Sheets of Sound?

[CS'56]

I hope this isn't a stupid question. It seems this book is for shredding? Will it help in other areas? I play mostly blues and dabble a little in rock. I guess what I’m trying to say is I don’t really want to waste money on a book that isn’t for the style I play.

Is this book for me?

[lhallam]

Originally posted by Mark
I hope this isn't a stupid question. It seems this book is for shredding? Will it help in other areas? I play mostly blues and dabble a little in rock. I guess what I’m trying to say is I don’t really want to waste money on a book that isn’t for the style I play.

Is this book for me?

The book is for everyone. It would be tough for a raw beginner unless there is a teacher to help.

There are over 300 pages of exercises, you can pick and choose what interests you. You don't have to following the sweep picking if you don't want to.

You will get out of it what you put into it, just like everything else.

If you want to shred, then shred, if you don't then don't.

What I find best about it is that it opens up different approaches to fingerings, neck positions and patterns that you probably haven't thought of before. For me, I find the approaches creeping into my playing more that just playing an exercise in a solo.

I haven't seen a bad review yet and most comments are accolades.

[jzucker]

Originally posted by Mark
I hope this isn't a stupid question. It seems this book is for shredding? Will it help in other areas? I play mostly blues and dabble a little in rock. I guess what I’m trying to say is I don’t really want to waste money on a book that isn’t for the style I play.

Is this book for me?

This book is definitely *NOT* about shredding. It's about opening your eyes to view the instrument in a different way. Most folks think this is a physical technique book. It's not. It's a mental technique book. Sure, your prowess on the instrument will grow but the true power and point of the material is in expanding the horizons of what your preconception of how the guitar is supposed be played.

The book is not about a "style". It's about music.

[neastguy]

OK.....I may be a little slow, but I cant find a cost for the book on the webpage....are they free? .....lol....

[jzucker]

$29.95+shipping.

However, it's $25 shipped for gearpage members (if you're in the continental US)

There's a thread in the dealers section which tells you how to order at that price.

[neastguy]

cool thanks, I think order one!!!

[Shai`tan]

"if you're in the continental US"

Hmmm it is times like this is really sux to be a Canadian Gear Page member. I myself am considering taking a look at this book. It is on my Christmas list. hehhhe

[jzucker]

Originally posted by Shai`tan
"if you're in the continental US"

Hmmm it is times like this is really sux to be a Canadian Gear Page member. I myself am considering taking a look at this book. It is on my Christmas list. hehhhe

$30 shipped for canada! :-)

[Shai`tan]

LOL ;p SOLD!

[jazzyblues]

I just got Sheets of Sound. I haven't really gotten into it much, but it seems decent.
I was wanting a book that helps me in the area of applying scales and arpeggios. I'm not sure how much this book does that. It seems to be more exercises oriented. But I've only skimmed through it a little.

[jzucker]

Look at chapter 6 and chapter 8

[jazzyblues]

Ok. Thanks, Jack.

[jazzyblues]

Jack -
I checked out chapter 8, like you said. I was reading on page 271 about the diminished chord concept. You were saying how by lowering one note of the diminished scale, you have a dominant chord.
Pat Martino also teaches this, but he didn't explain it clearly. He called the diminished chord the "parental form" and the dominant chords that come from it the "children."
When I was listening to him, I was wondering how that would benefit me.
But in your book you explain - and correct me if I got this wrong - that if the diminished chord (the "parental form") can be used every minor 3rd, then so can the dominant chord (the "children") that comes from it.
And to me, this would be useful in application, whereas when PM explained it, it kind of seemed like worthless info.

[jzucker]

Originally posted by jazzyblues
Jack -
I checked out chapter 8, like you said. I was reading on page 271 about the diminished chord concept. You were saying how by lowering one note of the diminished scale, you have a dominant chord.
Pat Martino also teaches this, but he didn't explain it clearly. He called the diminished chord the "parental form" and the dominant chords that come from it the "children."
When I was listening to him, I was wondering how that would benefit me.
But in your book you explain - and correct me if I got this wrong - that if the diminished chord (the "parental form") can be used every minor 3rd, then so can the dominant chord (the "children") that comes from it.
And to me, this would be useful in application, whereas when PM explained it, it kind of seemed like worthless info.

I think Pat does eventually explain that somewhere but I agree. His methodology sometimes becomes the end instead of the means. I studied with him for a year and it was always interesting.

Once, I copied a lick he played on the Willis Jackson CD, "Bar Wars". It was a ridiculous sounding thing with all kinds of weird and random sounding intervals. I went into my next lesson and asked him what it was. Jack - That melody was born spontaneously, as I played itI blinked a few times and went back to the lesson material.

A few lessons later, he left the room to get some tea and I looked up on his drafting table and saw something called "12 Chromatic forms for guitar".

Amazingly, one of the forms was the line from the Bar Wars recording. Not sure why he couldn't just tell me that.

Ever since then, I made it a goal to take the mysticism out of theory and improvisation and try to explain the concepts in useable ways. Not all of them can be grasped at first sight but I'll never tell you to [i]sit under a tree as the sun comes up in order to understand it! :D

[therealting]

Originally posted by jzucker

Not all of them can be grasped at first sight but I'll never tell you to sit under a tree as the sun comes up in order to understand it! :D

Ok, so you won't tell us to... but does that help?

:D

[jzucker]

Originally posted by therealting
Ok, so you won't tell us to... but does that help?

:D

I thought so at the time. :D

[jazzyblues]

What Pat Martino said kind of reminds me of an article I read by Howard Roberts years ago. he said (I'm paraphrasing) it doesn't matter where you start but where you end up.
And he gave all these different patterns that made no melodic sense. This was back in the 70's. I took it and used it. And it actually can be interesting sometimes to play random notes, then tie them in - remembering what HR said, it's not where you start but where you end up.
Of course I don't make a habit of playing like that. But here and there it's interesting.

And now that I'm getting into Sheets of Sound I can give a good recommendation for it. I'm doing the Pat Martino licks and find them really good. :)

[scottl]

Originally posted by jazzyblues
What Pat Martino said kind of reminds me of an article I read by Howard Roberts years ago. he said (I'm paraphrasing) it doesn't matter where you start but where you end up.
And he gave all these different patterns that made no melodic sense. This was back in the 70's. I took it and used it. And it actually can be interesting sometimes to play random notes, then tie them in - remembering what HR said, it's not where you start but where you end up.
Of course I don't make a habit of playing like that. But here and there it's interesting.

And now that I'm getting into Sheets of Sound I can give a good recommendation for it. I'm doing the Pat Martino licks and find them really good. :)

Scott Henderson said the same thing at a clinic I was at in the 80's.... I do it all the time.

Make sure you resolve with conviction!!!

[Ed DeGenaro]

Originally posted by jzucker
I think Pat does eventually explain that somewhere but I agree. His methodology sometimes becomes the end instead of the means. I studied with him for a year and it was always interesting.

Once, I copied a lick he played on the Willis Jackson CD, "Bar Wars". It was a ridiculous sounding thing with all kinds of weird and random sounding intervals. I went into my next lesson and asked him what it was. [b]I blinked a few times and went back to the lesson material.

A few lessons later, he left the room to get some tea and I looked up on his drafting table and saw something called "12 Chromatic forms for guitar".

Amazingly, one of the forms was the line from the Bar Wars recording. Not sure why he couldn't just tell me that.

Ever since then, I made it a goal to take the mysticism out of theory and improvisation and try to explain the concepts in useable ways. Not all of them can be grasped at first sight but I'll never tell you to [i]sit under a tree as the sun comes up in order to understand it! :D
That ought to be on your site....

[Ed DeGenaro]

Originally posted by scottl
Scott Henderson said the same thing at a clinic I was at in the 80's.... I do it all the time.

Make sure you resolve with conviction!!!
Or to quote Ray Gomez...there are no bad notes, only bad resolutions.

[Shai`tan]

It will be interesting to try this out.

[jazzyblues]

You know, the more I get into Sheets of Sound the more I like it. Good book, Jack.

[lhallam]

Originally posted by jazzyblues
You know, the more I get into Sheets of Sound the more I like it. Good book, Jack.

Agreed, I keep finding cool things.

[jazzyblues]

Originally posted by lhallam
Agreed, I keep finding cool things.

Yeah, the only problem is finding the time to spend to go through it all. I only have about an hour a day for practice. So I don't think I'll be able to go over everything in my lifetime.

[bukowski]

this part of the book has help me alot great ideas for comping and soloing and it has inspiried me when writing honestly I could spend many years in this section of the book ex. spread voicings , other scales etc.

