor and the diminished scales. Love your channel! More power!
I couldn't get pass that you "worked for Jimmy Bruno"! Nice! I was a member in his online teaching and love his current videos.
Jimmy is awesome!!!
Who cares what Jimmy (love him) cares about how others analyze his music? Some people derive joy and understanding relating how Jimmy thinks about things to how they think about things.Just because Jimmy might not have been thinking about the melodic minor scale does not mean he was not using the melodic minor scale… or that what he did is not described by the melodic minor scale.
I think it's pretty safe to assume when talking about guys from that era, like George Benson, Joe Pass or even Joe Diorio that they had no idea what a "bebop dominant scale" is. Joe Pass didn't even know modes, those guys mostly just thought about major/minor/dominant sounds and then added whatever extensions on top. And the blues. They also thought much more in terms of chord sounds than scales, which is a way more practical approach.
I’d say so! Thanks for watching 🙏
@12:52, I totally agree. Even in Rick Beato’s interview with Benson, George talks mostly about his influences, the people he listened to, the people he “stole” ideas from. Rick tries, with no success to exact from George, Benson’s theoretical/ harmonies approach. I had the great pleasure to hang with George a few decades ago, and not once did he talk about scales, harmony, arpeggios etc, he always mentioned those that gave him the ideas to explore. So Chase is bang on. In the case of George, he delves into the musical language and vocabulary he learned and acquired in his life rather than thinking about playing this scale or that arpeggio”.
I appreciate you sharing your personal experience on this topic 🙏
Those guys didn’t think in those terms. Music theory is useful in hindsight for figuring out what people did but none of the best players use theory in the moment to plan out a solo. It’s internalized and they feel it or hear it. The best music that resonates is not so analytical and more emotional.
Bullseye! That's exactly why Beato never was a success as a musician.
The actual lines and vocabulary is where it's at.
You're right - I mean it is important to learn the theory, arpeggios, scales and all that, but the actual lines are what really connects us to the tradition and the language of the music. The theory is good to explain it but is usually some kind of oversimplification of the reality of the melodies.
Thanks for the video Chase!
Thanks for watching, Az! 🙌
Many jazz players I know would think of the Fm7b5 arpeggio here as a Abm6. Just another perspective. Also that Charlie Parker lick is more similar to a diminished phrase (such as from donna lee) not harmonic minor. But yeah vocabulary is where it's at.
I agree! I’ve seen other people analyze that lick as “based on harmonic minor”.
Man, you're so right about "real" jazz feel involving starting lines on the upbeat. One day it hit me and I started to listen for this and sure enough, it's something that separates the men from the boys.
Thanks for sharing your experience! 🙏
Maddox,
As much as I love Rick B and the way he teaches I don’t believe that he is above correction and I am sure that he has the best that he can do posted for us to learn from. I also think that you post the best that you have to offer and together you and Rick B have helped me improve vastly. Thank You 🙏😎🎸
Thanks for watching! 🙏
I agree with you that great musicians are not using theory when they create music. On the contrary they are using their ears to hear sounds and then imagining how to make these sounds as sweet and interesting as possible. There isn’t any theory involved in this creative process because it’s not relevant at that moment
In fact, good theory texts emphasise that the theory of what great musicians comes later, often much later, as it begins to be understood that there were certain structural changes that made musical sense
For instance, you have the inversion of melodies used in counterpoint. It’s not that the musicians developing these melodic inversions are applying the rule of inversion. Instead they are learning from experience of the sounds that inversions are sweet sounding and meaningful.
And this is important because if this were to be done theoretically it would be too rigid, predictable and meaningless
Great points! Thanks for sharing your thoughts 👍
An Fmin7b5 is an Abm6 which is all of the notes of Db9 without the root note, Db.
Yes, I say that in the video 👍
I love Rick, and I love you. The debate / disagreement you’re (politely) engaging in makes us all learn and think more, which is a win win. Thank you ❤
Thanks for saying that. I hope it’s clear my purpose here is to help people come to a greater understanding and ability to play guitar. Sometimes the best way to do that is discussing very popular ideas being put forward that I strongly believe are wrong.
Rick ist actually pretty off in his analysis and it's great to see it politefully addressed, as he it so influential as a usually brilliant educator.
Great explanation. When I learned solos from Dickie Betts and Duane Allman, I don't analyze them in terms of scales/modes etc., I "hear" their references to other musicians I know they admired, along with their own takes on those licks/riffs/bits
That’s a great way to think about it! 👍
isn't the phase at 12:13 a quote from Donna Lee?
I like the way you could see a B major7 arpeggio within the Ab Dorian lick; a nice way of looking at it because it does fit perfectly well over the Db7. Lots of enharmonic coincidence/convenience going on.
Sometimes I also think of it as just adding in the 9th to Ab minor Pentatonic
@ChaseMaddox yeppers, for sure. Benson uses that 2/9 so well.
I'd even wager that ~ 50% of bebop language is thinking like this.
