# Fretboard Note Locations



## Ravvij (Nov 4, 2013)

UPDATE: 40% cooler. (for all you who said it was too dark)








Here's a set of Sharps and Flats for all.
download at 28x7Fretboard Notes SHARPS and FLATS by SinistraAlucard13 on deviantART


----------



## wespaul (Nov 4, 2013)

This hurts my eyes


----------



## Winspear (Nov 4, 2013)

And it's backwards


----------



## phrygian12 (Nov 4, 2013)

No offense, but this is a horrible way of learning all the notes on the fret board and they're kinda wrong. 

Here's some good information from various users about learning notes on the fret board. 

http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/mu...202220-i-just-cant-get-past-basic-theory.html


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 4, 2013)

EtherealEntity said:


> And it's backwards


LOL it's not backwards. It's only backwards if you read it like tableture. But, I suppose it would be easier for seasoned players to read if it were flipped.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 4, 2013)

phrygian12 said:


> No offense, but this is a horrible way of learning all the notes on the fret board and they're kinda wrong.
> 
> Here's some good information from various users about learning notes on the fret board.
> 
> http://www.sevenstring.org/forum/mu...202220-i-just-cant-get-past-basic-theory.html


Not really. I based the colors and form on the Rocksmith Game's interface. This is only supposed to be a reference. Not a way of learning.


----------



## phrygian12 (Nov 4, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> LOL it's not backwards. It's only backwards if you read it like tableture. But, I suppose it would be easier for seasoned players to read if it were flipped.


 I haven't read tablature in years, but I'm pretty sure you read it Low to high EADGBE, not high to low. You're basically viewing the guitar as a viewer rather than a player, according to your chart. 



Ravvij said:


> Not really. I based the colors and form on the Rocksmith Game's interface. This is only supposed to be a reference. Not a way of learning.



But when learning don't you use reference material for you know..learning?


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 4, 2013)

FIXED!!!
Now it has both the normal and Rocksmith flips to the string orientations.


----------



## wrongnote85 (Nov 4, 2013)

i have no idea what i'm looking at


----------



## ncfiala (Nov 4, 2013)

The mods might want to put a warning on this thread for the epileptic members here.


----------



## Winspear (Nov 4, 2013)

There we go, yeah much better that way round! The original made me as confused as picking up a left handed guitar


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 4, 2013)

wrongnote85 said:


> i have no idea what i'm looking at


I'm not sure if I should tell you because it's so obvious... :/


----------



## Dayn (Nov 5, 2013)

You might want to make the notes white. I can't see anything.


----------



## wrongnote85 (Nov 5, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> I'm not sure if I should tell you because it's so obvious... :/




oh dude, i know what i'm _supposed_ to be looking at....


i just ain't sure if what i'm looking at is that.


----------



## potatohead (Nov 5, 2013)

Black letters against a dark grey background. OP is not asian


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 5, 2013)

wrongnote85 said:


> oh dude, i know what i'm _supposed_ to be looking at....
> 
> 
> i just ain't sure if what i'm looking at is that.


LOL Okay!


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 5, 2013)

Dayn said:


> You might want to make the notes white. I can't see anything.


Actually, the white letters didn't look so good on it. Even the white between the dark parts of it hurts my eyes when I look at them.
You may try increasing the brightness or contrast of you screen?


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 5, 2013)

Then do white background with dark letters. And change those fonts. As you have it, it's hideous.


----------



## stuglue (Nov 5, 2013)

Here's a tip. To find the same note but on the immediate string below the one you are playing simply add 5 to the fret number of the note you are playing
Here's an example you are playing C at the third fret on the A string. You want to know where the same note is on the low E string. What you do is add 5 to 3 (the number of the fret where the C note is in the A string) and you get 8, so to play C on the low E you fret at the 8th.
You can do the reverse of this process if you want to find the same pitched note but up a string.

This changes slightly with the G and B string, you have to add or subtract 4, not 5.


----------



## ncfiala (Nov 5, 2013)

Do people actually use charts like these? If you know what each open string is tuned to and that each fret up is another semitone up then you know where the notes are. You could teach that to a monkey, or even a djent or metalcore fan, in about five minutes (djent and metalcore fans might take 10).


----------



## wespaul (Nov 6, 2013)

I've found that sight reading helps more with internalizing notes on a fretboard than just trying to memorize a chart.


----------



## TeeWX (Nov 6, 2013)

I feel that memorizing all the notes in standard tuning is completely un-required. What is significantly more useful and applicable to real playing is to memorize intervals. Like stuglue said, you can use tricks to remember note locations. If adjacent strings are tuned in 4ths, you can find the same note on an adjacent string by moving 5 fret spaces. If adjacent strings are in 5ths, you move 7 fret spaces. Octaves are pretty easy as well, if tuned in 4ths you skip a string and go over 2 fret spaces.