[Shai`tan]

It is here. lol

[Lucidology]

This book is definitely *NOT* about shredding. It's about opening your eyes to view the instrument in a different way. Most folks think this is a physical technique book. It's not. It's a mental technique book. Sure, your prowess on the instrument will grow but the true power and point of the material is in expanding the horizons of what your preconception of how the guitar is supposed be played.

The book is not about a "style". It's about music.

This is very True... was thumbing through Jack's book tonight...
& it's very well done ...
Developing Mental Technique is a good way to describe it ...

[KRosser]

A few lessons later, he left the room to get some tea and I looked up on his drafting table and saw something called "12 Chromatic forms for guitar".

Amazingly, one of the forms was the line from the Bar Wars recording. Not sure why he couldn't just tell me that.



I have that "12 Chromatic Forms" somewhere here. It struck me as an elaborate octave displacement thing the last time I played through it...

Funny story...

[Clifford-D]

I think Pat does eventually explain that somewhere but I agree. His methodology sometimes becomes the end instead of the means. I studied with him for a year and it was always interesting.

Once, I copied a lick he played on the Willis Jackson CD, "Bar Wars". It was a ridiculous sounding thing with all kinds of weird and random sounding intervals. I went into my next lesson and asked him what it was. [b]I blinked a few times and went back to the lesson material.

A few lessons later, he left the room to get some tea and I looked up on his drafting table and saw something called "12 Chromatic forms for guitar".

Amazingly, one of the forms was the line from the Bar Wars recording. Not sure why he couldn't just tell me that.

Ever since then, I made it a goal to take the mysticism out of theory and improvisation and try to explain the concepts in useable ways. Not all of them can be grasped at first sight but I'll never tell you to [i]sit under a tree as the sun comes up in order to understand it! :D
Hey Jack,

Is it possible Pat transcribed that lick from the recording and also discovered somrthing interesting about chromatic forms?
Maybe a work in progress based on what he does spontaniously??
I don't know, that was my first thought. I'm often wrong.

Got many of my students on SOS, they like it.

[jzucker]

Ok, so you won't tell us to... but does that help?

:D

No, it doesn't help. I find that sitting under the tree and expressing the rising sun is more helpful after you have already gotten your playing together. ;)

The idea is in the right place though. Students need to remember that improvisation is a folk-art and not a science, yet it depends on athletic ability and knowledge of your instrument. In that way, it's not unlike ballet or dance.

[jzucker]

Hey Jack,

Is it possible Pat transcribed that lick from the recording and also discovered somrthing interesting about chromatic forms?

Nah, Pat had been shedding on the Octave-displacement stuff for a while. He tends to like to shroud himself in mystery. I think a lot of great players like to shroud themselves in mystery. It's sort of a spiritual thing. It sounds better to explain it was direct communication from above then to say it was a hot lick that you've been shedding on for a year or two. :AOK

[gennation]

Martino uses the Dim7 and Aug chords as more a a reference for memorization in that you can flatten any note of the dim7 chord and get a Dom7 chord and by raising or flattening notes of the Aug chord you can create the Major and Minor Triads.

I've never heard him use the Dim7 or Aug concept for any "musical" explanations, only for memorization.

[TonyV]

I think Pat does eventually explain that somewhere but I agree. His methodology sometimes becomes the end instead of the means. I studied with him for a year and it was always interesting.

Once, I copied a lick he played on the Willis Jackson CD, "Bar Wars". It was a ridiculous sounding thing with all kinds of weird and random sounding intervals. I went into my next lesson and asked him what it was. [b]I blinked a few times and went back to the lesson material.

A few lessons later, he left the room to get some tea and I looked up on his drafting table and saw something called "12 Chromatic forms for guitar".

Amazingly, one of the forms was the line from the Bar Wars recording. Not sure why he couldn't just tell me that.

Ever since then, I made it a goal to take the mysticism out of theory and improvisation and try to explain the concepts in useable ways. Not all of them can be grasped at first sight but I'll never tell you to [I]sit under a tree as the sun comes up in order to understand it! :D

That is so funny having twice spent a day at a seminar with him.

As you mention I think he figures these theories/presentations out as an end to itself, he is into that, but it has nothing to do with the way he plays and learned.