Hello Chase, As always you give good insights into playing. I understand completely your analysis and its comparison to Rick Beato's analysis. However I have a slightly different take on what you are saying that I find to be more general, and more la encompassing of chords against scales. I have no doubt that you understand this, but I find it curious that I never find a complete analysis that this gives of chords and scales. Some preliminaries that we all have to learn: The harmonic basis of the diatonic scale is the Do, re, mi, fa , sol, la, ti, do. (You can call it how you like such as C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C or 1 root, 2M, 3M, 4P, 5P, 6M, 7M, 8 Octave). We then are shown how relationships between these notes in various ways. 1). Up and down the scale its in minor and major seconds. 2) the scale in thirds to create triads (only 3 notes) and seventh chords (only 4 notes) plus a few with extensions with the 9ths, 11ths, & 13ths. 3). The scale in 4ths or 5ths to give us the cycle of 4ths and 5ths. But the analysis bogs down with extensions of 9th, 11ths, 13ths. Because the extensions are seen en triads or 7th chords build over roots higher up the chord,; For example: The chordal idea a Db7 or an F half diminished, or a B Maj7th.???? The thing is to see all the upper partials as resulting to the root, and that is based on the sound from the root with the chordal tones. So a F half diminished over Db7 is the 3, 5, 7, 9 of the scale . And B Maj7 over Db7 is the 7, 9, 11, 13 of the scale In a way I agree more with Rick's vision of playing over Db7, because that is George's harmonic base over which he hears to play. ( I like you, do not agree with his idea of the scale being the bebop scale. He would probably not disagree when he sees your more complete analysis of The solo..) The idea is to understand (when hearing) what are chordal notes and the extensions over the root of the chord. So, you play the scales for two octaves in thirds: 1, 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13. If you think about it, evreyone probably already knows all the scale degrees of any note of any mode of the the diatonic scale. That is, if they know all the degrees of the 7 modes of the diatonic scale. (The best organized way to study them is in the order of the cycle of 5ths starting with the mode built on the 7th degree of the major scale and ending on the 4th degree. This way going from one scale to the next has only one note that is different, making it easier to organize in the mind). This all simplifies down the ideas of lots of great musicians like Joe Pass, where they see types of 3 chords: major, minor and dominant seventh. Joe, like many others, did not learn in university classes, so he did not know all the terminology used here. But the terminology is just to get to the same place as Joe Pass, of hearing notes over chords and knowing (sound wise) what those notes are, from the root to any diatonic note, and to any augmented or diminished note played over any chord. I find playing the scales in thirds for 2 octaves is great to help see this. And also doing this with other scales like the minor scale with the major 6th and 7th, which gives some great altered chords with altered upper partials. A very good example is playing this minor scale over a dominant 7th chord using the major 7th of the scale as the root of the dominant 7th chord. Here again, play the scale and listen to the intervals over the chord. Also play the two octaves of the scale in thirds to also see and hear all the diminished and augmented notes of the scale and listen for those intervals from the root of the chord. Also look at the 7 note arpeggio and see what are the triads and 7th chords are according to what note you are starting on; again this is just seeing what you already know if you know the chords of the scale; the only difference is here the chords are built vertically on top of each other in thirds and not up and down the scale or chord progression. I have no doubt you know all this, but explaining the ideas this way I think is very helpful to learn to play and hear the sounds. I went into more preliminary ideas, but thought it good for those who read this and are just learning. The goal is to hear the sounds in the mind and know where they are on your instrument. The theory is just a tool to get there. As Charlie Parker said ( more or less), "You have to learn all that, and then you just forget it and play". I loved Joe Pass and I think a great idea he gave when asked by a student who was worried about making mistakes was "Mistakes? that's part of my style.".😂😂👍👌💪🎸🎸 😅😊❤❤
I'm a bass guitar player that plays jazz. Jeff Berlin was one of my instructors @ M.I.
Berlin taught me about chord tones, approach notes & transcribing & not be scale like. That way you can spell out the harmony. When you just play scales, it's hard to hear the harmony when you solo without chords behind you.
Thanks for sharing! 🤘
Not starting phrases on the downbeat is literally the greatest improv jazz/blues hack of all time. I literally independently did this a week ago on harmonica, and every vocab sounds hip, same phrase on the 1 sounds brutally amateurish......its literally the most valuable thing you have to do.
It is a great rhythmic principle 👍
Love this lesson and showing such an efficient way to play a 2 octave min7b5 arpeggio- thank you
Thanks for checking it out and commenting!
The hidden gem is that you can disagree with a point of view and still learn even more through investigating.
Excellent takeaway 👍 It’s about finding the truth, not agreeing or disagreeing with a specific person/group.
Beato is a Berklee graduate and uses the Berklee system to explain this stuff...which is just one of the ways to communicate amongst musicians...how Benson thinks about it? We'd have to ask him.
Sure, but for all the reasons I present in the video, Beato’s not even accurately describing what Benson is doing. I’m not talking about getting in Benson’s head.
FYI Beato went to Ithaca for undergrad (great music program) and New England Conservatory for grad work. He has talked about this in past videos.
That’s great, but I judge people’s teaching based on their teaching, not based on where they went to school.
@@PeteCalandra thank you for the clarification. NEC has often shared tutors with Berklee (at least when I was there!) that's why his way of analysing and communicating things always feels familiar to me
That's what I thought, too, then I rememberd he never was at Berklee. but still I think you americnas are very much infiuenced by "the Berklee" system. I attended a very good music academy here in Europe and we hardly ever spoke about scales. And I don't think Dizzy, or Bird, or Thelonious did. It's all about approaches. Aproache the note that you want to emphasize. We had a whole course that was only focused on "chromatic approach to a note" which was great. I still don't think about scales when playing (I'm a pro guitar player today) but much more how to embellish notes. And I teach that to my guitar students today...
I'm coming back to this because you gave me a lot of food for thought (which is good, I appreciate it!). Here's the thing: I noticed how your language analogy instantly resonated (!) with me. Because I have a linguistics degree and particularly when you go about saying that the scale describing the notes of the phrase is _not_ the equivalent of _what's_ being played, being "said", i.e. it is _not_ the phrase. This then had me think "why not"? (not from a questioning perspective but from needing to know _why it isn't_ and why one can't automatically be equated with the other)
This is my suggestion: As you said, we use language by using sequences of words and phrases that are meant to convey something, i.e. a melody, a statement of sorts. The scale might describe what the "words" and phrases consist of, but it doesn't say much or anything about that which we're trying to say and express, i.e. the content (or "semantics" in linguistics). And that is actually reflected in linguistics in a very similar or conceptually the same way: You can describe a certain part of a sentence as the verb or the subject, entire subclauses as e.g. a participle or an ellipsis or a gerund or any such categorial denotation. However, that doesn't say _anything_ about the actual content, the semantics of the phrase.
