The Steel Guitar Forum

to throw even more monkeys in the barrel....

after experimenting with different interval methods in my own education (and i use them all) - i think for TEACHING purposes the old solfeg method is a lot more powerful than you may realize.
the MAIN point, IMO is tonality, being able to HEAR what the key center is at that certain time and where the line is going.
for example: - you have resting tones (1/3 - Do/Mi) you have active WHOLE steps (2-6 Re/La - they do not predict where they are going) active LEADING tones (4/7 - Fa/Ti) that want to RESOLVE and you have and finally the LEADING tone, (5 / So)
then you have your chromatic intervals (b2/b3/aug4/#5/b7, etc that each follow the same logic....and it builds from there - ever wonder why a ii-V7-I has such a strong tonal pull?

Until a student understands this, that each note in the TONALITY has a SPECIFIC purpose, then you still dont have the MAIN piece of the puzzle. This is my complete distaste for the "modern shred method" of teaching - that you teach the major scale and you can play ANY note over the key center and it will "work" - if you cant get it to sound right - (it usually wont cause you dont know the rules of tonality ) - then you drop down to a pentatonic scale and then learn some sequences and you are "shreading" - you can now join a rock/blues band.

+the reason your pentatonic scale will work over just about any progression is that you have eliminated the ACTIVE LEADING TONES 4/7 that define the tonality, so the resulting scale seems to "float" above the harmony, not really defining anything specific - which is GREAT and powerful if its your choosing vs your only option.

I think folks missed my point about the numbers related to piano
The piano is a C major scale instrument (white keys) with separate keys for notes not in the scale (black keys)..
So you have to play within C major no matter what key you’re in.
As a result each chord on the piano has it’s own unique grip.
In light of this I would presume notation far more practical than Nashville Numbers for piano.
But then again since we speak of PSG here I guess it matters little if you use one potato two potato for piano.

Stuart, the system of using numbers has been around for centuries. It's called figured bass. Figured bass shows the pianist what inversions of the chords to to play.

The Nashville number system is a very simplified method of doing the same thing, but without the inversions. It also makes it easy to play the songs in any key on the fly. I am more familiar with the figured bass as seen in Walter Piston's Harmony book and John Mehegan's system. It is especially useful for Jazz.

James Mayer wrote:Maybe I don't understand the Nashville system after all. I understand II, in a major key, as a minor chord. Dm in the key of C, for example.

How could 2 be a major?

In a system using Arabic numerals, only one chord quality on a given root can be written as root number only; others must have added notations to distinguish them.

Folk and popular harmony is so freewheeling that it precludes any implicit assumption that particular roots will necessarily take particular chord qualities prescribed by a theory system. So in the "Nashville" number notation the major chord, probably because it occurs with greater frequency, arbitrarily becomes the default chord assumed for any number in the absence of a qualifying notation.

Stuart Legg wrote:I think folks missed my point about the numbers related to piano

"Thinking" musically remains the same on all instruments.

Paul

Dickie Whitley wrote:Just my 2 cents, but If I were teaching, my students would study music before touching an instrument. I just firmly believe you need to understand the rudimentary things before you can wrap your head around an instrument.

That will run off about %90 of todays new players I think. I make sure they are actually playing music first. You don't need to know a damn thing about music theory, how to build a chord, etc. to finger a D major chord on the guitar. But if you strum out that chord, in time, you are making music!

You have to get them addicted to the playing before you can bring in too much theory. In all my experiences

I always tell my students that I can't teach them how to play... THEY have to teach THEMSELVES, but I can give them the information to do that and help them know what the next step is.

Josh Yenne wrote:....
You have to get them addicted to the playing before you can bring in too much theory. In all my experiences

This is my personal experience, too. I'd be playing for a few years as a kid with no knowledge of music theory when I began to develop an intellectual curiosity about it. When I was about 13 or 14, I started taking books out from the library and had music theory in high school. My ears were already good by that time and I could already play, but the knowledge opened up the whole world for me.