In essence you should understand that if you can't reach every note you want in one hand position, you're probably playing in a non ideal position. I've noticed just as ncfiala jokes that a lot of metal tabs are played hilariously poorly. Pretty much any riff barring sliding shouldn't really require much hand movement as everything you need is within a 5 fret spread if you're tuned in 4ths.

I rambled a bit, but my general thinking is that memorizing a chart of notes isn't going to get you very far. Learn how to find what intervals you need and you'll be much better off. Find some of the crappy tabs out there (there's thousands) and play them in different positions. You'll learn fast.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

You know for as much as you people are dissing on this, I'd think you are lazy players or just scared of learning a tiny bit of theory.
I made this for anyone who wants it. You don't, so, leave it be.

I think because of this I've gained some haters. #@[[ YEAH! Life's no fun without opposition! Bring on the hate mail and rude comments! 

As for learning "tricks" for playing. A trick will only get you so far.
If you're lazy and you just want to learn to play what you want to imitate right away then that's all fine and good; learn as many tricks as you want. Every beginner has to start somewhere.
As for me I aim to be a master guitar player someday soon. "Tricks are for kids." And I'm not a kid anymore.


----------



## Solodini (Nov 6, 2013)

I don't think the "tricks" of intervals are a shortcut, more a way of viewing relationships between notes. Music is about relationships between notes, not just individual notes so if you learn by intervals and other such methods then you'll have a better understanding of how and why the notes you're playing work. 

You'll start to see similarities, such as 4ths between strings, octaves up 2 strings and 2 frets as mentioned. It'll facilitate creating new arrangements and voicings when things clash and will help to tie together various aspects of theory rather than having a brain full of disparate fragments.

Not hating on you, OP, I just think others have found that they may have started with fretboard maps and ended up with more intervallic thought processes as they work more fluently, much of the time.


----------



## Dayn (Nov 6, 2013)

Not haters, just people pointing out how it could be better. And it would be infinitely better if people could actually read it.

I'd hazard a guess that most of the people who've replied know quite a lot about theory. Many of the 'tricks' mentioned in this thread, from what I've seen, are mostly ways to internalise more knowledge with less effort while exercising theoretical knowledge. Rather than brute-force memorisation.


----------



## HellGamer666 (Nov 6, 2013)

Okay, the world isn't against you because you made this. It's a helpful resource for people like myself who aren't sure about fret-note locations. I just can't get over how you adorned it with low-fi deathcore logos set against a background with very little colour co-ordination sense.


----------



## TeeWX (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> You know for as much as you people are dissing on this, I'd think you are lazy players or just scared of learning a tiny bit of theory.
> I made this for anyone who wants it. You don't, so, leave it be.
> 
> I think because of this I've gained some haters. #@[[ YEAH! Life's no fun without opposition! Bring on the hate mail and rude comments!
> ...



I would argue that the "tricks" and basic theory will have you understanding where notes are on the fretboard much faster than memorization. The human brain is really just terrible with memory, but quite good with tricks. You use them everyday without even realizing it.

Any basic music course will teach you that the relationship between notes is much more significant than knowing what every actual note is. 

Just to poke some fun, memorization is what's taught in grade school. It's much more of a kid thing.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

Dayn said:


> Not haters, just people pointing out how it could be better. And it would be infinitely better if people could actually read it.
> 
> I'd hazard a guess that most of the people who've replied know quite a lot about theory. Many of the 'tricks' mentioned in this thread, from what I've seen, are mostly ways to internalize more knowledge with less effort while exercising theoretical knowledge. Rather than brute-force memorization.


All too often I've found that many musicians either don't know music theory (or even just a very very basic understanding of terminology) or they learned a bit of it and think they know all of it because of one or two things they've learned that have worked well for them.
I dislike Tricks because they're used as Shortcuts to a limited point of learning. Those Tricks you guys have posted up are probably great ways of learning where notes are and how to find what you're looking for, but do you ever really remember where the notes are that you've just rambled them off in your head? I doubt it.
Think about this if you aspire to be in a band or work with other musicians (whether or not they play the same instrument as you do)... Let's say you want to work with someone that play's keyboard, and, they don't know what chord you've just played because they don't play guitar. Or, lets say you want your other guitar player to play a chord as the harmonic (An octave higher/lower or more). Them watching you using your Trick to find the notes is not only going to take longer but might also confuse them as they watch you look for the notes and you'll have to do it all over again. I know. I've been there. Even if you tell the guitarist the notes they probably won't know where to find them, so, you'd need to know where to find them in order to show them the proper fingering.
You can't sit there and tell me that it's pointless to learn all the notes when you yourself don't even know where all of them are at any moment.

I like contradictions. I think both work. But, I aspire to be more than I am and if that means memorizing every note, I'll do it.