I'm just offering this because it seems now more obvious to me, why students have such a hard time with scales (as did I ): How is one supposed to _apply_ that description of vocabulary and actually start "speaking"? (hint: When learning to speak, we _listen_ first, then _emulate_ what we heard until facial expression of those addressed signal back that we got it right ;-) )
Anyway, for all those who may have wondered, I'm hoping some of it makes sense.
Thank you for coming back and posting this insightful comment! Adds a lot to have your perspective with your linguistics background 🙏
That brings clarity!
Thanks Adolfo 🙏
Excellent tone..
Thanks man!
I lovE Beato, BUT am so glad to hear you bring this out!
Glad you did! Thanks 🙏
Hey Chase,
Great content! I agree with your assessment of Rick's video. However, In my years of teaching, I've noticed that every student learns differently and eventually develops their unique style as a player based on how they approach and absorb the material. Notes, arpeggios, scales, chords, and all the theory in between ultimately depend on the individual-how their brain works and how they think about music.
I completely agree with the idea of keeping things simple; the path of least resistance is often the most effective. That said, it’s not the only path. When you sit down with George, he doesn’t just want you to copy him; he encourages you to find your own way of doing things, which is invaluable.
Thank you so much for putting out this content. The value you're adding to the guitar community is truly immeasurable.
Thanks for your comment and support! I think the big thing I have an issue with here is that Rick doesn’t even mention the idea of vocab or phrases here. I’m not anti-scale because I agree with you that it can be useful to know them and some people find them helpful. However this presentation of the material was missing that very important piece. We’re coming at it from different sides and you all get to enjoy the benefit of our different perspectives 🤘
So well articulated, loved this video!
Thank you! 🙏
I understand and appreciate the need for clarification, but I need to dig deeper into both your and Rick's video. I agree that the wider context of the isolated part of the solo would lead to a better understanding. But your video seems to want to address a perspective/opinion that Rick was not trying to make. I am going to give a very close listen for better accuracy.
Please do! Let me know what you think afterwards. I did my best to quote Rick directly and don’t believe I took him out of context.
Scales are essential to know, but I agree with you on how to utilise them. Neat video.
Thanks for watching!
Db9 without the root = Fm7b5 from the third and Abm6 from the fifth. So the F makes the crucial difference, wheras Abm7 would demand a Gb. You could just switch between Gb and F, to outline Abm7 and Db7.
Yes that’s all true, but the real point is that it’s not at all what was described or how improvisers approach playing over changes.
@@ChaseMaddoxright, and as you pointed out Benson likes to use the halfdiminished arpeggio, which he himself learned to apply from Wes
Thank you so much for your analysis and breakdown…. There’s countless theory heads on social media that make you feel like you have to learn a boatload of theory to be able to play like a Benson or some aspects of people like Benson’s style…. Definitely respect Music theory, but these people are Monday morning quarterbacks doing a analysis of greatness and trying to make you feel like this is what the artist themselves were actually thinking when they put the stuff together, so I’m glad you exposed that fallacy. ! Thanks again
I appreciate your comments and your point about people feeling like they need to learn a lot of theory! The goal should be to play music, not scales 👍
I don't want to be a hater, but Rick knows about theory, modes, scales, arpeggios and production... but he over-analyses everything when the composer/improviser might not be thinking about that AT ALL.
I remember there was a Blink182 video when he was talking about Csus4 chord when it was just a F melody over a C5 chord, he was almost implying that they were thinking about Csus4 when most of the time you play a note over a chord, sounds great, and that's it.
In another video he talks about a Rolling Stone song (I think it was Angie), and he talks about a chromatic line because the song goes something like G Gsus4, A Asus4 (B C C# D line) when in reality it can be that they use G and A and they fool around with suspensions.
I can’t speak on what he’s said in other videos and I don’t watch many other RUclips videos in general, because it takes so much time to make content for my own channel. Thanks for watching 👍
@@ChaseMaddox To make it short, Rick goes "X thought about Lydian here" when there's a chance the artist is just using something he liked or going for try and error until he finds something.
My best friends likes to make songs, he knows NOTHING about theory. A lot of his songs are en Dorian mode or Lydian, impossible for him to think about that.
Good video.
Great video! I was struggling with that arpeggio after watching Rick’s video, so I sat down with my guitar thinking, there has to be an easier way of playing this, and I actually figured it out by myself. Nice to see that I was right. It felt so much more fluid and natural this way. Again excellent video!
Great job putting it right to use! 🤘
If you ever get the chance to ask these questions to Rick directly, the internet would greatly benefit from both of you speaking freely about how you interpret these types of melodic ideas.
I’d love to discuss with Rick in general and get a much better understanding of how he thinks of this 👍
@@ChaseMaddox Well, if I don't see a collab vid with Rick by tomorrow afternoon, I'll send you my own thoughts. Peace
I wouldn't hold your breath!
Great content! Keep it up.
Thanks, will do!
IIm7-V7-I is simple X to I. In this case IIm6-I. So IIm6= Abm6 (almost Db7)= Fm7b5 (it is same chord).
G.Benson got that from Django Reinhardt.
When you talk about the upbeat part it is because when you use triplets is easier to "feel" the tempo and come up with the phrase linking the scales having a fluid play. Funny to think about that because most of players would do it by feeling in it and not thinking of it...
Benson’s not really using a ton of triplets in his playing though 🤔
@@ChaseMaddox oh I see it is just because you talked about the upbeat and that was great because most people do not realize how that part you mentioned is so important...thanks for bringing that out. the patterns used on this particular song is so good to hear it and he is singing as well with it (the solo). awesome work Chase.
