If this tome still hasn't been written, does anyone else agree we need it? Could this be done by a consulting group of great steelers pooling their musical knowledge and specific steel skills?

I've been looking for a 6-string jazz guitar book, but then one faces the arduous task of somehow transcribing everything for pedal steel. Ugh. I'm not up to the task, but sure would like to see this realized, if it doesn't already exist.

If we could talk heavy hitters into helping write this course, would anyone really care or dig in and apply it? Opinions on this, anyone?

I don't find converting from 6 string guitar to pedal steel that bad. I had been playing lead guitar when I started on Pedal Steel and a lot of my "learning" licks involved learning them on my Gretsch first and then transferring it to my pedal steel.

------------------
Steve Stallings
Bremond, Texas

Interesting thread here, I hope it's not all old rehash of other past dialogues! Hope what I'm trying to convey makes sense.

quote:

---

In truth, I'm a busy, lazy person

---

This is his home page:
click here

-In order for such a thing to happen, the author would find himself in the curious position of inadvertently presenting his/herself as an authority on a very complicated subject. As there are many approachs, it would be easy to have elements of any writing called into question. There are some guys around who know a few things about it, who do not hold any kind of degree from a school of music (like me) who would feel uneasy about saying "This is the way it is". After all, that's why they call it Theory and not Fact. In my own case, I've studied on my own, (lotsa books) and feel assured enough of that knowledge to base my playing on it, but still can't resist opening any comment in here about theory with the sentence "Now, I've never been to school, but...."
I hope that makes sense.

- I have to respectfully disagree with any notion that we are coveters of information and not sharers. On the contrary, I can't think of a single theorical question that has come up here that there hasn't been some effort to answer, or at least discuss it. Some lively conversations have ensued, and alot of great knowledge has been traded; not the least of which courtesy of a respondent in this thread - Jeff Lampert. I don't know where Jeff learned his stuff, but I know that I have never seen a response from Jeff that didn't correspond exactly with any of the studies I have absorbed. I have also delivered several long-winded dictums in here, some of which I've saved on paper, some in a text file, and some just posted and forgotten.

- "Jazz" is a big word. There are many miles of road between Scott Joplin and Cecil Taylor. So, this raises questions. Where do you start? What level of knowledge would you assume a reader would have to begin with?
Maybe you could audition readers... have them sit down and play "The Preacher", and if when they got to the III chord, they fell off the cliff, you'd know you'd have to haul out "music 101" for them

-Jazz is very much one of those "learn by doing" things.
And it's very easy to look at someone and say "Gee, I wish I could do that". It's kinda like that guy that gets sand kicked in his face by the bully at the beach, and says "wow, I wish I was built like that guy".
Well, you can. But, do you wanna hit the gym every day ? Do you ? Fine, then:
~ Listen to everything you can, intensely, and find sounds you like that you want to learn about.
~ Buy a fakebook, or many fakebooks, and get at it. Study those chords, make note of the way they connect, note the II-V-I changes in all it's incarnations, etc.
~ Find other musicians to play with... the ultimate in importance.
~ Ask questions of someone whose opinion you trust.
~ Post any question you have on the forum, and I would personally guarantee an effort to respond. I know Jeff would too, he has been very kind with his time.
~ With regard to the "what level of knowledge have you acquired" question, it's not a bad idea with jazz to look at it chronologically. Jazz developed, and continues to do so. (One of the few genres of music which does, imho) There's no point trying to decipher a Wayne Shorter composition if you have trouble grasping Fats Waller.

- Theory and practice are two different things, and as Andy said, it's a very interpretational thing too. Some people have told me they think I know alot about theory, yet there are several guys in here who claim to know nothing, yet they play music that's way over my head. (where are you, Rick Schmidt?)

So, I'm going to close with a question, alluding to my third point above:
What would be the title of the first chapter of this book ?

quote:

---

What would be the title of the first chapter of this book ?

---

Chapter One: The Blues.

