On guitar there are two systems: a 5-pattern system (commonly called CAGED) and a 7-pattern system.

You can skip this part if you want —————————————-

The 7-pattern system has a unique fingering from each note of a major scale. Using the 5-pattern system, it would just skip the patterns that are in the two places where a half-step occurs in a major scale. The idea is the two fingerings that are a half-step away are close enough that the next pattern can be a minor 3rd away; the 7-pattern system guys want to always overlap two notes (pattern is B C D the next pattern goes C D E, overlapping the C D, whereas CAGED would go B C D to D E F).

—————————————————————–

Whichever system one chooses, each unique scale fingering is a little over two octaves. Each scale fingering can be moved to a different fret and thereby changing the key without changing the fingering. In other words, one can play in all 12 keys by only using one scale fingering. However, if you need to go from the key of C to the key of G, you'd have to shift seven frets up or five frets down to be able to use the same exact fingering.

Because of that, it would just be simpler to play that same C major fingering and change all the F's to F#. Now you're playing G major without having to shift any frets. If you want to play D major, play that new G major fingering and raise all the C's to C#. Then do the same for the G's to change to the key of A, etc.

Each time this is done, you have a new unique scale fingering. However, because keys of a half step are close, if you need to switch from a C major scale to a B major scale, it would be just easier to shift the original first pattern back one fret.

That is why there are only 5 or 7 unique patterns to learn on guitar to play in all 12 keys in every position. However, Berklee teaches 12 fingerings for their reading system but 7 for their improv system. Basically 7 conventional patterns and 5 weird fingering patterns just so that all your bases are covered when it comes to reading.

The problem that arises is since it ridiculously easy to memorize a fingering pattern compared to memorizing every single note on every single string to the point where the notes jump out like they do on piano, many people are not aware of which notes they are playing and it sounds like it.

What I like to say is the difference between a person playing D Dorian over a Dm chord and a person playing C Major over a Dm chord is the person playing D Dorian realizes he is playing a C Major scale but that the tonal center is Dm and acts accordingly.

That can be done on piano or guitar. On piano, there's a very visual connection between the relative major scale and any of the corresponding chords from its modes; on guitar, it's hidden inside fingerings and one has to dig a bit differently so that's why. But yes, guitar players also think in relative terms to a key center.

You're closer than you think - just keep chipping away and big chunks will form.

As for the notes on the neck, I think Dom mentioned this before and I recommend this as well, learn one string at a time. If you're doing that four note phrasing exercise, you can do it on one string, gradually climbing up the entire neck, 4 note insolations at a time, until the entire scale is memorized on the neck by note names on the first string. Then do the 2nd string the same way. Now combine both strings. Rinse and repeat for the other 4 strings.

I certainly hope I'm closer than I think, cuz it feels far as chit lmao. But thanks again for the encouragement and the guide-line for approaching jazz theory - I would have paid real money to an instructor to teach me that stuff.

I have the 4 notes memorized in a lot of different positions. I will try that single string approach as well, I very much like the fact that the notes all repeat after the 12th fret though lmao.

The good and bad about these recent discussions is that I'm playing a lot of guitar



(and not doing much else!)


Thank you, all

I still haven't gotten a new guitar yet. I'm utterly bedevilled by all sorts of questions, not only about the type of guitar, but also now whether to go digital or have a traditional means of amplification and effects.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to z4v4 again.

Thx man, really appreciate all the insight. For awhile I've had curiosity about guitar but the fret board is really intimidating, it seems so complicated to digest especially if compared to a piano layout.

It's hard to believe how I went from knowing very little about guitar to now having a deep understanding of incredibly abstruse guitar theory after just reading that one post.

I still have my first guitar from more than 3 decades ago (and and some others).

Any guitar is better than no guitar!

Grab a used strat and a used POD and get playing!

Yeah, I had a Peavey superstrat and then a Gibson LP Epiphone but I hocked them both needing some quick cash. I wish I hung onto them, but now the quest for a new axe is on. I still haven't decided on what I want, but I am leaning towards a Nightswan or a Charvel Pro-Mod. Both sound gorgeous.

Unrelated to theory and instruments:

I can't believe the tech we have available now - for free!

I needed a ring modulator for a cover I recorded, evict is something I can imagine using otherwise.

So I wondered, is there a plug in?

More specifically, is there a plugin that will work with Ardour under Linux?

Yes, yes there is.

Enter Calf Studio Gear:
https://calf-studio-gear.org/

A big suite of great sounding plugins that integrate seamlessly into Ardour.

