Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 7 2007, 07:17 PM

Hi All,

Here is a fragment of a version of the work song (old Jazz standard) that pretty much captures where I am at lead-wise. Like a lot of the stuff I have been doing, I think it is a little dull and uninspired. I'm trying to figure out how to take my playing to the next level - any suggestions on techniques I can work on to add some excitement here?

Check the 3rd post in the thread for the actual file - I messed up the upload!

Thanks!

Posted by: Steelkonsum Feb 7 2007, 07:36 PM

Well that was one minute and a half of silence Oo

What am I missin here?

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 7 2007, 07:53 PM

But GOOD silence no ?

Doh, it was the wrong file -try this one instead - sorry!

Posted by: Why Feb 8 2007, 01:39 AM

Okay, that's pretty good. You're not a complete newb

I guess you should focus on consolidating each technique. Isolate one and practice it till you get it perfect. Also, incorporate some speed picking in your file and there you have it, a solo full of tension and melody.

Posted by: Steelkonsum Feb 8 2007, 08:52 AM

Indeed it was splendid silence

Listened to the actual recording now, was really good. I liked it alot, good feelin and nice technique. Guess you should take some advices from the more experienced players here and just listen to my praise

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 8 2007, 02:17 PM

Thanks Steelkonsum - by the way, I LIKED your lesson even though you say you sucked - although I can play ok on a couple of scales, one thing I have found I am lacking is any idea at all that there are more than 2 major scales ... I just found out about CAGED and I am now practicing new scales feverishly. Long story short, my next challenge will be to hook them all together in long runs, and your lesson helped me start to visualize that, even though it has now gone

Why: Thanks for your kind words - I started practicing with a metronome just yesterday, that should help. Speed picking here I come!

I'll post a new version of this in a few months/years when I can play something better!

Posted by: Steelkonsum Feb 8 2007, 02:28 PM

Thanks mate. I'm glad to see I didnt just waste everyones time. It's back up now if there's something you need to check again.

Also, good luck with the CAGED system. It just confuses the crap out of me

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 8 2007, 02:42 PM

Well now I finally know CAGED exists, it makes sense to me - its just a fancy way of saying "Dude, you can play the same scales all over the place"

Better yet, the thing I like about it, if I understand correctly, is that CAGED major scales give you free access to minor scales (use the relative minor) and modes too if you know what you are doing although modes confuse the crap out of ME - I've seen many guitar tutorials online and I think I am just missing something essential, or perhaps failing to work on them for several years until I understand them ... maybe I'll ask for a modes lesson in the request forum, I haven't seen one on the site yet.

Anyway, thanks for putting the lesson back up, I'll have a go at it tonight.

Posted by: radarlove1984 Feb 9 2007, 09:46 PM

Great playing! That's at least as good as some of the backing tracks from one of the Blues Brothers movies.

I've heard a few people talk about the CAGED thing before, but I still don't know what it is. From your description, it sounds really useful though. Are you learning all this from a book or a website? Most of the websites describing this are too complicated for my skill level. If you know a "simple" lesson on this, could you post a link?

Keep on rockin'

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 9 2007, 10:11 PM

Hi radarlove1984 - thanks for your comments. I hadn't thought about the blues brother movies for a while

For the CAGED system I used http://www.cyberfret.com/scales/major-caged/index.php link - its a fairly easy discussion. If that doesn't work for you I'll try and answer any questions you have.

What the CAGED system actually is, is a group of scales and associated chords that let you play the same notes at different places on the fretboard. Its called CAGED because the initials stand for the open fret chords that the scales are based on. I'm still working on it, but when you know your CAGED scales inside out, you should be able to:

1. Move to particular scale without going a huge distance up and down the neck from where you are

e.g. If you are playing in the key of A using the 'E' scale from CAGED, and need to move to a scale in the key of D, you could move up 5 frets and play the same scale, but it is easier to stay in the same place and play a different scale (in this case the 'A' scale) The E and A scales are named for the open chords that their shapes are based around, not the actual scale itself, so although saying "play and A scale with the E shape" sounds a little crazy, it makes sense when you look at how the notes all fit together.

2. Connect all of the different scales together so that you can do monster runs all the way from low low notes to high high notes. If you just had one scale you would need to jump a whole octave (12 frets) at some point - very hard. Using CAGED, you can play different parts of the same scale a couple of tones up, and keep moving up in easy steps. (I'm still tring to figure this part out)

3. CAGED also helps with your chords. For any chord you want to play, there is an option for each of the CAGED scales that will fit what you are trying to do, giving you a lot more options without moving up and down the neck so much.