FYI: if you've lost sight of the point of this diagram. It's meant as a reference AND a way to learn the notes AND it would be better printed off onto a bright piece of paper.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

TeeWX said:


> I would argue that the "tricks" and basic theory will have you understanding where notes are on the fretboard much faster than memorization. The human brain is really just terrible with memory, but quite good with tricks. You use them everyday without even realizing it.
> 
> Any basic music course will teach you that the relationship between notes is much more significant than knowing what every actual note is.
> 
> Just to poke some fun, memorization is what's taught in grade school. It's much more of a kid thing.



Ah, but you forget, if memorization didn't work they wouldn't use it.
And I do know what the relation ships between notes are much more than just knowing where they are. That's still not the point, however.


----------



## TeeWX (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> Ah, but you forget, if memorization didn't work they wouldn't use it.
> And I do know what the relation ships between notes are much more than just knowing where they are. That's still not the point, however.



They use memorization because the American school system is completely terrible and outdated, aimed at producing masses of people who are capable of learning trades for factory work. It's pretty bad when you need to adapt or new situations to solve complex problems. So you memorized all the notes on a guitar in standard tuning. What do you know when you join a band that plays in some other tuning?


----------



## Dayn (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> I dislike Tricks because they're used as Shortcuts to a limited point of learning. Those Tricks you guys have posted up are probably great ways of learning where notes are and how to find what you're looking for, but do you ever really remember where the notes are that you've just rambled them off in your head? I doubt it.


Yes. By knowing the shapes intervals make, I've memorised the entire fretboard by only learning about maybe 1/6th of it. Using these 'Tricks' I extrapolated that small amount of knowledge to encompass any note on any guitar in any tuning.



Ravvij said:


> You can't sit there and tell me that it's pointless to learn all the notes when you yourself don't even know where all of them are at any moment.


As said above, by using these 'Tricks', I've learned every note on the fretboard with efficiency. I haven't had to learn 150+ different positions individually. It's so internalised now that I sometimes scare myself with how I can hear a note and instantly place it on my guitar first try.

Brute memorisation is alright. But there are far more efficient ways to learn, and perhaps more useful. I'm not 'dissing' your charts beyond their form obscuring their function. But since you've raised it, I do however take exception to your apparent railing against efficient learning.


----------



## guitarfreak1387 (Nov 6, 2013)

Its not that people are dissing on you, its that (and i agree) you can barely read what meant to be. The colors used against each other, the font used. its not that great of a reference if you get confused just looking at it. There is a reason most of the diagrams you find online are just simple black and white and nothing fancy.

Now, not to be a dick, but if you cant take the criticism, don't post stuff like that, its the internet, everyone will have their opinion. get over it.


----------



## Solodini (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> All too often I've found that many musicians either don't know music theory (or even just a very very basic understanding of terminology) or they learned a bit of it and think they know all of it because of one or two things they've learned that have worked well for them.
> I dislike Tricks because they're used as Shortcuts to a limited point of learning. Those Tricks you guys have posted up are probably great ways of learning where notes are and how to find what you're looking for, but do you ever really remember where the notes are that you've just rambled them off in your head? I doubt it.


Yep, and I can do so more consistently by knowing what scale/chord degrees they are, knowing that x is resolving to y and so on. Seeing them as degrees of the scale with ability to clearly see octaves and repetitions of the note makes it easier for me to move a whole passage rather than each note at a time, if I need to change positions.



Ravvij said:


> Think about this if you aspire to be in a band or work with other musicians (whether or not they play the same instrument as you do)... Let's say you want to work with someone that play's keyboard, and, they don't know what chord you've just played because they don't play guitar. Or, lets say you want your other guitar player to play a chord as the harmonic (An octave higher/lower or more). Them watching you using your Trick to find the notes is not only going to take longer [IT DOESN&#8217;T. MOVING BY INTERVALS IS QUICKER THAN COUNTING CHROMATICALLY THROUGH EVERY NOTE.] but might also confuse them as they watch you look for the notes and you'll have to do it all over again. I know. I've been there. Even if you tell the guitarist the notes they probably won't know where to find them, so, you'd need to know where to find them in order to show them the proper fingering.


You can easily tell the guitarists that x note is as y fret. That&#8217;s quicker than having them count up the whole neck with you. Keyboard, sax and many other instruments are layed out by natural notes with accidentals out of the way so moving in a linear chromatic fashion isn&#8217;t much use to them. They can see a 5th, for example and just adjust it to be diminished, augmented et c..



Ravvij said:


> You can't sit there and tell me that it's pointless to learn all the notes when you yourself don't even know where all of them are at any moment.



I do know where they are. In various tunings. Because I use intervals to find them. I can adjust to be functional in a new tuning within minutes, by these methods. I don&#8217;t need to count up each string to find the next note, as I know the next string is, for example, a minor 6th above, so I can just go up a string, back a fret and be at a 5th.