Thank you! 🙏
I like what you said, "VOCABULARY" I learned theory and how to read at 9 yrs old. Then at 12 I started listening to music, meeting some the greatest A-List guitarists many of whom knew less theory that I did, or none at all. However, All I can say, is when they played Guitar, I was floored by the creativity, skill, vibe, phrasing, articulation, attack, release, emotion Vocabulary, whether they used 3 chords or 12.. This changed me more than theory, it inspired to to create and forget thinking about theory, or being like anyone else.
Vocab is what it’s all about! 🤘
Great vid, great insights. I‘m personally a big zero at improvising solos, can’t play a single scale but I do have a tip for everyone. Rhythm is the elephant in the room everyone is missing and if you were only allowed one note (like if you had one drum), would you be able to complement the rest of what’s going on in the groove the sum of the other instruments are making to make yourself and the audience to bounce to it? I think that‘s the hugely overlooked element most people are missing when approaching and trying to reach these great players. Rhythm and groove.
You’re absolutely correct 👍
Levi Clay did a full transcription of this solo this week.
Yes he did, I saw that! 👍
I totally agree.
Scales are a good foundation; but also a pain in the arse in the long run. It is difficult to get them out of your system and finger memory in order to develop your own phrasing. Playing linear running scales over chord changes says nothing Its just like the letters of the alphabet in a certain language. Phrasing means building words and sentences. Listen to the first 7 notes of Joe Pass Solo in Cavalerie. That was an eyeopener for me. Very simple. Very effective.
Well said! Thanks for your comment 🙏
I think you might have slightly missed his point on “feel”. Your points made are correct, but it was a response to an entirely different topic it seems. Your whole video is great, not complaining by any means.
I believe what Rick was talking about with “feel” is less about whether to start phrases on upbeats or not. It’s more about knowing when to be behind or on top of the beat especially regarding placement of upbeats. In other words, “the variable amount of swing chosen on a note per note basis”. Natural push and pull given the context of surrounding lines. Consider that many players don’t comprehend beat divisions, the difference between straight and swung, swung 8ths vs swung 16th and the various degrees of swung time feel within those parameters. Even when many players begin grasping this, they simply act as if you choose the amount of swing and it can only be that, the whole time.
My point is, I think Rick was talking about Benson’s mastery in weaving in and out of not only different melodic concepts, but time-based concepts as well.
Your dive is deeper and completely well done. Just felt that one particular moment was kind of misrepresented.
Appreciate you sharing thoughts on this. It's totally possible he was meaning it in that way, but I think that's assuming a lot when he didn't specifically say any of that. Maybe we're talking about different aspects of having good 'feel', with Rick talking about general pocket and I'm talking about how the rhythm of his phrasing leads to a good feel.
@@ChaseMaddox For sure, but it’s not that big of a leap. Just as you’ve shown how Benson’s mindset can be further understood by comparing similarities in his other works you’ve studied; I’m pretty dang confident that Rick is talking about what I’m mentioning given he’s specifically discussed it in other videos for several years now. In fact, I’ve had one private conversation with the guy and this was one of the topics we discussed, however we were speaking on Pat Martino instead.
You also should put into context, Rick is a career producer that happens to have jazz as one of his many backgrounds. Chances are, what he’s discussing has something to do with his worldview and directly something to do with his place in music historically, that is production. These are things a producer would care about more than the performer would in most cases. Usually, the performer can’t even grasp what this might mean, therefore the producer will do it himself with editing. I’m just providing background context. He also comes from a world of producing that, as far as I know, is mostly not jazz related. His “jazz guitarist” hat is a separate hat from his “professional music producer hat”.
Again, not saying you’re wrong by any means. Wonderful presentation and great work!
I’m not sure I understand your point about him being a producer and the relevance of that. Can you elaborate on that?
@@ChaseMaddox A modern producer has the tools to measure what average human senses alone cannot. Milliseconds can make all the difference in the world to “feel” in ways that most performers don’t even grasp. They usually are never made aware to begin with because producers can get the job done faster by nudging and editing. When producers are used to doing that over and over for years, they generally become hyper aware of how millisecond differences change “feel”. Sometimes, the performer alone can have that greatness, George Benson is a great example.
In other words, it sounds like you’re talking about feel on a phrase by phrase basis. Rick, I believe is zooming in on the feel within a given phrase. (As a producer would).
If you notate a single-phrase straight melody for 100 jazz players, give the instruction to swing, it will be interpreted 100 different ways.
That’s why I say, I think we’re just describing different things here. Same ballpark, different seats.
Thanks for elaborating 🙏 I understand what you're saying now 👍
Great video Chase ! Totally agree with your analysis. Rick is a great guy, but makes a mistake a lot of people with music theory knowledge do : using theory as a recipe to improvisation. Theory is a very valuable tool, but using it like this to create music is a very dangerous path (Bach might be the only successful one), that leads to nonsense such as bebop scales. Barry Harris demonstrated how bebop musicians were doing their thing, using chromatisms with rhythm, arpeggios and scale fragments, and there is no bebop scale in this, it is way richer than just a series of notes you're supposed to use to sound bop. People tend to forget that rhythm is the key when playing melodies, written or improvised.
I totally agree. I’ve seen many students who have bought into this approach waste years trying to make it work and eventually get frustrated and quit. When I heard a few of my CGA students mentioning this video I knew I had to present my take so they didn’t get caught in this same trap.
If I recall Beato claimed it was a 2 5 progression that would be in F# ! It is in the of Abm I new then he had NO IDEA!!
I studied jazz in college and all my professors talked about learning "licks" as a bad thing, they looked down on guitar players who learned "licks". Improvising was presented as a mythical thing that is always totally new and creative that you can only do after you develop your ears, not by learning music, but by using computer programs. Then, once you can identify all the intervals and chords, you are worthy of creating music. Oh yeah they also all loved modernist and 12 tone, or pretended to.