I hope that helps and hasn't confused you more

Posted by: fretdancer Feb 9 2007, 10:24 PM

I have heard people banging on about "CAGED" use of the fretboard but I could never fully understand it, I will have to have another look and see if its ready to click with me yet.

Andrew, I did not comment on your playing, I actually loved it, thats how I aspire to play.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 9 2007, 10:37 PM

Thanks!

Posted by: radarlove1984 Feb 9 2007, 11:26 PM

Thanks for the link. I've been putting off learning stuff like this for a while now. I'll give it a try over the weekend.

Posted by: Liam Feb 10 2007, 10:24 AM

I enjoyed it nice man

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 11 2007, 01:36 AM

Thanks Liam!

Posted by: PickNGrin Feb 11 2007, 06:10 PM

I liked it a lot!
Some nice feel over some complex backing chords. hey, the bends are not sour, its in time, its in tune, its fairly well mixed. Not too much messy background noise, not overloaded with effects / gain / distortion. You are not putting all your effort into trying to play as many notes as you possibly can, you are putting your effort into the music.
It's also not too long of a clip.
Nice job!

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 11 2007, 09:12 PM

Thanks PickNGrin - really like your cool picture thingy that draws itself ;-)

Wow, you guys have all been really kind to me - thank you very much. As PickNGrin pointed out, for me it has always been about the complete song, not just the guitar parts, sometimes I even write songs with no guitar in them (though not too many) I am enough of an egotist though, to want to completely blow everyone away when I rip into a solo, just like the rest of us, which means I need to learn to play like Kris and Pavel. One thing this thread has done, is allow me to be a little more objective about what I do reasonably well - I was pretty down on myself as a guitarist because I hadn't done anything new in such a long time. Now I feel like I have a starting point and a good idea of where I want to go next - thank you all for your help getting me on this road

Posted by: jeff Feb 13 2007, 07:59 PM

I dig it. Sounds cool man!

Posted by: Robin Feb 14 2007, 03:50 AM

oh my god this was really really good! my jaw dropped to the floor

Posted by: Kristofer Dahl Feb 14 2007, 09:59 AM

I join the quire - feely stuff!

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 14 2007, 02:37 PM

Thanks so much guys!

I'll post something new soon - the regular practice is paying off and I think I am already improving :-)

Posted by: ezravdb Feb 14 2007, 02:38 PM

The beginning was AWESOME, where did you get that sound in the beginning? was that a trumpet? also the solo sounded good and fits the backing.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 14 2007, 02:43 PM

It was a saxophone - I record using Cubase, and the Sax sound came from Linplug's SaxLab - glad you liked it!

Posted by: fretdancer Feb 14 2007, 05:03 PM

You mean that sax was "software"??? my ghast considers itself flabbered!!

I want Cubase....tell me more about this SaxLab - are the drums and backing you have all generated by that program?... I want some of it if it does.

Got to say, you got a great jazzy sax sounding guitar tone going on there too with that one - incredible.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 14 2007, 06:30 PM

Hey Fret, take a moment to de-flabber your ghast, and I'll tell you what I know (although this in itself is a vast subject).

The good news is that with the PodXTL you are totally setup for recording - the bad news is that Cubase and all the stuff that goes with it is not cheap ...

Firstly, yes, Cubase is an awesome program. There are a few such similar programs that all do roughly the same but vary in price and abilities. Cubase is pretty much top of the heap apart from ProTools that requires a more significant hardware investment.

Cubase is your recording studio - it records sound, and sequences MIDI. To do this properly you need a high-end sound card (most standard PC ones just won't do for quality and latency reasons). However, it just so happens that the PodXTL acts as a high-end sound card when you hook it up to your PC via USB. In our case, since we both have Variaxes (Variax's? Variaxen?) we can feed our guitar output in digital to the Pod, then digital straight to the PC, which is a huge win for quality. You can also use the pod for basic microphone recording but it doesn't do so well for this for various reasons, relating to the connection type etc.

Once you have Cubase and can record yourself playing guitar, you need to add some backing. You could go out and get a band, you could also pay for session musicians (http://drumsforyou.com/is a great service I have used before), or .... tada ... you can use Cubase's VSTi capability.

