posted 03-25-2002 09:47 AM               

Music emerges from the soul, not the fingers. If it's just a finger discovery, what we compose is to music as fingerfood is to nourishing cuisine.

posted 03-25-2002 10:39 AM               

If our musical souls are in charge, they won't.

In listening to guitar music, it is usually very easy to tell an original composition from a cover. The originals TEND to be largely comprised of riffs, (sometimes very cool ones, but riffs nonetheless). Those riffs are easy to identify because they are a series of notes that one will inevitably happen upon if one starts noodling in that tuning. Whether you're a good, bad, medium or non-musician, your fingers WILL find those riffs.

If those riffs become the basis of your composition, you have deprived yourlistener of a connection to your musical essence, and provided instead only a series of notes that your fingers discovered.

Clearly there is a noticeable difference between the emotive qualities in music that the fingers found and music that the soul created.

posted 03-25-2002 10:59 AM               

frailerdude/ec-- human physiology/mind/heart are all zones of musical intelligence in the same soulful unit, in my view. It's definitely all connected. I am also making the point that a certain amount of "finger foraging" comes with the territory in open tunings. this is good for your ears, good for your heart-- and helps acculturate your ears to great sounds in guitar.

but the point is, that finger foraging is a grazing process for the imagination-- and you eventually have to use your brain to fully flush out what you are trying to express. it's all part of what goes into playing soulfully, if you integrate all the dimensions to the unit.

posted 03-25-2002 02:13 PM               

"hey camalex -- there are actually people out there who can play "anything" in open tunings. it is possible therefore to use an open tuning as your alternate "standard" tuning, if you really decide you'd like to do that-- but it takes alot of study and commitment."

I guess my point wasn't that it couldn't be done -- its just that so many people aren't playing in altered tunings that to constantly search for chord charts or TAB in DADGAD instead of standard tuning would make it more difficult to jam with others. I assume a 12-bar blues in E-flat wouldn't work as well in DADGAD as in standard but then I haven't paid my dues in DADGAD fretboard. Maybe with a capo everything is possible with enough effort.

Of course you can play with others in altered tuning, but standard tuning didn't just fall out as a mistake. There are certain efficiencies in standard tuning that make three note chords very workable for the jazz guy and there are certain keys (aminor, A, E, D, C, G, etc.) that work best for open or first position playing. As uncool as barre chords seem to be, if one can work more than the E-shaped barre chord, one can really get around the fretboard with some interesting voicings -- perhaps not resonant as open tunings but maybe more flexible.

Frailerdude -- I have to say that one man's riff is another man's sonata -- honestly. And one man's etude is another man's headache -- it's so subjective that your blanket statement seems very bothersome to me. I thought I was specifically saying that I am using my hands and my ears to learn this new fretboard -- I'm not just applying tried and true riff formulas against a new fretbaord and see if it sounds okay. And even if I did just that, it's still music.. it'd be my music and for you to say it has no soul is entirely out of order.

Finally, Frailer, doesn't is seem that you come to this discussion as pretty accomplished student of music? For many of us, the guitar is our musical education and sole instrumental outlet. As such, if I can make these six strings ring in harmony once in a while and I lean on a few riffs to make it happen, have I somehow violated some law of music. Your comments remind of the elitist crap I hear when others describe true "classical music" being better or having more soul than modern classical music.

BTW -- for what's it worth, I actually thought the guys were talking about riff master Kottke, not riff master Clapton. But Leo's riffs sure have moved his audience so who are we to critique?

What do you think Frailer -- is Kottke or Clapton throwing out riffs or are they throwing out music with soul?

posted 03-25-2002 02:40 PM               

It's different from the "crap" about what is realy classical music. THAT is highly subjective. This is considerably more precise. Are your fingers "discovering" or is your soul "creating"?, that is the question.

I imagine it's inevitably a bit of both, but it seems wise to be mindful of the dangers of "finger foraging" (great term, Brian.)

c.u.
steve baughman

posted 03-25-2002 04:22 PM               

we have all heard pieces that consist of interesting chord changes and fluffy arpeggios which is played nicely, but seems somehow empty. or, we have heard pieces with nice melodies that don't seem to be linked or to go anywhere. my impression of these types of pieces are not that they lack soul-- rather, they have not been filtered completely through each zone of musical intelligence. there's a difference between stringing ideas that you have together, and stringing ideas together with an expressive goal.

posted 03-25-2002 05:26 PM            

Since I improvise a lot,changing tunings extensively means you have to relearn the fingerboard with every tuning. In fact, Pierre Bensusan uses DADGAD exclusively because he wanted to master it.