Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
I know some of you are or were big pick users before flamenco days. I never was, but I stumbled about this guys channel where he does analysis of famous players picking style.
Anyway, this guys big thing is on pick slanting. Do you guys consciously pick slant downward or upward for changing strings? Both? Or not even think about it?
Do you guys consciously pick slant downward or upward for changing strings
If you mean on electric, I like to use the side edge of the pick for a certain sound that I cannot explain. Maybe the pick mutes the string a millisecond later, I don't really know. It's organic
RE: For you pick shredders (in reply to Mr Lemonoue)
For good guitar picking technique check gipsy jazz guys, their right hand is pretty similar to the pulgar position that we use in flamenco and they use rest stroke a lot. Doing so they have way better tone volume and dynamics that someone who use a "standard" alternate technique which sound really weak on acoustic guitar but works on electric guitar. strunz and Farah like meola have good alternate picking but I don't like their tone and sound. Check angelo debarre, jimmy rosenberg, bireli pretty much any gipsy jazz player...
(more modern, sometimes he use "standard" but he's keeping the swing and the dynamics going).
If you mean on electric, I like to use the side edge of the pick for a certain sound that I cannot explain. Maybe the pick mutes the string a millisecond later, I don't really know. It's organic
Yup, dunno why but I use a bit of side, I've just always done it that way....
The side of the pick gives a bit less resistance then straight on - I do that too. But the pick slant is where you attack the strings with the pick at held at an angle, rather than holding it 90 degrees. Which I Had never realized players do this, other than gypsy jazz players which is a little different as they emphasize downstrokes when changing strings. But guys like Maltreem Van Halen Melola all do this slant.
So for example with a downward slant you would change strings after an upstroke. John McLaughlin uses an upward angle, so you change strings after a downstroke? Playing lines with this technique supposedly is how they are able to play so fast due to economy of motion, but it seems a trade off in that you must stick with a certain number of notes per string. The principle is to get the pick to clear a strong so your not hopping around. Gyspy jazz players do use a downward slant like pulgar, but they are pretty strict about strarting a new string with a down stroke.
I always considered Gilbert a great teacher, but this guy troy takes the details and clarity to a new level. He is truly unique and making great use of technology. Too bad he is not a flamenco guy, this would all be very helpful. I like this one, pointing out the typical contradictions of well intended instructors:
I know, I was thinking the same. It would be really cool to have a close up analysis of our flamenco gods. I watched that analysis of Paul Gilbert - inside vs outside picking. growing up in the 80's and 90's was hard for guitar players.
I looked at how I was using the pick tonight, on my Strat. The edge of the pick (with the tip pointing about 45 degrees back towards the bridge) allows more of the pick to contact in a progressive motion. It seems to produce a clipped extra harmonic. (I'm talking downstrokes only. I don't do upstrokes )
I always considered Gilbert a great teacher, but this guy troy takes the details and clarity to a new level. He is truly unique and making great use of technology. Too bad he is not a flamenco guy, this would all be very helpful. I like this one, pointing out the typical contradictions of well intended instructors:
I came to a realization after seeing this video, in regards to flamenco technique. Although he doesn't say it here, pick slanting relates to rest vs freestroke technique. By that I mean, downward pick slant means down strokes are rested and up strokes are "free". Upward pick slanting means the opposite. The "free" stroke is the one we need to change strings. How this relates to flamenco? Ok.
For years now I have been applying paul gilbert picking principles to picado, such that i=down stroke, and m=up stroke. I always assumed that this related to OUTSIDE picking vs INSIDE picking issues, due to differing finger lengths. After seeing this video where Troy Grady claims that this is a non issue and SLANTING direction is the thing that makes picking hard or easy I had to ask myself why did my Gilbert applications for picado fingerings work so smoothly after all??? I think I found the reason.