On a related note, I was sitting at the piano the other day, melancholy as can be. Just noodling around in C, but I found myself, in that frame of mind, unable to play a straight major diatonic scale. And then it hit me:

"Can a blue man play the whites?"

... sorry.

------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

Though I was around for the entire 60's... as well as the entire 50's and a good part of the 40's ... the band you mention seems to have escaped entry into my data base. Did they have any "hits?"

------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

Herb, ask Paul Skelton (or me) about the Bonzos. I know he knows. They were an English comedy/pop/jazz band. Kind of like a sixties Spike Jones. I'm the Urban Spaceman" was their biggest hit, but not very representative of a lot of their stuff. The "Intro and the Outro" is my favorite, a great satire on showbiz patter featuring a vocalist who spends the entire song introduceing the band (Eric Clapton on Ukelele, Adolf Hitler on vibes, swinging General De Gaule on Accordion, big John Wayne on Sousaphone)

[This message was edited by Steve England on 04 January 2002 at 09:08 AM.]

If I were to ever attempt writing such a book, I'd probably base it around the way I taught myself C6 in the first place...i.e.;

1)Start with a "Real" jazz fake book
2)Learn one of the melodies that's familiar to you (of course a little reading helps)...like "Misty", "All of Me", "Freedom Jazz Dance" etc.
3)Next learn the bass note of the progression
4)Then fill in the blanks..i.e. find the Chords. (go slow as you need to at first)

Listen as much as possible to all the greats. (Armstong to Zawinul)Check out the books that they were reading at the time...The "Lydian Chromatic Concept" by George Russell, Slonymsky's "Theosaurus of Scales and Melodic Patterns" etc. etc. etc.

Try to visualize yourself phrasing more like a horn or a keyboard than a typical steel guitar hero. (I'm sure B.E. must of had a similar approach)

then jam & clam until the clams start sounding musical....

voilà! You just taught yourself!

quote:

---

- The Hal Leonard series "Ultimate Jazz Fake Book" is way-out-in-front the best fake book for Standards that I've ever seen. The chords are complete, correct, and legal. It includes the words too. If I could only own one fake book, this would be the one. It leans more toward the standards than the obscure.

---

I have it. It's fantastic. Highly recommended. It's 47.50 and worth it.

------------------
Herb's Steel Guitar Pages
Texas Steel Guitar Association

quote:

---

In this example, pedals 6 & 7, at the 7th fret, strings 3-8

---

quote:

---

They better win

---

If you were listening to Erroll Garner, or Joe Pass, or Oscar Peterson, that's likely the scale they would use; that's the era they are from. And, Jeff is right, the natural ninth would clash.
However, later on in jazz history, people started to employ the natural ninth tone in the chords and scales for a half-diminished chord. If you listen to Herbie Hancock, or Bill Evans, they do it all the time. Some people's ears do not accept the natural ninth in a half diminished chord. Myself, I'm kind of in the middle. I use a sparingly few single note runs that employ the natural ninth.. I stick mostly with the above-mentioned Locrian mode. I do, however, use the natural ninth tone in half-diminished chord voicings alot (like the previously posted example for Stella).
Those that use the natural ninth in half diminished chords use a different scale. For this chord, you would use the 6th mode of the Melodic Minor scale. For the example of A half diminished, it would be derived from the C melodic minor scale:

Half diminished mode of the
C melodic minor scale (also known
as Locrian #2)
1----------------3--------
2-------------------3--5--
3----------2--3-----------
4----2--3-----------------
5--2----------------------
6-------------------------
7-------------------------
8-------------------------
9-------------------------
10------------------------