----------



## wespaul (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> You know for as much as you people are dissing on this, I'd think you are lazy players or just scared of learning a tiny bit of theory.



Man, you're in the *Music Theory* section of this board. The very people who have criticized this fretboard diagram have spent hours helping others in just about every aspect of actual theory. With that aside, there's nothing theoretical about the diagram --it's just a list of note names in standard tuning.


----------



## TeeWX (Nov 6, 2013)

Everyone here is just trying to help you. The fact is that memorizing the location of every note in a specific tuning that you use a lot seems like a useful skill to have. But in practice it's really just not. Learn to like tricks, because your brain seriously can't do without them. You use them for everything. You don't really have songs memorized. You couldn't tell me what note is played on a specific beat of a certain measure. You probably couldn't start playing a song at a random spot in the middle of a riff. You remember it as you play through it though. Your brain HAS to use little tricks to remember anything longer than a small list. You're not going to be playing at a high tempo and be able to think in terms of notes, especially in a key you're unfamiliar with. If you have ever taken any college courses in music, especially ear training, they'll never teach you notes. The actual notes don't really matter. The distance, or intervals is what you're brain is actually processing. By telling us that you have such a strong emphasis on memorizing where every note is you're telling us that you have a weak understanding of theory and how to apply it. You don't need to be thinking about what notes you're playing, think in intervals, play something you like, figure out the notes later when you want to write it down.

This all goes back to the uneducated vs. educated way of thinking. Don't spend countless hours memorizing something. Instead train yourself HOW TO THINK, train yourself how to figure out, on the fly, what you want to know. It's faster, more efficient, and it's something you can actually apply to your playing. You don't need to memorize where every note is if you can figure it out in a few seconds given the root note of whatever key you're going to play in.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

TeeWX said:


> They use memorization because the American school system is completely terrible and outdated, aimed at producing masses of people who are capable of learning trades for factory work. It's pretty bad when you need to adapt or new situations to solve complex problems. So you memorized all the notes on a guitar in standard tuning. What do you know when you join a band that plays in some other tuning?


First of all, I never said the "American" school system by itself. Memorization is a system of learning that has been practiced through-out the centuries. You wouldn't be able to read without it.
You need to get a better opinion of the people that come out of public school.
Secondly, I play in D Standard tuning (DGCFAD). I have to transpose notes all the time when I want to play something in E Standard and it's just as difficult when I use an Capo. [Floyd Rose Original Tremolo; IF you don't know what this means you should look up how difficult it is to tune a guitar with this bridge and why using a capo is the only quick solution to changing tunings for people who use this bridge.] The whole time I must remember that the original note positions are a whole step up.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

Dayn said:


> Yes. By knowing the shapes intervals make, I've memorised the entire fretboard by only learning about maybe 1/6th of it. Using these 'Tricks' I extrapolated that small amount of knowledge to encompass any note on any guitar in any tuning.
> 
> As said above, by using these 'Tricks', I've learned every note on the fretboard with efficiency. I haven't had to learn 150+ different positions individually. It's so internalised now that I sometimes scare myself with how I can hear a note and instantly place it on my guitar first try.
> 
> Brute memorisation is alright. But there are far more efficient ways to learn, and perhaps more useful. I'm not 'dissing' your charts beyond their form obscuring their function. But since you've raised it, I do however take exception to your apparent railing against efficient learning.


I never said I was against other ways of learning. you should see this. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S8yaHkvSmq0
It's very similar to the techniques you use to learn the notes on the fretboard. It's impractical to memorize something in only method of practice. You seem to think I practice in a linear fashion. This is not so.


----------



## wespaul (Nov 6, 2013)

What happens when you're in an open tuning? Do you memorize the notes in every open tuning, too? That seems like a lot of work.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 6, 2013)

You're walking on thin ice, homeslice. This board is one of the better ones on the internet for music theory. I am a member on several other boards that are solely dedicated to music theory, and while some of the contributors there are vastly knowledgable, the level of competency is much higher and more evenly distributed on this forum. Most of the people in this thread are regulars here, and they know their theory. The very first thing I was taught in music theory when I went into college was intervals, intervallic relationships took up the majority of my three semesters of harmony, intervals factored heavily into my six semesters of aural skills, and intervals provided the pitch basis of my composition, counterpoint, and analysis classes. I can pick up another instrument without any prior experience and reliably make a tune with it because it's all intervals. To learn intervals is to understand pitch space. If I memorized the fretboard by a chart like that, I would have to get a new chart for every tuning. Since my ear knows what to look for though, I can do the same work much faster and more intuitively. Intervals aren't the shortcut, they are "The Way".

Having gotten that out of the way, I have no problem with the content of your diagram, but it is completely unreadable. We'll be fine if we print it on bright paper, you say? Well, all I have is the printer that came free with my laptop. It only prints 8.5"x11", the quality of print isn't very sharp, I am on a student budget so I can't afford nice paper and copious ink, and your diagram would come out as a gray blob. For instructional material, you should ideally be able to print it on a beat up dot matrix printer from 1986 and still have magnificent results.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

wespaul said:


> Man, you're in the *Music Theory* section of this board. The very people who have criticized this fretboard diagram have spent hours helping others in just about every aspect of actual theory. With that aside, there's nothing theoretical about the diagram --it's just a list of note names in standard tuning.


Exactly!
But you're right. I did forget exactly where I posted this.
I do apologize if I've offended those of you who actually know what you're talking about. I realize that I might have come across with a "Holier than though" attitude and for that I apologize again.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

wespaul said:


> What happens when you're in an open tuning? Do you memorize the notes in every open tuning, too? That seems like a lot of work.


Yes I do. But it's worth it. I've seen the end-result of this kind of work and I'm looking forward to being able to play anything I want just by hearing it or thinking it. In any tuning.
It's not as if I'm trying to learn and deify a set pattern; although that would be accurate only in the case of A to G#/Ab.
As it's been said by many people through out the ages, "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."


----------



## redstone (Nov 6, 2013)

Then I guess there was no cleaner fretboard charts available on google image, and violinists cannot play with other instruments because hey, they don't have any fretboard charts. 

Sarcasm aside, I'll agree with TeeWX, you won't be a quick guitar thinker if you're looking for notes instead of intervals. For people without perfect pitch, it's like taking a longcut to avoid shortcuts.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

SchecterWhore said:


> You're walking on thin ice, homeslice. This board is one of the better ones on the internet for music theory. I am a member on several other boards that are solely dedicated to music theory, and while some of the contributors there are vastly knowledgable, the level of competency is much higher and more evenly distributed on this forum. Most of the people in this thread are regulars here, and they know their theory. The very first thing I was taught in music theory when I went into college was intervals, intervallic relationships took up the majority of my three semesters of harmony, intervals factored heavily into my six semesters of aural skills, and intervals provided the pitch basis of my composition, counterpoint, and analysis classes. I can pick up another instrument without any prior experience and reliably make a tune with it because it's all intervals. To learn intervals is to understand pitch space. If I memorized the fretboard by a chart like that, I would have to get a new chart for every tuning. Since my ear knows what to look for though, I can do the same work much faster and more intuitively. Intervals aren't the shortcut, they are "The Way".
> 
> Having gotten that out of the way, I have no problem with the content of your diagram, but it is completely unreadable. We'll be fine if we print it on bright paper, you say? Well, all I have is the printer that came free with my laptop. It only prints 8.5"x11", the quality of print isn't very sharp, I am on a student budget so I can't afford nice paper and copious ink, and your diagram would come out as a gray blob. For instructional material, you should ideally be able to print it on a beat up dot matrix printer from 1986 and still have magnificent results.


I agree with you. I didn't mean that learning those things were pointless, but, as someone who aspires to master guitar I believe that I should know every note by name and position even without hearing it. I envy your skill to be able to find notes just by their pitch which is why I memorize the notes (and their sounds) so that I can do just the same.

I don't understand why you're all having trouble reading the diagram. "It's too dark" only tells me that your monitor might not be bright enough. I intended to make this dark so that it wouldn't strain anyone's eyes with the typical White on Black set-up I see almost every where.
And, I guess I should split it into two parts; the flipped and normal sets.


----------



## wespaul (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> Yes I do. But it's worth it. I've seen the end-result of this kind of work and I'm looking forward to being able to play anything I want just by hearing it or thinking it. In any tuning.
> It's not as if I'm trying to learn and deify a set pattern; although that would be accurate only in the case of A to G#/Ab.
> As it's been said by many people through out the ages, "It's better to have it and not need it, than to need it and not have it."



Do you see how much more work and effort it takes to memorize something rather than understanding it? Why memorize note locations when you can understand interval relationships? I'm kind of repeating what others have said, but it's an amazing point. There are countless tunings you can play in, so are you going to memorize each and every one? Or will you put in the work to understand intervals so you can be able to name any note in any tuning?

And thanks to SW for the new quote.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> Exactly!
> But you're right. I did forget exactly where I posted this.
> I do apologize if I've offended those of you who actually know what you're talking about. I realize that I might have come across with a "Holier than though" attitude and for that I apologize again.



No problem. We're all friends here. We try to keep this place free from the attitudes and shoddy information that permeate places like Ultimate Guitar and other corners of the internet that I thankfully cannot remember the names of. We're helpful, but we don't tolerate BS. If everyone here is telling you something similar, it's a good idea to consider what they're saying.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

SchecterWhore said:


> No problem. We're all friends here. We try to keep this place free from the attitudes and shoddy information that permeate places like Ultimate Guitar and other corners of the internet that I thankfully cannot remember the names of. We're helpful, but we don't tolerate BS. If everyone here is telling you something similar, it's a good idea to consider what they're saying.


