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.
Is there any argument that sequential plants for pima and pimami arpegios are better than full plants? The only guitarist who does only seq. plants i know is nunez, is there a reason for that? except the note ringing thing of course.
Posts: 15428
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion
Is there any argument that sequential plants for pima and pimami arpegios are better than full plants? The only guitarist who does only seq. plants i know is nunez, is there a reason for that? except the note ringing thing of course.
It is simply a superior technique if you can develop the speed of it. More complex music can be done, though I admit it is not essential for traditional flamenco generally. A simple 16th phrase like this requires it, a-m-i-m,a-m-i-m, etc
FYI, Nuñez no longer can use his index as before and avoids these arps. However, in his prime he could do the above at similar speed as p-a-m-i type arps.
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion
Is there any argument that sequential plants for pima and pimami arpegios are better than full plants? The only guitarist who does only seq. plants i know is nunez, is there a reason for that? except the note ringing thing of course.
IMHO the question should be: Is there any reason why block (full) plant should be used, apart from as a muting technique when the piece requires it (so, nothing to do with planting)? Block plant is a tool which may be useful to beginners, but starts to lose relevance as one acquires precision and consistency. Yet for some reason it is still advocated for on par with sequential planting in all contexts, rather than just for initial skill-building.
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
I'd like to see you playing clean sextuplets (pimami) at lets say 120 bpm with sequential plants
I have no particular problem with that and I'm honestly not a good player (not sure I could hold it over full exercices but it comes up all the time in certain palos around those speeds and I'm fine with it). I never learned with full plants, so I suppose the argument could be made that it's easier for me since I don't have the full plant technique to "unlearn". I discovered that much later on. I thought it was useful for a while, kind of helped me focus on reducing movement but honestly that's all. Plus, for the sextuplet arpeggio, you're already doing the second half of it in sequential plants anyway right? so why not just get rid of the first half of full plants?
Dunno. I've never really understood why people need full plants for ima if they're just fine with sequential for ami. To me the question is what's the point of full plants in the first place (except muting of course)?
_____________________________
"Anything you do can be fixed. What you cannot fix is the perfection of a blank page. What you cannot fix is that pristine, unsullied whiteness of a screen or a page with nothing on it—because there’s nothing there to fix."
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion
"Block plant is a tool which may be useful to beginners, but starts to lose relevance as one acquires precision and consistency." Amigo, had PdL a lack of precision and cosistency then? Because he used full plants for pima and pimami arpegios?
Your question does not connect logically to what you quote me saying. I argued that full plant is not a needed tool for an advanced guitarist(*); I did not say that employing it results in diminished precision and consistency or that those who keep using it would never attain virtuosic skill levels. If you have precision and consistency, you don't need it but can use it if you are used to doing things that way.
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion Like the most flamenco guitarists -except nunez- too. I'd like to see you playing clean sextuplets (pimami) at lets say 120 bpm with sequential plants
What makes you think this is a problem? It isn't, though this has nothing to do with proving or disproving my point, as I tried to explain above.
(*) Well, really I posed it as a question - why is block plant needed for someone well beyond a beginner; if anyone could provide new info or make a good argument I am listening and will change my mind if convinced.
Posts: 292
Joined: May 3 2017
From: Iraq, living in Germany
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
I've never done any full plants while doing pimami-arpeggios. it feels like it could slow me down (not that I'm really fast). a full plant for pima can sound in a specific way, but other than that...why full plant?
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
Sound and speed. For example play the typical 16th triplet ima arpegio for alegrias, I am sure you can't get the same bite and speed with sequential plants.
or the same 16th triplet in alegrías (particularly escobilla, no?), but ami instead? I got that originally from watching Manolo Franco play arpegios pami with full plant.
a classical guitarist once asked my why flamenco guitarists used rest stroke for scale passages when free stroke was quicker...
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion
"why is block plant needed for someone well beyond a beginner; if anyone could provide new info or make a good argument I am listening and will change my mind if convinced."
Sound and speed.
Let's go with this for a bit. If true, it follows that your pimami should be "crooked" sound-wise and speed-wise at fast tempos because you do the first half as block plant and the second half as sequential plant. And if you say "no, it is perfectly even and sounds the same up and down at fast tempos", then how does that square with your claim that that a block plant changes sound and is also needed beyond a certain speed? Just trying to understand.
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
no. I use full plant for the fast ima triplet arp and it's a different sound than the pimami or 16th pami arp. I CAN get more bite out of if i want to with full plant. It is that simple. I don't say it is impossible to do it only with seq. plants, but I'd say at least for me it seems easier to achieve the required speed and sound.
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion
no. I use full plant for the fast ima triplet arp and it's a different sound than the pimami or 16th pami arp. I CAN get more bite out of if i want to with full plant. It is that simple.
So, do you do pimami with full plant for ima and sequential for ami, or not? If so, my question stands. And if you don't do full plant at all during pimami, but just sequential all the way, why did you bring up pimami in this context?
You also do not address speed at all, which was your other claim besides a difference in sound.
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to callemunicion)
Ah you added another sentence:
quote:
ORIGINAL: callemunicion AMI and IMA is not the same, it feels better to do seq. plants for ami and full plants for ima, don't ask me why but it seems that many pro guitarists have discovered the same because in flamenco guitar tradition you use full plants for pima and seq. plants for pami.
Don't ask you why? - well you should have started with that. I understand that it feels better to you since this is what you have a habit of doing. BTW the full on ima vs. sequential on ami planting is a thing from historical classical guitar pedagogy; as I said, probably useful for beginners and a bit beyond. I am just questioning its need (beyond as a muting technique or actually executing block chords) when individual fingers' planting precision and speed are well developed.
RE: Sequential plant vs. full plant (in reply to kitarist)
quote:
BTW the full on ima vs. sequential on ami planting is a thing from historical classical guitar pedagogy;
seems to be heading in the direction of the long and fruitless argument of classical vs flamenco guitar...
whatever the source and origin of particular guitar techniques, flamenco guitarists have developed them according to the demands of their music, and employ them for the musical end of flamenco performance, such as "the typical 16th triplet ima arpegio for alegrias"
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