Pick slanting is about rest stroke and free stroke relations, or rather crossing the strings requires the free stroke, up or down, depending on the phrase. Pulgar lines feel like downward pick slanting, so those phrases will feel good on the thumb. Especially the sweeping ones. I-M strokes are like having two picks that use upward pick slanting. With my ascending gilbert patterns the i finger takes the role of the "free stroke" or downpick move, if you have upward pick slant. Just like picking structure must reverse for reversed slanting, my decending glibert licks must reverse roles for picado. M finger takes the down pick role, or "freed" stroke, and i becomes my up pick or "rest" stroke for smooth crossings. In that sense I never truly was adhering to the proper gilbert patterns, it only seemed like it superficially when dealing with string changes from bass->treble, due to upward pick slanting, NOT due to outside picking. The true connection between gilbert licks and picados has more to do with timing and note groupings. The 3 note per string patterns allow the right hand to "see" or "chunk" in like number groups per string, rather than get confused at an odd group of 2 or 4 on a string. At the end of the day, we flamenco players have to work on our awkward string crossings for the same reasons pick players need to work on two-way pick slanting exercises.
I thought about a potential connection too. But it seems that there is another variable - since in picado we have two "picks", for every actual stroke (either i or m) we also do a simultaneous silent "free stroke" movement with the other finger.
So comparing with the slanting terminology, I think when you say "crossing the strings requires the free stroke, up or down, depending on the phrase" you mean that silent prep movement, not an actual stroke. Let's call that a "stroke" (with quotation marks).
So in picado for each rest stroke, we have a simultaneous free "stroke" with the other finger (or pick). I.e. for every stroke of the pick in electric guitar in flamenco we have two things - a rest stroke and a free "stroke" - both of which have analogs in the pick slanting terminology - for an ascending run the rest stroke is like the pick up-stroke when upward-pick-slanting, and the free "stroke" is like the pick down-stroke when upward-pick-slanting.
With that in mind I think I understand your explanation. Two followup questions though:
1. Why would it matter to assign a specific finger for ascending vs. descending string crossing for the free "stroke"? In you case you said it works for you to have i-finger for ascending and m-finger for descending. What if I have to string-cross ascending but am at a point where I am doing a rest stroke with i so it would be m's turn to do the free "stroke" crossing?
2. I don't get the 3-per-string vs. even number (2 or 4)-per-string argument and why the former is smooth and the latter is awkward (though I admit it feels that way!). Could you elaborate on that? I.e. why is odd-chunking easier than even-chunking?
With my ascending gilbert patterns the i finger takes the role of the "free stroke" or downpick move, if you have upward pick slant. Just like picking structure must reverse for reversed slanting, my decending glibert licks must reverse roles for picado. M finger takes the down pick role, or "freed" stroke, and i becomes my up pick or "rest" stroke for smooth crossings.
Do you have a reason for that Ricardo? I happen to do the opposite.
With that in mind I think I understand your explanation. Two followup questions though:
1. Why would it matter to assign a specific finger for ascending vs. descending string crossing for the free "stroke"? In you case you said it works for you to have i-finger for ascending and m-finger for descending. What if I have to string-cross ascending but am at a point where I am doing a rest stroke with i so it would be m's turn to do the free "stroke" crossing?
2. I don't get the 3-per-string vs. even number (2 or 4)-per-string argument and why the former is smooth and the latter is awkward (though I admit it feels that way!). Could you elaborate on that? I.e. why is odd-chunking easier than even-chunking?
1. (And for FredGuitarraOle above) If you read on from my quote, I realized that I thought I was applying Gilbert licks religiously to my i-m "picado" but was in fact reversing my "picking structure" unknowingly in reverse direction cases. The specific Gilbert licks were ones that helped me navigate the fingerboard rapidly and involved patterns where you had EVEN number groups per string (6 usually, two groups of 3 and this ties into your 2. Question) but used upward pick slanting mainly, and involved ASCENDING string changes (Bass to treble). Mclaughlin patterns also follow these "rules", as Troy notes he uses primarily upward pick slant for fast runs and structures LH fingering to accommodate this. Because of the comfort of i ->m bass to treble relations with picado, (as most of us know I hope?) I wrongly assumed this was connected to OUTSIDE picking preferences, but as Troy proves outside or inside picking is a NON issue for pickers, so all I was REALLY doing was letting my i-m work easier rhythmically by tying it to my well studied left hand patterns previously designed to make RH picking moves smooth.
