If you are an up-and-coming classical player, take the time to learn the scales and put them in your bag. Especially concentrate on the right hand. Rest stroke recommendations. Your tone will always benefit from this. Thank you for posting this material.
Thank you Brad! Scales are indeed too useful for being left out. They should be known profoundly: technically they prepare full melodic control; theoretically you interiorize the scales structures; paying attention to the note location the fretboard gets clear once for all. It must'nt be Segovia's scales, but there are a good breakdown; not complete, but a good to go almost everywhere.
What "grinds my gears" is that whenever anyone posts anything about Segovia scales--people feel OBLIGATED to say "the Segovia scales are a complete waste of time." If you are going through Segovia's little "book" to learn your scales--I think you're looking in the wrong place and missing the point. Just like George Van Eps' Harmonic Mechanisms book to learn how to play basic jazz chord--you need to treat these texts for the mechanics they teach, and not take these texts as an explicit "how to play guitar". I came across the Segovia scales through my jazz studies with a certain guitarist who's taught at the best music colleges in NYC, and plays rhythm guitar for a certain Wynton Marsalis. What did I learn from the Segovia scales that are apparently "useless"? I learned proper shifting technique that allowed me to play lines that extend multiple octaves--like pianists do without thinking. I also learned how to pay attention to the intentional effort required to play LEGATO on the guitar--fretting and releasing just at the right time. Thanks JC, you know who you are ;) Are Segovia's scales useful for classical guitar arrangements? Maybe? Could you use them to adapt violin studies to the guitar? Yes. Can guitarists in other genres learn something useful from these studies? Yes, that I can speak from experience. I was able to break out of the positional boxes that plague the guitar and see lines as they exist horizontally across the neck. I love hearing how "Joe Pass and George Benson" play positionally--then I show them countless closeup's of their actual playing, what do I find? Plenty of shifting. Watch the videos of Jimmy Raney playing that showed up on TH-cam recently--watch his fretting hand, he is shifting all across the fretboard. I think his son said that Jimmy Raney played cello, so that informed how he approached the fretboard. My essay here is getting long. My point is that we should be curious and look for application of these studies instead of blanketly saying "they are useless." I mean, so many people once called partimento useless--and now EVERYONE is talking about partimento again. Hell, I want to study some partimento!
Thank you for your long comment! Actually there is a lot of truth in your writing! Scales-studies in jazz and classical music are basically two different things: improvisors get the material under their hands to tell there own stories with them; classical guitarist very much study the technique: legato, coordination, tone, shifts; hopefully note-location. Musically speaking for classical musicians the scales from root to root are "poor": many have the idea to practice the alphabet for techniques sake; improvisors, when stuck to scales, sound banal as they drift along paths run through far too often. That's anyway not the fault or the problem of the scales; it's the use we players make of them: good use, scales are a vey good tool for both technical improvement and improvising material. Partimento: all the (italian at least) pro-guitarists of the late 18th and first 19th century had a solid training in partimento! And as they played only one style - the one of there own era - they were experts. Today's guitarists have so many centuries and styles of music to cover... Anyway: "Fedele Fenaroli - Regole Musicali per i principianti di cembalo: Guitar version"; it's distributed by amazon. www.amazon.de/s?k=Fedele+Fenaroli+-+Regole+Musicali+per+i+principianti+di+cembalo%3A+Guitar+version&crid=XIHRP7QWQTHN&sprefix=fedele+fenaroli+-+regole+musicali+per+i+principianti+di+cembalo+guitar+version%2Caps%2C181&ref=nb_sb_noss
It’s main problem of many adaptations of compositions for guitar because they are adapted primarily for piano. And small number of people are able to adapt it for guitar - F. Tarrega was also graduated pianist and his transcriptions are famous
the g major scale is i think too complicated with the two shifts. there are a lot of solutions which are easier. what is the use of playing it in this way ?
The use is to learn two shifts one immediately after the other. 😊 In other words: you're right: there are a lot of possible solutions to play G-Major in three octaves differently from the one Segovia published. There's nothing to special in this G-Major scale, apart the fact it's been published by Segovia.
No offense but the Segovia scales in my opinion are just a waste of time, I mean you will never find those scales in any pieces, it's only hands gym. I prefer to take a piece with scales or using only a melody of a piece, there are plenty of them and at least we are playing music instead of a scale which is just a scale. Of course I hat to study the scales when I was In conservatory but even my teacher was not so happy about studying scales. Just my opinion of course.
I studies scales a lot as a young player: I abandoned a promising sports-career for the guitar and have to admit that I went mad for speed (I bet many guitarists are still very obsessed with that). And yes: the "Segovia-Scales" are just some of all the possibilities of playing scales. Musically they don't have much sense, if you only study them note for note increasing speed. "Only hand gym": I wouldn't say so. Gym is important in any given instrument to play; leaving out musical meaning and expression during gym makes a lot of sense: you focus on technique only. As in sports: they do not play games all the time but focus on certain abilities that are useful for playing better.
@@joachimgeissler614 I don’t know, I am not obsessed with speed but I can play fast scales, but I achieved that playing pieces and not scales. The fact is that speed is a consequence of hand relaxation and playing a scale is something not connected with a piece of music, it’s just a scale. In which piece will you find a 2 octave scale from C to C? None right? So what is the sense of studying something that you will never play? Of course it is just my opinion, not criticizing you at all and I am not the law…. I had to study scales as everyone in school but once had done my 5th conservatory exam which had scales I completely stopped to practice scales. That doesn’t mean I do not study scales, I do it but in another way, for example Bach Chaconne have a long scales part or Carcassi op.60 n14… there are so many scales studies. I like the parallel with sport but in my opinion still I believe it is better to practice a piece of music. For example Carcassi N14, it’s years I am practicing it and it is an incredible scale study and you can play it with free and rest stroke. Bring it up to 120bpm or more and you will play faster even the Segovia scales.
@@NotoriousFunk I get your point. The Scales in the Ciaccona are great for sure, as the piece is one of a kind. As I said that's the point: you can play a scale of two or three octaves in order to train your technique or you can learn a masterpiece of nearly 15 minutes of duration which is among the most important pieces of music (not accessible for everyone, I'd add). Scales have other benefits, by the way, not only the pure running up and down. Just stay tuned and I'm happy to know your opinion on what will be coming. Did you watch my video on the Tarrega scale study no. 1 (th-cam.com/video/r9LhOEpwlKw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=iVAR2KZQ-4_VUitY)? Should be more to your taste, even if Carcassi no. 14 and no. 1 as well are more interesting under certain points of view. . 🙂
@@joachimgeissler614 Oh no no, I am not saying to study the entire piece, just the variation regarding the scale. Chaconne is a lifetime piece and is not for beginners or intermediate, sometimes is not right even for pro... Just watched, that Tarrega study is for sure better and less boring to study the Segovia scales. I'm sorry but I have a low consideration of Segovia scales. Again, just my humble opinion.
If you are an up-and-coming classical player, take the time to learn the scales and put them in your bag. Especially concentrate on the right hand. Rest stroke recommendations. Your tone will always benefit from this. Thank you for posting this material.
Thanks for your comment! :-)
Another great lesson!
Thanks! I'll come back to you soon. ;-)
The caterpillar exercise can be useful for helping to prepare fingers for the position changes. Especially the 4->1 and 1->4.
Yes, very good point! Everything is connected in guitar technique (just as in real live).
@@joachimgeissler614 thought I would just reference one of your previous videos a little for those that have just got here 😁
Great @@LiamWakefield, thank you!
Great video, Joachim. These scales really kicked my butt as a young student, but a must study for any aspiring guitarist.
Thank you Brad! Scales are indeed too useful for being left out. They should be known profoundly: technically they prepare full melodic control; theoretically you interiorize the scales structures; paying attention to the note location the fretboard gets clear once for all.
It must'nt be Segovia's scales, but there are a good breakdown; not complete, but a good to go almost everywhere.
What "grinds my gears" is that whenever anyone posts anything about Segovia scales--people feel OBLIGATED to say "the Segovia scales are a complete waste of time." If you are going through Segovia's little "book" to learn your scales--I think you're looking in the wrong place and missing the point. Just like George Van Eps' Harmonic Mechanisms book to learn how to play basic jazz chord--you need to treat these texts for the mechanics they teach, and not take these texts as an explicit "how to play guitar".
I came across the Segovia scales through my jazz studies with a certain guitarist who's taught at the best music colleges in NYC, and plays rhythm guitar for a certain Wynton Marsalis. What did I learn from the Segovia scales that are apparently "useless"? I learned proper shifting technique that allowed me to play lines that extend multiple octaves--like pianists do without thinking. I also learned how to pay attention to the intentional effort required to play LEGATO on the guitar--fretting and releasing just at the right time. Thanks JC, you know who you are ;)
Are Segovia's scales useful for classical guitar arrangements? Maybe? Could you use them to adapt violin studies to the guitar? Yes. Can guitarists in other genres learn something useful from these studies? Yes, that I can speak from experience. I was able to break out of the positional boxes that plague the guitar and see lines as they exist horizontally across the neck.
I love hearing how "Joe Pass and George Benson" play positionally--then I show them countless closeup's of their actual playing, what do I find? Plenty of shifting. Watch the videos of Jimmy Raney playing that showed up on TH-cam recently--watch his fretting hand, he is shifting all across the fretboard. I think his son said that Jimmy Raney played cello, so that informed how he approached the fretboard.
My essay here is getting long. My point is that we should be curious and look for application of these studies instead of blanketly saying "they are useless." I mean, so many people once called partimento useless--and now EVERYONE is talking about partimento again. Hell, I want to study some partimento!
Thank you for your long comment! Actually there is a lot of truth in your writing!