OS - free
DAW - free
Plugins - free

No love for Ibanez AZ? Why buy a new guitar without stainless steel frets?

I play heavy strings, do a lot of bending, and after 6 years mine are still mint.

do you have stainless on the JS? my JS1000 is from 2006 and I've played the shyt out of it, there's visible cratering on some frets. I could just level but those frets are already pretty low to begin with. I'd like to just get stainless and not have to worry about it again

My JS is first year, '94-95 with the "JS Custom" inlay. Didn't take long for the frets to get that cratering you described and that was with light strings and a softer touch.

Sounds like you need yours refretted with stainless. I opted for a completely new neck with stainless frets, ebony, roasted maple, luminlay, etc. Thankfully Satriani insisted on a Strat neck pocket which made that possible.

How thick is your neck? I feel like my Charvel DK24 RG Signature model is around 19-20mm thick around the 12th fret.

I often extol the virtues of the Charvel Speed Neck but again this compound radiused neck carve is, for me, just insanely comfortable. I also feel pity for all those Charvel players without the sweet stainless steel frets that my DK24 RG Signature model comes with stock.

It's amusing how you have to spend at least $2800 if you want a Charvel with steel frets, if buying new. They should all have stainless steel frets.

Guitar makers are so fukking stubborn. Fukk your nickel frets and your stupid pickup rings - direct mounted pickups are the way to go aesthetically.

Neck is a baseball bat. 26mm all the way which is pretty beefy with a 16" radius. Not what I asked for but the builder was going out of business so it was that or nothing. Today it's what I like but production guitars don't have necks like this.

I agree about stainless frets. They buy them pre-radiused and we're talking $5 more for a bag of 24 frets. As in $10 vs. $15 (they pay even less in bulk). They'll say stainless is harder on their tools but that's a poor excuse given the price of guitars.

As for pickup rings, if we're talking plastic then yes — direct mounted all the way. However I'm a fan of metal pickup rings which you rarely see. The only plastic on my guitar is the cavity cover. Knobs and switch are metal. Metal locking nut which never wears out and I can change string gauges at will without cutting a new nut. At the end of the day you like what you like. This is what I like.

Spoiler!

WTF 26mm, do you have elephant hands?

Honestly that's the best looking Schmoe Satriale I think I've ever seen minus the headstock. I am not a fan of that generic headstock shape but I love that clean ebony fretboard. And it's not some chitty half-assed looking chit they pass off as ebony these days but the real deal ebony like off a Steinway grand piano.

Still not a fan of pick-up rings. To me it's a very dated look.

But I'm guessing all the Schmoe Satriales have pick-up rings.

Here's the girth compared to the original Ibanez neck which is probably similar to what you have since they copied an 80s Strat neck.

Headstock shapes are tricky. I've heard people complain about the Suhr headstock but are you really going to care when the rest of the guitar is perfect?

There were only 3 other options. Fender headstock. It's not a Fender so no thanks. Cut my own headstock shape and risk disaster. Copy the Ibanez headstock and put a logo on it which still feels like frauding. I'm fine with my decision. Generic is better than something polarizing.

The Ibanez shape is what you expect to see on that guitar but Ibanez don't build custom necks unless you're on the roster. I lost count of how many times I banged the pointy headstock on ceilings and desks. What I have now is more compact like an Ernie Ball and quite practical. That photo doesn't show the detail in the roasted maple which I couldn't bring myself to paint black so I left it. I'm used to it now.

Roasted neck is also unfinished. It's got a light coat of gunstock wax but doesn't need it.

You'd be surprised how easy it is to get used to a thick neck. A friend of mine has a Richie Kotzen Tele which has a similar neck, maybe around 90% as thick. Read the reviews .

Lol look at those HUGE luminlay dots. I don't like thick necks for shredding, but I can understand liking a thicker neck for bending and vibrato and bluesy playing and playing with one's thumb to fret notes. But for thumb behind the neck shredding I like a thin neck with a flat radius and huge frets. Charvel necks are thin like Ibanez necks but they have a different feel to them - superior to Ibanez imo.

There are few headstocks that actually look good to me tbh. The Suhr headstock is pretty meh, I do wish it looked snazzier. Your headstock kind of reminds of me of the Ibanez Talman headstocks. Why on earth would anyone paint over a roasted maple neck, it feels too good for that.

Dots on the Satriani neck are a like a vintage Strat and half in the rosewood — tiny. Not easy to see on a dark stage unless you were sitting down. Potentially more of an issue without inlays.