Heh, I guess it's a bit of Musician's pride talking.
I still don't think Intervals are THE Way, but they are A Way. I've found that there are many roads to reach the same goal, however, the roads others take don't really work well for me. Intervals are great and I love how easy they make playing, but I don't think they're the final say. Music is a lot like math, most of it is accurate, but not everything is known about it. So I'm not going to discount memorization just yet.

BTW: Without memorization practices your brain starts to shut down and can't reason properly. I've done a self study and found that people who're able to memorize things tend to remember more and more often. That's one of the reasons the Matching Card game is so popular for kids as they're learning in their first years of schooling.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

UPDATED
I made the background lighter.


----------



## JustMac (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> UPDATED
> I made the background lighter.


----------



## redstone (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> BTW: Without memorization practices your brain starts to shut down and can't reason properly. I've done a self study and found that people who're able to memorize things tend to remember more and more often. That's one of the reasons the Matching Card game is so popular for kids as they're learning in their first years of schooling.



With poor sensitivity to intervals, the brain only learns about music, not music itself. We're all more or less pitchdeaf and the only cure is focusing on interval recognition. No recognition, no comprehension... no imagination.

There's no use in reasoning when one cannot imagine, recognize, the right premises.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 6, 2013)

redstone said:


> With poor sensitivity to intervals, the brain only learns about music, not music itself. We're all more or less pitchdeaf and the only cure is focusing on interval recognition. No recognition, no comprehension... no imagination.
> 
> There's no use in reasoning when one cannot imagine, recognize, the right premises.


You can't have one without the other. Reason and Imagination go hand in hand. If you were only imaginative you end up with a chaotic mash-up of sounds. If you were only reasonable you end up playing like a robot with no soul.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 6, 2013)




----------



## TeeWX (Nov 6, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> First of all, I never said the "American" school system by itself. Memorization is a system of learning that has been practiced through-out the centuries. You wouldn't be able to read without it.
> You need to get a better opinion of the people that come out of public school.
> Secondly, I play in D Standard tuning (DGCFAD). I have to transpose notes all the time when I want to play something in E Standard and it's just as difficult when I use an Capo. [Floyd Rose Original Tremolo; IF you don't know what this means you should look up how difficult it is to tune a guitar with this bridge and why using a capo is the only quick solution to changing tunings for people who use this bridge.] The whole time I must remember that the original note positions are a whole step up.



I think when I say memorization and you say memorization we are talking about two different things, and that's fine. You aren't actually memorizing every word to be able to read. When you come across new words you're often combining different parts of the word and still figuring out exactly what it means without ever having memorized the word because you've never seen it before. Some things do have to be memorized, but they are often small. Make it easy on yourself, memorize the intervals and the few note finding tricks. On a 7 string guitar there are 84 note locations in the first half of the fretboard alone. It's a lot to handle.

If you're focusing on notes, and you're given a key, you're having to figure out each note of the key as you go. It's probably just going to confuse you and slow you down. In fact I really doubt anyone could use such a method in real time. If you can just figure out the root note and you understand the intervals that make up the chords you're using or the specific scale than you have a lot less things to remember to be able to play all over the fretboard. You'll want to learn scales by the intervals that make them up, not by the notes. The intervals never change, the notes always change. The same note location in one key could be B, and in another Cb, for example. It's really just too many calculations for your brain to handle, let alone when you're playing sixteenth notes at over 200bpm. Notes apply to ONE key/tuning, intervals apply to everything.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 7, 2013)

TeeWX said:


> I think when I say memorization and you say memorization we are talking about two different things, and that's fine. You aren't actually memorizing every word to be able to read. When you come across new words you're often combining different parts of the word and still figuring out exactly what it means without ever having memorized the word because you've never seen it before. Some things do have to be memorized, but they are often small. Make it easy on yourself, memorize the intervals and the few note finding tricks. On a 7 string guitar there are 84 note locations in the first half of the fretboard alone. It's a lot to handle.
> 
> If you're focusing on notes, and you're given a key, you're having to figure out each note of the key as you go. It's probably just going to confuse you and slow you down. In fact I really doubt anyone could use such a method in real time. If you can just figure out the root note and you understand the intervals that make up the chords you're using or the specific scale than you have a lot less things to remember to be able to play all over the fretboard. You'll want to learn scales by the intervals that make them up, not by the notes. The intervals never change, the notes always change. The same note location in one key could be B, and in another Cb, for example. It's really just too many calculations for your brain to handle, let alone when you're playing sixteenth notes at over 200bpm. Notes apply to ONE key/tuning, intervals apply to everything.