Scales-studies in jazz and classical music are basically two different things: improvisors get the material under their hands to tell there own stories with them; classical guitarist very much study the technique: legato, coordination, tone, shifts; hopefully note-location.
Musically speaking for classical musicians the scales from root to root are "poor": many have the idea to practice the alphabet for techniques sake; improvisors, when stuck to scales, sound banal as they drift along paths run through far too often.
That's anyway not the fault or the problem of the scales; it's the use we players make of them: good use, scales are a vey good tool for both technical improvement and improvising material.
Partimento: all the (italian at least) pro-guitarists of the late 18th and first 19th century had a solid training in partimento! And as they played only one style - the one of there own era - they were experts. Today's guitarists have so many centuries and styles of music to cover... Anyway: "Fedele Fenaroli - Regole Musicali per i principianti di cembalo: Guitar version"; it's distributed by amazon.
www.amazon.de/s?k=Fedele+Fenaroli+-+Regole+Musicali+per+i+principianti+di+cembalo%3A+Guitar+version&crid=XIHRP7QWQTHN&sprefix=fedele+fenaroli+-+regole+musicali+per+i+principianti+di+cembalo+guitar+version%2Caps%2C181&ref=nb_sb_noss
And this one is just great: th-cam.com/video/fED17Td8heA/w-d-xo.htmlsi=aYJh-656mUY-YMlJ
It’s main problem of many adaptations of compositions for guitar because they are adapted primarily for piano. And small number of people are able to adapt it for guitar - F. Tarrega was also graduated pianist and his transcriptions are famous
the g major scale is i think too complicated with the two shifts.
there are a lot of solutions which are easier.
what is the use of playing it in this way ?
The use is to learn two shifts one immediately after the other. 😊
In other words: you're right: there are a lot of possible solutions to play G-Major in three octaves differently from the one Segovia published.
There's nothing to special in this G-Major scale, apart the fact it's been published by Segovia.
Why?
This is a profound question... 🙂
No offense but the Segovia scales in my opinion are just a waste of time, I mean you will never find those scales in any pieces, it's only hands gym. I prefer to take a piece with scales or using only a melody of a piece, there are plenty of them and at least we are playing music instead of a scale which is just a scale. Of course I hat to study the scales when I was In conservatory but even my teacher was not so happy about studying scales. Just my opinion of course.
I studies scales a lot as a young player: I abandoned a promising sports-career for the guitar and have to admit that I went mad for speed (I bet many guitarists are still very obsessed with that).
And yes: the "Segovia-Scales" are just some of all the possibilities of playing scales. Musically they don't have much sense, if you only study them note for note increasing speed.
"Only hand gym": I wouldn't say so. Gym is important in any given instrument to play; leaving out musical meaning and expression during gym makes a lot of sense: you focus on technique only. As in sports: they do not play games all the time but focus on certain abilities that are useful for playing better.
@@joachimgeissler614 I don’t know, I am not obsessed with speed but I can play fast scales, but I achieved that playing pieces and not scales. The fact is that speed is a consequence of hand relaxation and playing a scale is something not connected with a piece of music, it’s just a scale. In which piece will you find a 2 octave scale from C to C? None right? So what is the sense of studying something that you will never play?
Of course it is just my opinion, not criticizing you at all and I am not the law…. I had to study scales as everyone in school but once had done my 5th conservatory exam which had scales I completely stopped to practice scales. That doesn’t mean I do not study scales, I do it but in another way, for example Bach Chaconne have a long scales part or Carcassi op.60 n14… there are so many scales studies.
I like the parallel with sport but in my opinion still I believe it is better to practice a piece of music. For example Carcassi N14, it’s years I am practicing it and it is an incredible scale study and you can play it with free and rest stroke. Bring it up to 120bpm or more and you will play faster even the Segovia scales.
@@NotoriousFunk I get your point. The Scales in the Ciaccona are great for sure, as the piece is one of a kind. As I said that's the point: you can play a scale of two or three octaves in order to train your technique or you can learn a masterpiece of nearly 15 minutes of duration which is among the most important pieces of music (not accessible for everyone, I'd add).
Scales have other benefits, by the way, not only the pure running up and down. Just stay tuned and I'm happy to know your opinion on what will be coming.
Did you watch my video on the Tarrega scale study no. 1 (th-cam.com/video/r9LhOEpwlKw/w-d-xo.htmlsi=iVAR2KZQ-4_VUitY)? Should be more to your taste, even if Carcassi no. 14 and no. 1 as well are more interesting under certain points of view. .
🙂
@@joachimgeissler614 Oh no no, I am not saying to study the entire piece, just the variation regarding the scale. Chaconne is a lifetime piece and is not for beginners or intermediate, sometimes is not right even for pro... Just watched, that Tarrega study is for sure better and less boring to study the Segovia scales. I'm sorry but I have a low consideration of Segovia scales. Again, just my humble opinion.
@@NotoriousFunk at that point it could be better to play the Giga BWV 1004: complete movement and real life scales as you couldn't desire better. 😀