2. Larger note groups per string will make changing strings less uncomfortable for the RH, it's not about odds or evens. Alternating fingers OR pick strokes for single note per string arpegios say, is notoriously difficult for this reason. Sweeping has always been the universal cheat for this issue. Soon as you add note groups to each string alternation starts making more sense for rapid repetitions. Sweeping still creeps in with picado scales, again as we all have seen, as an econmical way to switch strings, DECENDING only. Now odds and evens DO matter for PICADO because of the smooth vs awkward string crossing. Odds will force alternating i or m string changes, and evens will keep to always the SAME finger crossing. In my own experimenting I have always had success by trying one starting finger and if it felt bad along the way I simply went back and tried starting with the other finger and things tend to work out. String switching mechanics for picado are simply different than using a pick since we don't use the back of the nail. The best analogy for alternating i-m is walking up or down the stairs with your hips facing to the left. If you let two feet land on a single step, you lead up with right foot (m finger) and down with left foot (i finger). The opposite tends to be uncomfortable but in flamenco guitar we need to learn it anyway. 3's are a great way to get it down.
OK I think I got it. Thanks for the extra details.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ricardo Because of the comfort of i ->m bass to treble relations with picado, (as most of us know I hope?)
Right , I forgot about that factor as presently I am trying very hard to learn to be able to go both ways with equal ease.
BTW, I think the comfort/discomfort is less about finger length (we have adjusted for that so the strings see the i and m fingertip at the same distance) and more about unusual angle of fingertip to string (and setup of finger/knuckles to string).
i-m-a on strings 3-2-1 is comfortable as the way the hand is usually tilted the knuckles are all at about the same place in relation to the relevant string, so all fingers are at about the same angle and setup when the stroke is driven from the big joint. If you do instead i-m-a on 1-2-3, two things make that uncomfortable (these issues remain even if hypothetically ima fingers all had the same length):
- unfamiliarity - never practiced; (we can work on that to an extent) - the knuckles relative to string remain the same as with 3-2-1 setup, but i-finger is now extended reaching to 1 and a-finger is tucked reaching to 3 so both have quite different angles at the strings compared to m-finger which is the same as before (and the same as we usually encounter).
How does this relate to picado? Compared to the uncomfortable ima-123 setup, we have it a bit easier - only two fingers, so less difference in angle of attack. To further make uncomfortable string-crossing (m->i ascending, i->m descending) less so, we can (1) practice it so it is less unfamiliar, and (2) move the hand in the direction of string-crossing travel to minimize the difference in finger-to-string angles and setup.
Also notice in tremolo, because it is on a single string, we do learn to live with slightly different angles of attack and execution of movement (I am assuming the hand is tilted the same as before rather than knuckles parallel to strings position). I figure if we can do it there, it is not a much bigger jump conceptually or in practice to learn the unusual picado string crossings.
Anyway just some thoughts. Feel free to pick apart..
The 3 note per string patterns allow the right hand to "see" or "chunk" in like number groups per string, rather than get confused at an odd group of 2 or 4 on a string. At the end of the day, we flamenco players have to work on our awkward string crossings for the same reasons pick players need to work on two-way pick slanting
Interesting comparison and observation to Picado mechanics! . I've always noticed that it's easier for me to change strings on decending lines with M being the free stroke, and accenting lines I being free stroke- which is what you had known or are saying I think. But The odd number of notes per string, i.e. 3, is when things get complicated with having to prepare to change slant before the last note- seems extra tricky. Compared to 2 or 4 note per string where you can maintain the same slant or fringed for switching.
It kind of shocked me when Troy said that some of these great players actually planed their lines to accommodate for their slant - although maybe unknowingly. Seems like cheating in a way.
It kind of shocked me when Troy said that some of these great players actually planed their lines to accommodate for their slant - although maybe unknowingly. Seems like cheating in a way.
Cheating only if you are TRYING to play a line EXACTLY as someone else DID. But what he refers to is the guitar gods were CREATING the lines via their personal technique language, so it's not really "cheating" in that sense. I talk about in my PDL tutorials that I know what paco did but I CHANGED the fingering to accommodate my own technique. Different than R. Diaz who does what he THINKS Pdl is doing and is in fact doing his own thing too. I am "cheating" and I know it yes, but that is the cool thing about guitar, and the way we actually become our own unique artist...or at least that is where it starts. And I mean if you are doing it differently because you either know it or you don't, either way you are doing your OWN thing.
Printable Version
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread