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 first learned tremolo sort of by ear and what felt most natural to my hand was a four-stroke p-i-m-a. It allows you to roll it quite fast but I wouldn't recommend it for most flamenco repertoire. I still use it when I want the thumb notes to be 8th notes:
I enjoyed that Andy, thanks. I mess around with pima tremolo a bit but not to the standard you just exhibited. I find it more difficult than the other ways I have used and was the most challenging to get up to speed.
the doubling up of the i finger as it appears to me an odd way of playing it.
if you have to do a minimum of 2 continuous double arpegios (pimami) you will have the same problem. It's not really repeating the i finger, as you have a thumb stroke (APOYANDO of course) in between the two index strokes. Like this:
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
and not sure how what you propose works for this possible conclusion of the compas
in fact this is the same thing Ricardo is talking about, the iami work as grace notes preceding the thumbstroke. the iami strokes certainly aren't quintuplets here, and the length of each note is not specific although all 4 should be the same. Here 2 possible written interpretations:
Images are resized automatically to a maximum width of 800px
Thanks for the post Mark. I would be playing both examples as you have written though I would not see, to my mind, either example as a true tremolo.
As I have said I am not sure about it but will play around with it to experiment. I believe my flamenco repertoire is not extensive enough to make final decision but after re-reading Ricardo's posts I think I will mostly go the traditional route until I feel I have built it up. Then we will see.
Thanks Ramzi. It is nice to know I am not the only one who thinks the repeated i is a bit odd. I'll have a go at his method since what I am trying to achieve is a better flow. Though I am not sure as Ricardo says it is played piami by "design". I would think it could be done other ways w/o disruption of the cadence.
I know, man! Check out my comments to him on the newest couple of videos he just posted. He's a legend, in my eyes.
I have the same feeling, he is the first person I saw showing flamenco related things (back then I think he had a web site with a bunch of videos and tabs), I learnt from his videos at the beginning some ~15 years ago. Glad to know he is still around.
It's funny how differently people can approach the same thing. Every time they say "but if you take away the thumb", I'm just thinking...but why would you do that?! The thumb is there, so no I isn't repeated.
Auda's version at least makes more sense in that there actually is more space between two strokes of the same finger. But Sal's version, well, all he's done is switch the I "repeat" for an M "repeat". piamIpIami and now pMaMipMaMi. It's the same thing, except in one case the "repeat" is separated by the thumb and in the other by the ring finger. In fact, if you play a tremolo not as quintuplets but bunched up as grace notes, than the repeat of M with his fingering happens much faster than the repeat of I in standard fingering, so you'd think, as far as a finger "repeating" goes, his version is a lot harder. I mean, if he's more comfortable playing it that way that's great. It's just that explanation of "it's because in the standard version I repeats" that makes no sense to me.
_____________________________
"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."
It's funny how differently people can approach the same thing. Every time they say "but if you take away the thumb", I'm just thinking...but why would you do that?! The thumb is there, so no I isn't repeated.
Auda's version at least makes more sense in that there actually is more space between two strokes of the same finger. But Sal's version, well, all he's done is switch the I "repeat" for an M "repeat". piamIpIami and now pMaMipMaMi. It's the same thing, except in one case the "repeat" is separated by the thumb and in the other by the ring finger. In fact, if you play a tremolo not as quintuplets but bunched up as grace notes, than the repeat of M with his fingering happens much faster than the repeat of I in standard fingering, so you'd think, as far as a finger "repeating" goes, his version is a lot harder. I mean, if he's more comfortable playing it that way that's great. It's just that explanation of "it's because in the standard version I repeats" that makes no sense to me.
Don't mess with Sal, otherwise the coffin dance guys may appear at your doorstep.
But Sal's version, well, all he's done is switch the I "repeat" for an M "repeat".
The repeat is not the same as it appears there is no mpm in Sal's version.
I have not really given it much of a go but I like the concept for playing scales (w/o the thumb) as another technique. amimamimami..... so basically I all need to think of every other m but how I go about it is M then ami, M then ami. So all I have to think about is M.
With the method of tremolo I am trying I think about it this way - pami then A - followed by pmia then M - followed by piam then I. That way I can approach it with just thinking about AMI. Hope it is not too confusing.
The repeat is not the same as it appears there is no mpm
I guess. I get that for some reason for you it's different if there's a thumb stroke in there. I just don't understand why you feel it's so different. The way I'm thinking of it is that ipi is one of the easiest things to do. mam on the other hand is fairly restrictive, just because of how the fingers are connected. So I don't understand how Sal would prefer adding an mam in there just to avoid the ipi. Feels like making things unnecessarily complicated. As does your own tremolo pattern tbh. I mean, I'd bet good money both of you play the standard double arpeggio pimami like everyone else, just because right-hand distribution would be pretty complicated if you did other patterns for that. Am I wrong? Yet, it has that ipi "repetition" in there. Does it bother you there, or is it just with tremolo that it's a problem? Anyway, everyone does their own thing and in the end the proof is in whether you can play a good tremolo that way. Not criticizing your or Sal's approach (please don't kill me Ramzi!!!!! ^^), I just don't understand the explanation about not wanting to have i "repeat".
Re: amima, to me that's an arpeggio pattern. To use it in scale runs it would have to be paired with a specific string distribution, otherwise, for me at least, it would be unnecessarily complicated. I mean, if you do it that way without any consideration to distribution, you could end up having to play, for instance, a sequence where a plays 6th string, m 5th string and i 4th string, which is rather uncomfortable.