So, it's a matter of personal taste. It's nice to have choices. Later, when you get into chords like 7#9 , there are numerous choices of scales to use for them. And, correspondingly, numerous ways to voice the chord, expressing different elements according to taste.
For an example, listen to two different piano pickers play "Autumn Leaves"... Erroll Garner on his "Concert by the Sea" album (all Locrian mode) versus Bill Evans on his "Portraits in Jazz" album (mostly the half diminished or Locrian #2 mode).
For anyone to whom these albums are inaccessible, I might recommend dredging up the old post Jerry Gleason and I did last year (?), posting 4 bar segments of "autumn leaves". I distinctly remember ripping off a nice Locrian #2 move from Bill Evans and posting it as such... while the rest of the half diminished chords were generally handled with Locrian #1.
You may use pockets on the neck to play these scales that are different than my examples; that's fine.
Thus endeth another chapter in the Steel Guitar Forum Jazz Theory Series
-John
*whew*

[This message was edited by John Steele on 13 January 2002 at 12:01 PM.]

Cmaj9 Am7    F9#11        Cmaj7/E
Moon  River, wider than a mile 
Cmaj7 F9#11           Cmaj7/E      Dm6 E7b9
I'm   crossing you in style,  some day
Am        C9         Fmaj9 Bb9#11(13)
Old dream maker, you heart breaker

I don't know the exact chords and I'm not listening to the song (is it a Dm6 or Bm7b5, can't tell without hearing it with the bass note. What the hey, do it one way, and then the other. That's the whole point, right?), but you can basically arrange it anyway you want. The point is to see how you can apply the 9#11. It is a great sound, as long as it doesn't bother you, as John pointed out.

[This message was edited by Jeff Lampert on 14 January 2002 at 09:18 AM.]

quote:

---

I’m frustrated by not being able to move any given note in a chord a half step in either direction. I would have to have a hundred pedals to do on the steel what my fingers do on guitar.

---

You cover a lot of points, so I'll tackle 'em one at a time.

1. To play a lot of altered stuff, you need a full knee lever complement. Besides lowering string 3 a 1/2 tone, which is standard, you also need to lower string 4 a 1/2 tone, and raise string 4 a 1/2 tone. Less important, but useful, you should also raise string 3 a 1/2 tone, either with a pedal, or a split with the lever that lowers string 3 and floor pedal 7. This will give you loads of extra inversions.

2. You probably are raising string 7 a 1/2 tone. You don't really need to lower it a 1/2, or do anything to string 8. When you want to move those strings, you do it by moving over a fret, and raising or lowering strings 3,4,5,6 using the floors and knees.

3. This will give you loads of flexibility. What it IS NOT is intuitive. You can't just look at your fingers like on piano and guitar, and see where you are going. You are right about that. But with some patience, you would discover hundreds of inversions, if you have a full knee lever complement.

4. Keep in mind that horn and reed players have NO chord abilities. Steel is WAY, WAY closer to guitar than anything else.

5. On the plus side, you have tremendous range in notes, much greater than guitar. Guitar has 2 bass strings in a sense, the 5th and 6th string. Steel has 4 bass strings, the 7,8,9,10. And strings 9 and 10 give you true bass resonance. This means that, at any given fret, you have a huge variety of voicings and dynamics, depending on which string you use under your chord. Far more than on guitar.

6. You have octaves. Strings 2,6, and 3,7 and 4,8. Since you have all those 1/2 tone pulls available on the top strings, it's easy to create dissonances, which are needed for many jazz voicings, some of which have a double dissonance. This is harder to get on guitar, and there is less availability. On steel, it's intuitive in places. Pick an octave, hit a 1/2 tone knee, there it is.

7. There are far more notes. Most guitar voicings in jazz are 4-note voicings. On C6, you can play many 6-note voicings, if you choose, and alter them easily with 1/2 tone moves.

8. If you choose, you can mix in very tight voicings, since some strings, with and without pedal moves, are only a second apart. Guitar strings are a fourth, except for the B string. The ability to mix in a tight voicing with a wide one, and do it easily, is one of the signature dynamics of playing C6 chords.

Bottom line, it's not the same as playing guitar. Then again, playing guitar is not the same as playing piano. It's one thing to apply some guitar voicings to it. It's another to dynamically try to play it like guitar. You can't. Anymore than you can play guitar like piano.

That's it. Hopefully it doesn't sound preachy. Regards.