Just a fun fact after you mentioned the number of notes, did you know that the Babylonians had a number system of Base 60? (We use Base 10) Now, Imagine having to learn and memorize 60 different symbols for 60 individual numbers. THAT's pointless and excessive.


----------



## TeeWX (Nov 7, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> Just a fun fact after you mentioned the number of notes, did you know that the Babylonians had a number system of Base 60? (We use Base 10) Now, Imagine having to learn and memorize 60 different symbols for 60 individual numbers. THAT's pointless and excessive.



I did not know that! Pretty ridiculous. I wonder why base 10 is so nice with 0-9. It's a smaller list to memorize. But thats not the only reason, drop down to base 2 with something like binary, and the sequences get a little too long for the kind of math we usually do. Finding the most effecient method for doing anything is always key


----------



## JustMac (Nov 7, 2013)

Is it a bad idea to think a lot in scales, rather than intervals? I understand intervallic relationships just as well but I think it's mostly habit at this point. I don't _feel_ that it's a hindrance but is this a dangerous path?


----------



## djyngwie (Nov 7, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> Just a fun fact after you mentioned the number of notes, did you know that the Babylonians had a number system of Base 60? (We use Base 10) Now, Imagine having to learn and memorize 60 different symbols for 60 individual numbers. THAT's pointless and excessive.


This is why we still have 60 minutes to an hour and 60 seconds to a minute.

But: there's a logical subsystem to the way those 60 symbols were represented. So, that's not so bad. The crazy part is learning the equivalent of a our basic multiplication table. I had to memorize a total of 10x9=90 different multiplication results while growing up, learning to do basic math. That's doable (well, it was for me anyway). But a babylonian would have to memorize 60x59=3540 such multiplication results (generally involving much larger numbers). That's a pretty big undertaking. (That said, I'm not sure the babylonians did multiplication this way).


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Nov 7, 2013)

JustMac said:


> Is it a bad idea to think a lot in scales, rather than intervals? I understand intervallic relationships just as well but I think it's mostly habit at this point. I don't _feel_ that it's a hindrance but is this a dangerous path?



Not necessarily. If somebody tells you "this is G minor", then plays a phrase and asks you what the last note was, can you tell them that it's a D? In music, it's never "instead of," it's always "as well as". Learn the intervals, learn the scales, learn the notes, learn the harmony.


----------



## Solodini (Nov 8, 2013)

JustMac said:


> Is it a bad idea to think a lot in scales, rather than intervals? I understand intervallic relationships just as well but I think it's mostly habit at this point. I don't _feel_ that it's a hindrance but is this a dangerous path?



Thinking a scale is a series of intervals, they just happen to be all 2nds. As long as you're aware of the notes, not just blasting a boxed fingering you should be pretty adaptable to intervals when you need them. 

Try playing scalar stuff with the notes moved to other octaves and look at what intervals this forms. Putting every other note up or down the octave will give you 7ths or 9ths and 3rds. Try playing a scale but with every other note above the octave i.e. tonic, 2nd above octave, 3rd, 4th above octave, 5th, 6th above octave, 7th, double octave. Work out the intervals between each of those. Between each note in pitch order you'll have 3rds. Move every other one of those down an octave i.e. tonic, 3rd down octave, 5th, 7th down octave, 9th, 11th down octave, 13th. What intervals do you have in between?

It's a bit of an excessive exercise but you could stumble across some cool ways of splitting an idea into a couple of voices.


----------



## JustMac (Nov 8, 2013)

SchecterWhore said:


> Not necessarily. If somebody tells you "this is G minor", then plays a phrase and asks you what the last note was, can you tell them that it's a D? In music, it's never "instead of," it's always "as well as". Learn the intervals, learn the scales, learn the notes, learn the harmony.



In that case I'd almost certainly recognise it as the "fifth" and then remember that D is the fifth "interval" of G. I think it's just my train of thought thinking in that order (scale-interval-note name). If it finishes in a different octave than it started, I notice I have more difficulty deciphering, say, a sharp 5 and a 6th. I guess that's neglection on my part, of my inner "ear" though. Definitely something for me to work on....in which case I think I've answered my own question


----------



## Konfyouzd (Nov 8, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> You know for as much as you people are dissing on this, I'd think you are lazy players or just scared of learning a tiny bit of theory.



Hand me a guitar, tell me how it's tuned and give me a starting pitch... I'll tell you where the other 11 are from that point without a chart... GUARANTEED


----------



## Konfyouzd (Nov 8, 2013)

Solodini said:


> Thinking a scale is a series of intervals, they just happen to be all 2nds. As long as you're aware of the notes, not just blasting a boxed fingering you should be pretty adaptable to intervals when you need them.
> 
> Try playing scalar stuff with the notes moved to other octaves and look at what intervals this forms. Putting every other note up or down the octave will give you 7ths or 9ths and 3rds. Try playing a scale but with every other note above the octave i.e. tonic, 2nd above octave, 3rd, 4th above octave, 5th, 6th above octave, 7th, double octave. Work out the intervals between each of those. Between each note in pitch order you'll have 3rds. Move every other one of those down an octave i.e. tonic, 3rd down octave, 5th, 7th down octave, 9th, 11th down octave, 13th. What intervals do you have in between?
> 
> It's a bit of an excessive exercise but you could stumble across some cool ways of splitting an idea into a couple of voices.