Yeah that’s not correct at all 👎
@@ChaseMaddox @ChaseMaddox I think approaching jazz theory from a classical perspective is a hindrance. As is the modernist notion of individuality in art. Studying Coltrane through chord scale theory, just like carving a spoon out of a slightly larger spoon. Then we get to call it "folk music" and feel very cool and detached.
It took me to long to stop trying on different theory methodologies, reading endless arguments of what a chord function actually is in context and what the correct scale is, boring and not useful.
If you are young and reading this, learn cool phrases that excite you and play them over different things. Eventually you will start tying them together like the video says. You don't need to transcribe Bird solos in order to be legitimate, only do that if you hear something you love enough to play it hundreds of times. As another youtuber said in a recent video - learning to play one phrase convincingly in multiple situations is far more valuable than learning an entire solo note for note that you can only play on one tune.
I still basically suck at jazz, due to laziness, adhd, and working memory problems, learning repertoire is hard. Ironically, my playing is A LOT more free when I'm playing a phrase I've used a million times. I can focus on the tone, phrasing, feel, building variations on a theme. I hear so many jazz legends who are clearly finding cool patterns and superimposing them over different stuff.
I think I get what you're saying. As a student learning improvisation, I have noticed that arpeggios lead to melodic phrases outside of the formal arpeggio.
Glad it makes sense to you 🤘
@@ChaseMaddox Thank you, brother and you have a new subscriber!
Glad to have you here!
Great video, I think the hardest thing is how we learn the jazz vocabulary! Thinking about that so many scales is overwhelming to me....I really like learning phrases or licks, as a vocabulary. I like also a concept that a teacher told me before, relating arpeggios (3-4 notes), with the pentatonic with the full scale (7 notes). Always thinking chords and adding some notes plus chromaticisms now and there
Yeah, the amount of info to process is crazy! You need to find a path that allows you to learn without getting overwhelmed 👍
Analyzing Music is beneficial because it shows you Why a Melody, Chord, Chord Progression, Rhythm, Tone, Phrase etc., sounds the way it does. At the same time, it's important to remember that Improvising Musicians, especially in Jazz, are usually not thinking about a particular Scale, Arpeggio, or Chord when they're Improvising. Instead, they're playing what they are Hearing and Thinking at that moment. This is what George Benson said on his Hot Licks Instructional Video. A more Beginning Jazz Musician will be thinking about Scales and Arpeggios, but not a more Advanced/Experienced Jazz Musician. Thanks.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts!
dann man, you’re a genius 🤌👌
I did understand a lot of what you’re talking about 👍💯
Glad it made sense to you! 🤘
Third figure correction - 'the interesting arpeggio' - you've notated F-flat and the TAB is stipulating 5-8 (F-natural) - @ChaseMaddox. Then the next figure about Fm7b5 had it right. Thought you'd wanna know.
I appreciate you pointing that out 👍 I fixed it in the PDF before but my video editor was using the older file.
I appreciate what you have done. You are right. He starts on the up beat. That's bebop Jazz. Benson can take these Bebob solos and incorporate them into urban pop music.
Thanks for your comment! 🤘
This was extremely useful! I especially like the comparison to words and the letter and order is what makes it the distinct word - otherwise anagrams would be just as readable as the original!
Glad you thought so! Thanks 🙏
Thankyou. That was a great explanation of that amazing solo. I think about things a lot in intervals. Am I right in thinking that the song is in key of Gb, the modulation from Ab to Db7 is a 2-5 that doesnt resolve to the root. The Fm7b5 is coming from the 7th interval, and the Bmaj7 is from the 4th interval? I could be right off track here :)
Thanks for watching! It’s possible you could think about it as being in Gb, but to me it really makes most sense as sounding like it’s in Ab minor since that’s the resolution, not Gb.
@@ChaseMaddox Perfect, thanks, that makes sense
The Fm7b5 arpeggio can be called Abm6, this shape goes back to Charlie Christian (check out the bridge on Stompin at the savoy, em6 over A7). Bebop musicians called the m7b5 chord a minor 6 chord with the 6th in the bass. Another way to think of the Bmaj7 arpeggio is a stacking of thirds sound derived from Wes. On almost every solo, Wes will reference the minor arpeggio/shape that goes 1-3-5-7-9-11-13 in some way. Wes can be heard playing that shape you played on Four On Six over the decending iiV's. At the end of the day, names are just names and scales are an alphabet, not the grammar or syntax of the music. I appreciate you outlining what is important, and that's melody and how it lays within the geometry of the guitar.
Our language is expanded exponentially when we realize that we can play our vocabulary for one chord over every other chord. Over Ab minor, we can play our Db7 language, Abm6, BMaj7. And the reverse is true, over BMajor7 we can play Abm6, Db7, etc.
Absolutely! This is how Benson combines all of those chord types as part of the same family 👍
Brotherman…well stated..all about the language..congrats on your new guitar and new look.peace.M
Thanks for the support, man! 🙏
Great stuff Chase, thanks!
Thanks Walter, glad you dig it!
Great video bruv! 👏👏👏
Great editing! 👌
@@ChaseMaddoxmore like fast editing 😅
100% bro! you are absolutely right on this
Appreciate it!
Totally agree with you, Chase! There was no incorrect or arguable idea from you! 💪
Thanks for watching!
Nice one man! Curious what you think about barry harris's approach, as I think it's pretty scale-oriented?
Thanks! Here's a whole video on what I think: ruclips.net/video/yU--jduZVus/видео.html
@ChaseMaddox nice, thanks! Interesting stuff
Or you can see that also as VII to I. Therefore is Fm7b5 to Gbmaj7. Just half step away from a root.
Chase hey. Much enjoyed this video! I like that you are exploring and thinking about what is logical. I quite like playing with scales even though its not especially music.... but for sure if you want to play music, its like parker said, (Ill always remember) learn and forget....I love that record and Bennys back... Bebop! Great analogies its like talking to a foreigner and they recite the alphabet.