In the seminars noone in the room was getting this guy and we were finally able to get out of him "I learned by repeatedly listening to records and immitating them"

And yes Pat does take the scenic route in explaining the half step relationship between diminished and Dom7. Mr Martino, step away from the thesaurus.

I respect the guy but just find his method amusing.

[jzucker]

Martino uses the Dim7 and Aug chords as more a a reference for memorization in that you can flatten any note of the dim7 chord and get a Dom7 chord and by raising or flattening notes of the Aug chord you can create the Major and Minor Triads.

I've never heard him use the Dim7 or Aug concept for any "musical" explanations, only for memorization.

The look so pretty in the diagrams though. :D

Martino actually uses a simplification of the dodecaphonics though I believe he calls it a 12 pointed star. But in reality, he plays everything as if it's a m7 chord. For example, he'll treat a C7 as Gm7, Bbm7, Dbm7 and theoretically Em7 though I've never actually heard him do that.

He plays over Fmaj7#11 or Fmaj7#5 as Dm7.

[Clifford-D]

Here's Martino's masterclass "Sacred Geometry"

"Master Class / Sacred Geometry / Simplifying the fretboard with Pat Martino" (April 2004)
This article by Jude Gold, published in Guitar Player magazine, can be read as a pdf here (http://www.patmartino.com/Articles/GuitarPlayer_April_2004.pdf).



And here is "The nature of guitar" masterclass

http://mto.societymusictheory.org/issues/mto.06.12.1/mto.06.12.1.capuzzo.pdf


Martinos website

http://www.patmartino.com/

[gennation]

The look so pretty in the diagrams though. :D

But in reality, he plays everything as if it's a m7 chord. For example, he'll treat a C7 as Gm7, Bbm7, Dbm7 and theoretically Em7 though I've never actually heard him do that.

He plays over Fmaj7#11 or Fmaj7#5 as Dm7.

Yes, that is exactly what he teaches for musical examples. The dim7 and Aug thing is two reference spots for memorization.

Funny how how all he has to do is mention dim7 and Aug and every thinks they are learning a key to his playing, when he's really teaching memorization of the fretboard. The Minor things is where his playing style stems from.

[dorfmeister]

Check this out, too.

http://web.mac.com/noshufuru/iWeb/TheNatureofGuitar/Index.html

[jzucker]

Here's Martino's masterclass "Sacred Geometry"

"Master Class / Sacred Geometry / Simplifying the fretboard with Pat Martino" (April 2004)
This article by Jude Gold, published in Guitar Player magazine, can be read as a pdf here (http://www.patmartino.com/Articles/GuitarPlayer_April_2004.pdf).



And here is "The nature of guitar" masterclass

http://mto.societymusictheory.org/issues/mto.06.12.1/mto.06.12.1.capuzzo.pdf


Martinos website

http://www.patmartino.com/

That's very cool stuff. Just another way of presenting the material. I'm not sure that's the best way to present the material though but it's a very impressive piece of work.

[jzucker]

One criticism of the Nature of the Guitar series is that while it presents the instrument in a mathematical nature, I'm not sure the students of the instrument are predisposed to learning with that methodology. So, while it makes for a good dissertation and serves to illustrate the mastery of the author, I'm not convinced it's the best way to convey the point.

In other words, it's best for preaching to the converted. That's just my personal viewpoint. I do believe it's worth looking into though. I think the eventual goal should always be kept in mind which is to throw away the slide rules and just !@#$ play.

[Clifford-D]

One criticism of the Nature of the Guitar series is that while it presents the instrument in a mathematical nature, I'm not sure the students of the instrument are predisposed to learning with that methodology. So, while it makes for a good dissertation and serves to illustrate the mastery of the author, I'm not convinced it's the best way to convey the point.

In other words, it's best for preaching to the converted. That's just my personal viewpoint. I do believe it's worth looking into though. I think the eventual goal should always be kept in mind which is to throw away the slide rules and just !@#$ play.
These designs look cool in my teaching studio wall
right below Albert Collins and to the right of Tuck Andress
and George Van Eps.

When asked what it really means I can quickly switch to "have you
seen the Icemans capo?" quick escape. I mean I have the grand daddy
of Martino geometric matrix's. I understand most of them, not this one.
But looks cool.

[jzucker]

Back to the original subject...Anyone have questions about the SOS stuff?