A VSTi is a completely software instrument that runs under Cubase. It hooks itself into the mixer and generally acts just as if it were a real recorded instrument, except that you can use MIDI to sequence the notes you want. There are a vast number of these from synths, through samplers to modeled instruments. In the track I posted, SaxLab (http://www.linplug.com/Products/SaxLab/saxlab.htm) is a VSTi, and I programmed the notes in by hand with a mouse. The drums are by a program called Toontracks EZ Drummer (http://www.toontrack.com/). One of the advantages of this particular program is that it also comes with a library of drum patterns so you can put a drum track together easily and quickly. Also, I used a program called Broomstick Bass (http://www.bornemark.se/bb/index.htm) - this gives you a lot of bass sounds and will also jam along with you - I left it in automatic mode for this track and just told it the chords. I shouldn't need to use this one as much after my birthday when I will be getting a Variax 705 bass

The downside of this is that once you have bought Cubase (by no means cheap) you find yourself adding a lot of other individual items that all seem to cost around $200 - $300.

Finally, in addition to the VSTis, you can also have VSTs - these are effect units like reverb, delay, compression that also bolt into your software environment. You can even get guitar effects processors, and Line6 have just released a software equivalent of the pod.

Cubase itself comes with a few basic synths and a drum machine and some effects, so you are not totaly starting with nothing, but you will probably soon outgrow what it has. With the right collection of plugins and instruments you can build tracks that are as good as anything released by a record company (but you have to have the skill in playing, recording, mixing, mastering, nothing is free!)

This is a fascinating subject and I could go on for hours, but I'll stop there - I hope this answers your questions, and I hope I didn't bore you! I'll email you the pod patch I used for the track as well.

A.

Posted by: fretdancer Feb 14 2007, 07:01 PM

I thought there were some good recording programs around but I did not realise just HOW good they are. You make it sound pretty awesome (and expensive).
I guess you need to spend a lot of time learning to make it all work, it sounds horribly complicated but I might just have a crack at it.

I will see what I can come up with software wise and have a play around.

I can see I am going to be emailing you a lot soon as I get some time. I think I am going to be short of time somewhat for a while - have just sold my house today and will be moving to a new on soon and thats taking up all my time for now - hopefull though, at the end of it, I will have an awesome music room !!!

thanks for the patches.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 14 2007, 07:05 PM

Sure, feel free to mail me anytime with any questions you have Good luck with the move - I have just been through selling my house in the UK and it was extremely painful

Posted by: Zee Deveel Feb 15 2007, 07:56 PM

That was really nice man good job. "Why" is right though, you need to incorporate some faster runs, that solo was ready to lift off but never quite made it.

Where did you get the backing track?

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 15 2007, 08:01 PM

Hi Zee - Yes, I totally agree with you and Why, it needs some help and a bit of lift to make it less mundane, and some variation is speed is a great suggestion. I'll post an improved version in a few months when the practicing has paid off, thanks for your feedback!

I made the backing track myself - Cubase and various software instruments. I posted all the info a couple of posts up fro Fretdancer :-)

Posted by: Zee Deveel Feb 15 2007, 08:25 PM

Ah so you did!

I started learning Cubase the other day, it's a pain to figure out! So many different errors that can occur and I've no idea how to fix most of them. My soundcard is struggling too despite being a dedicated external one by M-Audio. I think Guitar Rig 2 eats it's memory.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 15 2007, 08:33 PM

Yeah, to do anything serious you probably need 1Gb, 2Gb is better ... I've been through some of this pain, so if you have any questions feel free to PM me and I'll try and help.

Posted by: Zee Deveel Feb 15 2007, 10:24 PM

I've got 2gb memory with an external m-audio soundcard but still when I have 2 tracks running with Guitar Rig on it craps out.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 15 2007, 10:30 PM

How does it crap out? If it starts sounding scratchy with pops and clicks, you might need to increase your latency ... I have managed more than 2 guitar rigs in the past.

Posted by: Zee Deveel Feb 15 2007, 11:03 PM

Well if one track is playing the rhythm for a few bars as soon as the lead clicks in I get loads of error messages saying not enough processing power or something.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 15 2007, 11:32 PM

Hmm, sounds a little wierd. What version of Cubase, and what CPU do you have? Also, what is the exact text of the error message?

Posted by: Zee Deveel Feb 16 2007, 12:03 AM

Think its a 2.4 centrino duo or something and Cubase SX3. My friend is a sound engineer though I'll get him to come take a look at it, will be too hard to do over the net, thanks though.

Posted by: Andrew Cockburn Feb 16 2007, 12:10 AM

Well, sounds like you have all of the right hardware anyway - hope your friend can sort it out, good luck!