Thanks for your comment and the great analogy!
Learning phrases and playing phrased solos is way more fun and makes a lot more sense than running up and down scales -there's a place for that in your training but the language and phrasing is what your communicating to your audience. Nobody would write down the alphabet backwards and forewards and claim it was an interesting story.
I agree! Thanks for watching 🤘
I can safely say that I play with feel using phrases that I have developed over the years. I have played solos live in bands. However, my understanding of theory is pretty poor, to say the least. I therefore know all about using small phrases and knitting them together in the moment, but I yearn to UNDERSTAND them in the greater scheme of things. I would say that Rick Beato's identifying scales in which to place these ideas, or even just fragments of them, is beneficial for a player like me. I doubt that many musicians assume that great players are just playing scales.
You’re in a great position, which the majority of intermediate guitarists trying to get better don’t find themselves. I’ve taught hundreds of students and most of them start with the perspective that they would solo better if only they knew more scales or could play them better.
Woot! Been listening to Benson since the 60s. He's definitely NOT a scale player. Looking forward to your take on his vocabulary.
Thank you! Hopefully done for next week 🤘
Music theory is a 'Descriptive Theory' not a 'Presriptive Theory' vocabulary is so important.
Yes indeed! 🤘
@ChaseMaddox watched a few more of your videos, good stuff man. Most guitar content is shockingly bad. It's bad really, there are a lot of people who put hours of practice in following terrible advice, anyway you got a sub. Keep going man
Appreciate that! 🙏🙏
Chase: thanks for the analysis, and I have a question: I am an amateur jazz student and I often feel that it is not appropriate to use licks such as the Donna lee one you mention. Even if many others do that all the time , I feel bad about it (like: i'm not being "creative"). Any idea on how to let go of that feeling?
Also : I purchased a long time ago the Beato book and although I like his videos very much, his book is just horrible, and pedagogy is nowhere to be found.
Thanks for the question and for watching the video! I think the first thing you really need to understand, which it sounds like you don't quite believe yet, is that all master improvisers are building from language they've learned from others before them. Great authors don't re-invent every word to express a new story; they use existing vocabulary in a new WAY, sometimes discovering new words along the way. The second thing I would say is you need to learn vocabulary one piece at a time and really 'play' with it. Sing the phrase, play it on different strings and positions, work it into different songs, see where it fits and where it doesn't, vary the rhythm, add some notes, take some out...explore the phrase to really understand how it functions and how you can use it. That takes a lot of work but it's worth it because then that phrase is really yours and it will authentically be part of your improvisations as you continue to build new vocab into your playing.
@@ChaseMaddox Thanks!
There’s a reason barry harris hated and never used or talked about anything called a “bebop dominant” scale. There’s just the dominant scale with years of vocabulary built off of it. Great vid bro.
Thank you! 🙏
Hey Chase, and another great video from you. You always do an amazing job and your tutorials have helped me occasionally to take new approaches to teaching my students things in a different way.
But with all the respect you show Rick, Mr. Beato has unfortunately shown a few times that he is not that receptive to other points of view. 😆
Thanks for your comment, and I'm honored that you use some of my approach to teach your students. I'm not looking for a response from Beato because it's not really about him, it's about the ideas he's presenting. He may take it the wrong way, but I feel like I presented him in his own words and was explicit about not knowing why he might have said things in the way he did.
@@ChaseMaddox My approach is not that a student simply has to understand the subject matter. If I see that a student has musical understanding and at least a little talent, I see it as my job to find a way for the student to understand the contents. It's usually a question of perspective. And your tutorials are really good inspiration. So.... Thank you very much!
My pleasure! 🙏
It´s a little like "Both Sides Now". I guess that after watching the two videos you can see a lot of truth on both. Of course, Benson wouldn´t be constrained to either the scale or the arpeggio approach. The two-octave arpeggio I see as a superposition of a minor arpeggio over a rootless dominant chord, but still working as the dominant.
I think you´re absolutely right about the fact that Benson mechanics - fueled by his amazing talent and honed over years and years - approached this little section more efficiently as a repeated arpeggio having "upper notes" from the base harmony than entirely from a root harmonic view. But that doesn´t negate a root base approach as Beato suggests. I would tend to agree that you have probably dedicated a lot more time to finely study Benson´s technique and precise execution and can teach that particularly well, but that doesn´t take anything from Beato´s general knowledge and his comments about this particular piece.
In the end, none of us, not me, not you, not Beato would ever get to play "like Benson" no matter what we all do or say, and after all, none of us knows what was exactly going through his head, and Benson - as the great Joe Pass did - won´t describe it. So let´s not be like the blind Hindu philosophers describing the elephant as a vine, a tree or a hanging snake and enjoy seeing the elephant. 🙂
Thanks for sharing your thoughts! 👍
Beato needs to buy his ear training course!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Dialectic. If only we enjoyed more of it..... SO healthy and profound.
Thank you for watching 🙏
but what about the coltrane pentatonic?🙃 1, 2, 3b, 5b. 7b.
That's a good one!
amazing video, thanks
I appreciate your comment 🙏
Im here for the blues Vocab. :)
Username checks out 👍🤘
great video
Thanks for checking it out!
This is illuminating.
I wish to take nothing from Rick and what he does; he seemed to be giving ballpark approximations in his tutorial that weren't explicit enough. Kinda like 'here are some scales and arpeggio ideas that might work over this 2-chord vamp, try it for yourself...'
Your analysis is focussed without being unnecessarily burdened with theory details, and when you do provide these insights they are correct; as you admit this was in response to Rick's errors.
It is one thing to lay out some scales, arpeggios etc., over chords.
It is another thing entirely to describe their contextualisation and other nuances like timing/feel, economical fingerings, and phrasing/line contour, extensions & substitutions, tensions & resolutions and how these contribute to what we are hearing.
I'm a forty years of playing Jazz and Classical guitarist (although I prefer 'musician') and one thing I adore about RUclips and the like is the ease of access to different modes, no pun intended, of evaluating and teaching creative musicianship. Indeed, everyone learns, thinks, and teaches differently... yet some swords are sharper than others.
Thanks for this. Shalom ❤🙏🏼
Thank you so much for your detailed comment of support! 🙏 This is exactly what I’m trying to accomplish in making the video 🤘
@@ChaseMaddox you're very welcome. I shall check out more of your stuff including memberships etc., very soon. Great teaching and personal (musical) development material will be found, I am sure of it.
www.skool.com/cga/about
I haven't watched your entire video yet. So far the thing that you both missed is that Benson SINGS EVERYTHING he plays! He's playing along with the voice in his head. Playing along on the guitar and his physical voice. That voice in your head is what GB has that so many other players don't.
He doesn’t always sing along with his solo though? Idk that saying he’s “singing along” in his head is worth commenting on because to me that just means really hearing what you’re playing. For example, I can’t sing well, but I “sing along” with my solo in my head. How does knowing that help you understand his solo?
@@johnresciniti4290 All Great ones do it Hendrix,Slash, Yngwie and Van Halen
I wonder if he was using that bebop language to kind of have a teaching moment and then explain Db bebop scale . Does Rick do that often ?
Not sure I would consider any of that teaching to be honest. It’s like opening a fire hydrant of information on someone’s head and expecting them to not feel thirsty afterwards.
Isn’t the answer really all of the above? I was lucky enough to take some lessons from Mike Stern during the Covid lockdown. He recommended knowing the arpeggios, scales and licks - and he uses them all. But most important is making music - tellling a story. Victor Wooten has a video where he plays the wrong notes with a great grove and contrasts that with playing the right notes with no time feel. The good grove sounds better every time. And maybe I should have started by saying Any of the above. Because there are people who creatively string licks together, and there are other people who embellish arpeggios while targeting chord tones, and there are people who primarily use scales. And they can all sound great - if they’re creating interesting music. Now I would argue that Benson and Stern have an advantage because they know it all. But a good ear combined with some creativity should be able to tell a good story with any of the approaches. My thought.
I appreciate you sharing your thoughts! 🤘
Monster! Great stuff Chase!
Thanks for watching! 👍
I'm watching you play on the intro and it's great. But as a George Benson fan I couldn't hear GB. The feel is different.
I'm not trying to be GB - just trying to explain a few things! 👍
rick without discounting his talented contributions relates all compositions to musical theory; scales, modes, in example to the creative process, he has a hard time understanding that a solo or song is either an artist hearing from the source, whether god and or the unconscious theoretical history in the inspiration of the moment. In other words, studying theory and practicing SHOULD NOT be in the moment of composition and soloing; you are hearing what to play without presupposing music as a mathematical multiple possibility for effect. Beato can analyze the music theoretically AFTER the composition and after the solo but that often was not the intended effort at that time. Yes, the soloist might think quickly " I'll put a a min7th flat five arpeggio- but the soloist cannot construct every part of the solo that way. A Benson blues lick line (to me ) can be interpreted as a scale but analyzing that after the event serves no purpose because improve is an art of tension and release and is a mini melodic composition in the spirit of your soul. Like many revered jazz artists have said, if you have to think what you're going to do, you can't play.
Well said! Thanks for watching!
Man this is fantastic advice and you can PLAY👍🏻
Thanks for checking it out! 🙏
I really agree with this concept when thinking about Benson. I don't think his playing is at all from a "school" approach. He comes up with lines "vocabulary" and never throws away his ideas. This is why Benson himself cannot articulate what he's doing exactly, he's just making music. He's no doubt learned many musical concepts along the way from other people, but his strength is not his understanding of theory it's his musicality.
Well said! Thanks for watching and sharing your thoughts 🙏
Killer playing
Thank you! 🙏
Great video, but you and Rick are both wrong. The secret to playing like George Benson is being George Benson. All you need to do is be George Benson. It's that easy. Also a Fm7b5 and a Db7 or Db9 are the same thing and T-Bone Walker has known that before all of us and Benson. Fight me.*
*Not really, this was a great video and I get a lot from both your and Rick's explanations!
lol thanks for this comment! F-7b5 and Db7 are not actually the same thing though. One has a Db and the other doesn’t. You can use them as substitutes for each other in many cases, but not all. What I described in this video is the process of how George Benson became a master improviser, which agrees with the point you’re trying to make?
@@ChaseMaddox I'm just being needlessly difficult of course because this is the internet! As I said, enjoyed the video (and your others) and explanations. And also of course, the transcriptions. I know those take a lot of time and work so thanks for making them available to all of us in these videos!
Haha all good! I think this is an important area to be super clear about because it really does confuse many well-intentioned people who want to learn to play guitar but get overwhelmed by the chaos of seemingly conflicting information and advice. I appreciate your comments 🤘
benson is playing from the 3rd of the Db7 chord(the fmin7) its common in jazz to play from the 3rd giving you that 9th sound its THAT SIMPLE.
You can hear chet baker use that same arpeggio in youd be so nice to come home to near the beginning of his solo!
Gained a sub brother. Amazing content
Thanks Sean! Appreciate you watching, and glad to have you here 🙏
Ok so ik he definitely can't speak on what benson was thinking you are right but i think it's more of that scales are taught wrong cause i have definitely tried to transcribe solos and copy and paste the phrases into other songs but then it's just ok I'm done with this phrase next phrase and so on but when i think scales and arpeggios and throw in some licks from a song everything flows better
Thanks for this comment as it’s something I should probably clarify in another video. Improvising is not just connecting a full phrase to another full phrase. There is also musical “connective tissue” in a solo such as scales, arpeggios, enclosure, chromaticisms, and more that unite the phrases. Those things I call Essential Jazz Patterns.
@ChaseMaddox I love that term lol you just summed up what I was trying to say except you said it way better
All I can Say Is WWOOOOOWWW!!!! You Nailed it
Thanks for watching and commenting! 🤘
George you're right he doesn't and he probably didn't study scales like that back in the day you know he is going off of musical phrases that's why he sounds so good all the time and his stuff does not sound like a scale that's number one number two I have heard that he actually builds for his solos especially on the breezing album to select pieces or I guess his improvisations that sounded really good on that section and peace mailed them together as the final product and then he went back and memorize that so he could always play when he's playing if you noticed when he plays a lot of his tunes live he plays the solo from the album which is also very amazing you know he has an amazing memory for Music that's for sure. If you see him on his George Benson I mean and he's trying to explain what he's doing he doesn't explain it at all in terms of any scales he said you know it's like this… It's like that and he licks that he he lick his licks simple licks most of the time yes they are blue licks but they're not just like a four lick you know it can go on for eight beats or something like that. I like that new GB guitar want to hear that plugged into the amp and sounding like GB guitar
Thanks for sharing your comment, although I think I had a stroke reading that gigantic run on sentence lol 😂
@@ChaseMaddox it's run-on because I was dictating it from my parked car ha ha and I couldn't edit it because I had access RUclips from another app my Gmail and apparently it won't let you edit it so I redid it I edited it but you know I have a lot to say I'm sorry and I have I have met him and played with his sidemen Stanley Banks and Mel Davis and you know I'm almost one of the cats you know.
And I have had four George Benson guitars the GB 10 blonde the GB 112 iced tea burst and a GB 112 cherry burst and now I have the cheap model sounds as good as all of them which is amazing to me
you gotta know how to pick the George Benson guitar you have to put the pic at a slight angle and it has to be almost in between the pick ups maybe a little towards the bridge up to get that bell tone
Haha I'm just joking around. I appreciate your comment 👍
great one
Thank you!
that lick sounds like Donna Lee 11:54
I think all guitar "education" used to mainly talk about licks, which is exactly you are talking about when youre talking about vocabulary.
Yes and no. I think people tend to view “licks” as isolated ideas whereas “vocab” connects with other vocab, just like in speaking a language. Talking about licks without also talking about how they relate and connect other ideas has its own issues as just talking about scales.
Probably nothing wrong with teaching scales, that's equivalent to teaching the letters of the alphabet. But knowing letters is a long way from knowing words, which is why teaching phrases (I noticed you didn't use the word "licks") is just as important.
And we need to normalize that it's ok to have an arsenal of phrases that we reuse, and it's still improvisation.
For improvisation, scales are important to know why certain notes are generally played together over certain harmony. Trying to create a good solo using scales reminds me of that story asking how many monkeys it would take typing randomly to generate the next Shakespeare.
All the best players have tons of phrases they reuse. And even some they plan out for the “improvised” solo, but we’re not ready for that conversation 😅
Great video . I know your going for the click bait title and its a good 1 ! Also i think your actually disagreeing with Rick . I think Rick prob uses scales and theory to explain his ideas and other guitarists . I also agree w you that its better to listen and learn language more than using scales / modes etc . To improv and to talk about improv. Thats just it though. Its prob great to have both under the belt. Everyone that has a youtube video teaching guitar probably knows how to do both. Everyone thats good i mean lol. Like you ! Keep up the great work man ! Your videos are great ! Would love to contribute something to you. Do you prefer patreon ?
Haha I had even more clickbait titles, but I thought this one was accurate without being inflammatory. I’m definitely disagreeing with Rick. The problem is not using music theory to understand the details of what’s being played. The problem is suggesting that it’s the scales themselves that allow you to play the music. Most people miss that critical distinction. I don’t have Patreon, but if you want to support the best ways are to check out what I offer in Chase’s Guitar Academy or become a RUclips member. Cheers 🤘
Excellent 🎉
Cheers! 🤘
In all honesty. Rick is NOT the guitar player he thinks he is. He loves theory, not LANGUAGE.
Beato plays guitar as if it was a piano. Watch at his finger. Immediately after he played a note he moves his finger up. A verybad habit.
I agree with rick on the Db :(
Say why? What specifically is Benson playing that would be called Db Bebop Dominant scale? And, more importantly, is that actually the approach Benson is taking based on the context of his solo and past solos?
I think I done watched this video 5 times 😂
Haha that's more times than I've seen it! 😂
Qué caradura para usar a Rick Beato en el título de este video! 🤣
How so?
@@ChaseMaddox Because of the "click bait". But i agree with what you´ve said about Benson though.
What’s click bait about the video? I think it’s a pretty straightforward title without being overly dramatic.
I love Beato's reverence for Pass, Martino, Benson, and Wes. But this concept of "vocabulary over scales" is a deep one that only emerges after DECADES of listening deeply to serious, straight ahead jazz (NOT smooth jazz!) and understanding WHAT the musicians are doing. If I were Chase, I might add this recommendation: If you're a guitarist and you want to play jazz, STOP listening to guitarists and start listening to horn players, particularly bebop and hard bop players from the 1950's.
Thanks for your comment! I wouldn’t recommend not listening to guitarists because I think it’s very important to be familiar with how master guitarists have approached our instrument. However, checking out other instrumentalists will also help. It’s “and” not “either/or” 👍
@@ChaseMaddox Great point, and you are absolutely right: be willing to listen to everyone. To be more clear: When I first heard Bruce Forman on Lanny Morgan's 1981 LP "It's About Time," I was left speechless: Cannonball (phrases) on guitar! OMG. Never heard THAT before. Playing guitar but THINKING like a horn player. articulation, dynamics, range, chromaticism, etc. So that's my high-water mark...and I don't hear many other guitarists over the last 75 years (except the Big Four, and please let's add Metheny to that list) playing or thinking that way.