_____________________________
"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."
It's funny how differently people can approach the same thing. Every time they say "but if you take away the thumb", I'm just thinking...but why would you do that?! The thumb is there, so no I isn't repeated.
Auda's version at least makes more sense in that there actually is more space between two strokes of the same finger. But Sal's version, well, all he's done is switch the I "repeat" for an M "repeat". piamIpIami and now pMaMipMaMi. It's the same thing, except in one case the "repeat" is separated by the thumb and in the other by the ring finger. In fact, if you play a tremolo not as quintuplets but bunched up as grace notes, than the repeat of M with his fingering happens much faster than the repeat of I in standard fingering, so you'd think, as far as a finger "repeating" goes, his version is a lot harder. I mean, if he's more comfortable playing it that way that's great. It's just that explanation of "it's because in the standard version I repeats" that makes no sense to me.
You are totally correct. With Sal the problem begins from his “decision” to not do apoyando pulgar. Next, at 10:40 he states he was taught pmami by someone and doesn’t understand why all the books print Piami. So right there is the red flag. He doesn’t actually know that it’s a transcription of how the non reading players have been doing it for over a CENTURY, nor WHY they are doing it like that ie, like my beginner/intermediate self and most others, the concept of the technique is backwards. He doesn’t see the grace note heading towards a secure rested thumb note as the PURPOSE of the technique. They all seem to think it’s just like recuerdos de La Alhambra with an awkward extra i stroke forced in for no reason other than it’s “Flamenco”.
This is a typical problem of trying to learn from books ie, via a different discipline. Myself included, it wasn’t until my first Spain trip until I realized what tremolo was about, and how it could be taught with no score. Also, pmpmpm might be easier for some people to get used to, it was for me too at the start, and again it comes from NOT wanting to rest and drag pulgar apoyando as much as I should have. So TIRANDO p m p m is very comfy for people, especially if you come from classical guitar, but if you learn to REST and drag pulgar, the change of angle and feeling makes pipipipi etc much more natural.
From resting p and doing i tirando against that, or any arp combo, stems the concept of the 4 finger leading into the rest and drag thumb...and finally tremolo is easy and natural too for making a melody sustain above the chord and becomes a fun and easy compositional device. But it ALL starts from resting the thumb and getting used that posture and feeling.
I just don't understand the explanation about not wanting to have i "repeat".
Re: amima, to me that's an arpeggio pattern. To use it in scale runs it would have to be paired with a specific string distribution, otherwise, for me at least, it would be unnecessarily complicated. I mean, if you do it that way without any consideration to distribution, you could end up having to play, for instance, a sequence where a plays 6th string, m 5th string and i 4th string, which is rather uncomfortable.
About the i "repeat" - I think I might approach it differently. I try to generally operate my fingers in sequence and plug in the pulgar where needed. To me the two are separate. With fingers I try to keep them in order where I can. The piami contradicts the approach. I can play it effectively in my meager repertoire. When I first started working on the 5 note tremolo (piami) it took a while to get it going likely due being used to the 4 note tremolo. Though I have not really worked on it all that much with the way I am proposing it appears not too difficult to get going likely because oof working on piami. I have not yet used it in the pieces I have learned mostly due to not wanting to change until I have the pieces completely locked in and I appear to be a slow learner.
About amima - again I have not really worked on it much but once I do I reckon it will not take too long. I seem to have acquired the ability since starting again to play scales multiple ways ie im, ia, am, ami, ima w/o changing the left hand fingering and can change between them while in the middle of playing the scale. I can do the same with 4 note tremolo though I typically play it pimi, pmim instead of pami now.
I think I understand what you are saying. If I am right, my understanding came from Sabicas' Zapateado en Re where in some portions there is a bit of a slight thumb dragging. I am sure it not truly the same be the concept seems to be similar.
I try to generally operate my fingers in sequence and plug in the pulgar where needed. To me the two are separate. With fingers I try to keep them in order where I can. The piami contradicts the approach.
Historically pulgar apoyando preceded tremolo in flamenco guitar technique.
The use of alternating pulgar and indice also preceded the use tremolo in flamenco guitar technique.
So all flamenco guitarists would use pulgar apoyando extensively, and also pulgar-indice, and when tremolo was introduced it was fitted in around the pre-existing thumb technique. I think that is also at least part of what Ricardo is saying.
With that in mind any/all approaches to tremolo that don't start from that basis are going to be misguided.
I think I understand what you are saying. If I am right, my understanding came from Sabicas' Zapateado en Re where in some portions there is a bit of a slight thumb dragging. I am sure it not truly the same be the concept seems to be similar.
Cheers
If you mean at :38 onward then yes... the secure rest strokes at that angle lend to using i for the treble notes instead of m. That is the same feeling, slight change of angle and add a-m-i and yes it’s flamenco tremolo. If you play pulgar tirando it feels more comfortable to use m for treble notes.
Sabicas was self taught being up in Pamplona with his record player and his excellent ear. He didn’t translate the above to his tremolo as you can see here, it’s all tirando at 4:14. That’s NOT the typical thing. The typical thing we all learned from Niño ricardo below, it’s quite a different sensation.
If you mean at :38 onward then yes... the secure rest strokes at that angle lend to using i for the treble notes instead of m. If you play pulgar tirando it feels more comfortable to use m for treble notes.
That was the part I referred to. I do play the trebles with m but my thumb angle appears to be similar. It feels comfortable though I could probably change it if need be but I am not really sure of the reason.