Mike Neer wrote:

Josh Yenne wrote:....
You have to get them addicted to the playing before you can bring in too much theory. In all my experiences

This is my personal experience, too. I'd be playing for a few years as a kid with no knowledge of music theory when I began to develop an intellectual curiosity about it. When I was about 13 or 14, I started taking books out from the library and had music theory in high school. My ears were already good by that time and I could already play, but the knowledge opened up the whole world for me.

Me too. That's the usual progression. First you learn HOW, then when you're interested enough, you eventually learn WHY.

Or you don't...

Franklin wrote:

Stuart Legg wrote:I think folks missed my point about the numbers related to piano

"Thinking" musically remains the same on all instruments.

Paul

The interval doesn’t change from instrument to instrument but the thought process varies considerably.
For instance the piano and notation go together like peaches and cream. That is why almost everyone who plays piano learns by notation. It’s almost like it was made for Piano
Given this there no advantage to visualize the piano keyboard in numbers.
In contrast notation for fretted instruments is mental overload, worst than eating sht with a big spoon.
Numbers and fretted instruments go together like peaches and cream.

Stuart Legg wrote:

Franklin wrote:

Stuart Legg wrote:I think folks missed my point about the numbers related to piano

"Thinking" musically remains the same on all instruments.

Paul

The interval doesn’t change from instrument to instrument but the thought process varies considerably.
For instance the piano and notation go together like peaches and cream. That is why almost everyone who plays piano learns by notation. It’s almost like it was made for Piano
Given this there no advantage to visualize the piano keyboard in numbers.
In contrast notation for fretted instruments is mental overload, worst than eating sht with a big spoon.
Numbers and fretted instruments go together like peaches and cream.

Transposition on a stringed instrument is so much easier than on a piano, so this makes sense. Patterns can be played exactly the same way at different positions. I think we are saying the same thing.

Keyboard instruments are my least favorite to play. Impossible to bend notes, vibrato, play microtones, etc. It's made for western music and reflects the theory perfectly. You are forced into that framework. Portability is not the only reason a piano is rarely used as a primary instrument for "world" musicians.

Stuart,

You're all over the map without direction in your posts and you are consistently quoting me for the sake of arguing points that have nothing to do with the meaning behind my statements......I have consistently posted about learning to speak music through intervals for communication purposes nothing more.

In my 40 years of playing, I have yet to work with a musician including pianists who does not think and speak of intervals......The simplest chord charts whether letters or numbers designate the interval formula next to the tonal center...C13th, C9th, C11, C-7th..........Jazz studies teach students to see and define the changes as 2minor / 5's........Yet you state pianists don't think music by the interval values because of the way its played.....

PF

I don't think he understands anything about the functions of harmony. That's what the numbers system is used for: functional harmony. It's essential stuff, IMO--at least on an elementary level.

At the risk of sidetracking Stuart's OP I think Jerome's nugget got overlooked:

Jerome Hawkes wrote:...each note in the TONALITY has a SPECIFIC purpose, then you still dont have the MAIN piece of the puzzle. This is my complete distaste for the "modern shred method" of teaching - that you teach the major scale and you can play ANY note over the key center and it will "work" - if you cant get it to sound right - (it usually wont cause you dont know the rules of tonality ) - then you drop down to a pentatonic scale and then learn some sequences and you are "shreading" - you can now join a rock/blues band.

+the reason your pentatonic scale will work over just about any progression is that you have eliminated the ACTIVE LEADING TONES 4/7 that define the tonality, so the resulting scale seems to "float" above the harmony, not really defining anything specific - which is GREAT and powerful if its your choosing vs your only option.

I work with one of these types of players. This type of "shred" style doesn't carry much meaning to me and now I understand why.

Fun thread, guys.

Franklin wrote:In my 40 years of playing, I have yet to work with a musician including pianists who does not think and speak of intervals

You are one with Walter Piston here.
"Harmony"
page 1
chapter 1
paragraph 1
sentence 1

Jerome Hawkes wrote:each note in the TONALITY has a SPECIFIC purpose,

I think this is why shape note singing works. Singers remember the key (tonal center) in the mind's ear, and easily learn to associate a sound with each scale note.

Just my two bits here...

First: giving to beginners is always considered an honor! Isn't that how we all learn?

Second: it is always the responsibility of the student to grasp, master and evolve what we were taught.

New to this site and to steel, but have to say that I believe some are meant to enjoy while others are meant to lead and create the new! Love and passion aren't the same thing and never have been.

Regards-
Wayne~O

Ps... Are people really arguing with PF???? Crazy....

Also need to add that as a new steel player, had I no understanding of theory and the intervals (In Latin " modus " or as jazz greats call em "modes") first time sitting behind a D-10 would have been an intimidating experience. Just my opinion....

Wayne~O

Earnest, interesting mention of shape singing and the "minds ear" for key tonality...
We've all known some accomplished players who eschew any study of theory, and may in fact disparage it- and still play very well "by ear", having learned "it" through years of bandstand exposure.

In my opinion, music, theory, the mathematical and emotional interplay of intervallic interaction- simply exists, and we can train ourselves to hear and understand it all. Notation and intellectual theory are just attempts to describe and codify the music we can otherwise hear and imagine.
While we can make a lifetime study of music based on just what one hears internally and is exposed to aurally, the study and application of "theory" exposes us to the accumulated knowledge and perspective (including some real shortcuts) of all who came before.
Ignoring that treasure trove would seem to be really shortchanging ourselves in the quest.

Wayne Gailey Jr wrote:Just my two bits here...

First: giving to beginners is always considered an honor! Isn't that how we all learn?

Second: it is always the responsibility of the student to grasp, master and evolve what we were taught.

New to this site and to steel, but have to say that I believe some are meant to enjoy while others are meant to lead and create the new! Love and passion aren't the same thing and never have been.

Regards-
Wayne~O

Ps... Are people really arguing with PF???? Crazy....

Wayne
First, welcome to the Forum. Your dad was a great player and you're part of his legacy.

I also agree with everything you said in the above quotation, with extra emphasis on your last sentence.

I'm thinking just maybe, folks would get a whole lot more out of what Paul says, if they were to just sit back and listen. Then, they might end up learning they aren't so brilliant after all. But then too, I've learned that some are so full of themselves, that nothing a person (with Real Knowledge) had to say, would (in their opinion) be right anyway.

I also agree with Herb, and, Wayne Gailey, Jr.

Especially with extra emphasis on the last sentence:

Ps... Are people really arguing with PF???? Crazy....

It's called disrespect in the highest.

Don,
the old man
NJ.

The piano is a C major scale instrument (white keys) with separate keys for notes not in the scale (black keys)..
So you have to play within C major no matter what key you’re in.

I disagree. The piano keyboard is a linear repetitive pattern of 12 notes.

Because I tend to think in terms of patterns, theory on the pedal guitar was pedal and knee lever patterns. I didn't have to know what the notes or chords were, "pedals-up" it was AB=IV, up 2 frets is V. A=VI and so on. When I had to actually read "simple" notes, I memorized the C-scale at the 3rd and 8th frets on E9 and the 5,7 and 12th frets on C6.

Ps... Are people really arguing with PF???? Crazy....

No dog in this fight but really? Nobody here's infallible, unless the P stands for "Pope" and no one told me about it.

There have been some excellent thoughts on both sides in this topic. And if challenging an acknowledged master gets him to share ideas that he wouldn't have had reason to otherwise, then so much the better.

Tim Victor wrote:There have been some excellent thoughts on both sides in this topic.

Our topic is "If you’re having to be shown everything, you don’t love it". The contrary position would be "you DO love it" but I really don't see the controversy. I'd love to figure out what the argument is, so I can take sides and call sombody an ignorant slut.