That Rick Graham Charvel is a beautiful guitar. Only thing I don't like about Charvels if I'm nitpicking is the chunk they cut out for the spoke wheel truss rod adjustment which is more noticeable on a maple fingerboard but the upside is you can adjust it with a small screwdriver so it's function over form.

Good observation about the Talman so it's not exactly a radical look for an Ibanez. Looks are important in the sense it should make you want to pick the thing up but obviously how it feels and sounds are the most important things. Most roasted necks probably have a light satin finish for warranty but my understanding is they don't need them. Some pros will sand the finish off their necks. I'm not a fan of a sticky gloss finish.

From an aesthetic perspective that spoke wheel truss rod isn't ideal but I've futzed with it and it does seem like the superior design for simple maintenance.

The RG model is a superior guitar in a lot of respects for sheer playability - my Suhr has gotten almost no play since I've gotten the RG (although this might also have something to do with the 9s I have on the Charvel). In addition to a great neck carve this has the best upper fret access of any bolt-on guitar I've ever played, it's extremely easy to play around the 20th-24th frets. And it feels like there is almost no finish or the finish on the neck is so thin and light it imparts a natural wood feeling which I greatly prefer to any type of gloss. (Although I will say the gloss of the Squier Custom Vibe Strat necks are weirdly comfortable feeling.)
The "Dinky" 3/4 body with the arm and belly carves are also extremely comfortable. Even the angled input jack makes it easier to recline on my day-bed couch without putting the cord at some potentially damaging angle to the cord against its own metal input cap in the guitar jack and leaning on it.

I will say the thing I dislike the most about it is the volume difference between the humbucker and the single coils - it's a pretty dramatic difference to the degree that for live performance I think it could be tricky for certain contexts. I like that I can get true single coil sound but it almost makes this guitar better suited as a studio guitar rather than for live performance if tone switching is preferred.
That being said the Bareknuckle pickups are really awesome sounding to my ears.

In terms of the looks if I'm being completely honest pretty much all the Charvels are just okay to me. They have a distinctly 80s Fender look a lot of the times due to that, imo, stupid decision to adopt the Fender headstock. I actually prefer the Suhrs in terms of aesthetics.

I recently also got my vintage RG550 plekked (it was already re-fretted with stainless steel frets when I got it) and it plays fantastically now. But I still prefer the Charvel RG lol.

So my Charvel RG > my Suhr Modern Pro (with matching flame maple headstock which they don't seem to do anymore on production models), Ibanez RG550 plekked with ss frets, my Gibson ES335, my Schecter Blackjack, and obviously my Squier Custom Vibe Stratocaster.

Have you adjusted the pickup height? I guess in a live situation you could always dial in the volume for the bridge and use a boost pedal for the single coils. If you love the sound of the humbucker and spend most of your time there then I wouldn't touch anything.

I found the post below on the Bare Knuckle forum. If the bridge is a Ragnarok designed for Misha from Periphery, described as "a hot ceramic pickup," then it wouldn't surprise me if it was difficult to balance with single coils. I wonder if a stacked humbucker like what Andy Timmons uses would be a better choice because I've used his Dimarzio humbucker before and it's on the hotter side. He gets beautiful neck tones.

I haven’t messed with the pickup height but I can’t imagine it could compensate for such a volume difference. It’s pretty dramatic.

That quoted description seems to jive with my experiences, I guess the bridge pickup has a ton of output BUT it still seems to have the tone and dynamics of a less hot pickup which I like.

The single coil tones are great outside of the volume drop-off. Very strat-y sounding despite the 24 frets.

I tend to prefer the single coil PUs with less gain however.

It can be tricky even with two humbuckers. Having one volume and tone control I went through a bunch of different neck pickups and several wiring mods to balance them in a way that I was happy with. Pickup and pole piece height also makes a difference and I spent a lot of time dialing that in. I'm a simple guy, even with humbuckers I want a bridge that sounds like a Tele and a neck that sounds like a Strat, only fatter and without the noise.

I played my brother's PRS and the neck humbucker is pure mud. Great if you want that creamy 60s/70s LP tone with gain but note separation playing chords wasn't there for me.

Getting back to your Charvel, a boost pedal would fix that live.

I suppose a boost pedal would work but I would be annoyed at having to use that pedal lol. I try to use as few pedals as possible either in actual tube amp or modeler format.

Ho Lee Fuk, people actually pay for this?



YJM meet and greet fail YJM meet and greet fail

I suspect these are the machinations of his wife. I think she is sorta known for being a gold-digger when it comes to the fans lol.

I can't believe I use to play 12-53 gauges with standard tuning during my band days.

I am really enjoying the 9-42 gauges.

paul gilbert is dat u