Now THIS I need to try...


----------



## JustMac (Nov 8, 2013)

Solodini said:


> Thinking a scale is a series of intervals, they just happen to be all 2nds. As long as you're aware of the notes, not just blasting a boxed fingering you should be pretty adaptable to intervals when you need them.
> 
> Try playing scalar stuff with the notes moved to other octaves and look at what intervals this forms. Putting every other note up or down the octave will give you 7ths or 9ths and 3rds. Try playing a scale but with every other note above the octave i.e. tonic, 2nd above octave, 3rd, 4th above octave, 5th, 6th above octave, 7th, double octave. Work out the intervals between each of those. Between each note in pitch order you'll have 3rds. Move every other one of those down an octave i.e. tonic, 3rd down octave, 5th, 7th down octave, 9th, 11th down octave, 13th. What intervals do you have in between?



If you jump from a root to second, but play it up an octave, is it not still really a second instead of a ninth, due to no third being played somewhere in between? I'm just thinking this because of how, say, an add9 chord requires a third to distinguish it from being a sus2...i think 

That's a really cool idea, I just had a go at that suggestion, I can already see how shifting octaves really helps with dynamics in sound, as well as encouraging adventurous use of the fretboard, with string skipping and less reliance on following shapes and all that. Cheers Sol!


----------



## Solodini (Nov 8, 2013)

If a 2nd is extended over the octave it's a 9th, in terms of the raw interval. You're correct in the context of chords though, yes.

You're welcome.


----------



## Given To Fly (Nov 14, 2013)

012478...that "pitch class set" takes care of the intervals and makes playing the guitar much much harder....


----------



## InfinityCollision (Nov 14, 2013)

wespaul said:


> Why memorize note locations when you can understand interval relationships?





If I absolutely insisted on learning the fretboard via memorization (which to be fair can be a good approach for a beginner), I'd use something like this that lets you drill on the material in different ways (and helps you learn the staff at the same time), or the equivalent exercise on musictheory.net (which allows you to edit tunings and supports 7-strings). Even then, ideally it's paired with interval training so that you're getting the full package and have the best possible understanding of the fretboard. Straight memorization from a chart is a poor teaching method in my experience, especially if the material is subject to change.



TeeWX said:


> I wonder why base 10 is so nice with 0-9.


Because you've been counting that way your whole life, and to an extent because you have ten fingers. If you counted in base 60 for a while it wouldn't be that bad. I do a decent amount of work with hexadecimal and it was tricky at first, but I've gotten used to it now.

It's kind of like reading sheet music in a different clef. The first time I had to read tenor clef was a pain in the ass, but now it's just as easy as reading bass clef (what I started out on). The same happened when I learned to read treble clef. I never read alto clef but it's just up a third from tenor clef so it's not so bad.



JustMac said:


> Is it a bad idea to think a lot in scales, rather than intervals? I understand intervallic relationships just as well but I think it's mostly habit at this point. I don't _feel_ that it's a hindrance but is this a dangerous path?



To expand on what SW said I'd caution against thinking in this manner to the exclusion or near-exclusion of thinking in intervals, because scalar thinking tends to (surprise surprise) limit your thinking to notes in that scale. Keys and scales give you a structural framework, intervals are your building blocks.


----------



## Syrinx (Nov 15, 2013)

Ravvij said:


> First of all, I never said the "American" school system by itself. Memorization is a system of learning that has been practiced through-out the centuries. You wouldn't be able to read without it.


I don't need to memorize every word in order to read something.


----------



## Ravvij (Nov 17, 2013)

Syrinx said:


> I don't need to memorize every word in order to read something.


Actually you do, but it's not the same. You do memorize words but not because you read them. You learn to speak before you read and your mind stores the series of sounds to be recalled at a moment's notice. Once you're reading you begin to memorize all over again but it's reenforcing your vocabulary in a much more structured way. You wouldn't be able to write if you didn't memorize at least 1000 words. You also wouldn't even be able to guess what a new word is unless you have some prior knowledge of the sounds of that word or a similar one.
The same could be said of playing music. Music is a language of sounds as well, but requires much more skill to "speak". (possibly be cause it has so many more sounds than we are capable of fully understanding.)
Anyone can write music, just like anyone can transliterate another language. It's being able to carry on a conversation in that language that requires lots of different kinds of memorization and stimulation.


----------

