# 2 note per string arpeggios - Paul Gilbert style!



## Cabinet (Dec 5, 2010)

I'm going to write down a method of creating and playing arpeggios in the same manner as Paul Gilbert. These arpeggios don't fit the idea of sweep picking, instead they are based on 2 notes for a string, picked or using legato. I've found that using this idea has given me a different way to play arpeggios, it's a lot easier to play arpeggios that are more than 3 notes, as well as get from one place to another quickly. So lets start.

First, it'll help you if you know a bit of chord theory, so you can start creating your own wacky ways of playing these and will understand what I'm talking about a little better. 
We'll start with a Em7. It contains the notes E, G, B and D. So, instead of trying to sweep a alteration of that chord, we can break it down for two notes per string.

e|-------------------------------------
B|-------------------------------------
G|-------------------------------------
D|-------------------------------------
A|----------7--10---------------------
E|--7--10-----------------------------

This simple shape contains the exact same notes as an Em7. It's easy to memorize, easy to play, and fits everywhere on the neck. I recommend you practice playing it ascending and descending octaves, all you have to do is shift up the pattern on different strings and higher frets.

Lets take another chord. Here's one I really, although I'm not too sure what the name is. I -think- it's a GMaj7 sus 4. It contains the notes G, C, D, and F#.
Here is the two note per string pattern

e|-------------------------------------
B|-------------------------------------
G|-------------------------------------
D|------------12--16-----------------------
A|---10--15--------------------------------
E|-------------------------------------

As you can see, it's a bit of a stretch. But it will get you to those higher frets in a few 8th or 16th notes. Here's a more expanded version with an added 3rd and 4th interval at the top. All I'm doing is stacking octaves.

e|----------------------------------------19--20--19----
B|-------------------------------15--20---------------20
G|----------------------12--17--------------------------
D|-------------12--16-----------------------------------
A|----10--15---------------------------------------------
E|--------------------------------------------------------

I really like this last one because it sounds extremely spacey, I think it's because of the Major 7th and 4th intervals.

Here's the video that brought this whole technique to light for me


----------



## Sang-Drax (Dec 5, 2010)

Paul Gilbert's awesome.


----------



## Mr. Big Noodles (Dec 5, 2010)

It's all just intervals. As long as you know what chord you're in and which notes in the chord you're playing, this should be second nature. I have a riff that uses this sort of concept, actually. It keeps one tone common and builds the half-diminished chords off of that note, assuming that it's a different chord member each time. I got the idea from a Debussy piece, in which he does basically the same thing with dominant chords. It's a pretty good exercise for chord building and inversion.







That B/Cb on the bottom is the common tone throughout. In the first measure, it's the third of the chord. In the second measure, it's the seventh. Third measure, B is obviously the root. Fourth measure, it's the fifth.

You can, obviously, extend these across the fretboard.






I think of this in terms or root, third, fifth, seventh, root, third, fifth, etc. I know the interval distance between any given note in the chord, so I have no problem conceptualizing these arpeggios. This chart basically represents the thought process:






Of course, this only goes up to the seventh, but if you're dealing with thirteenth chords, you're probably at the level where you can figure out the rest yourself. I just omitted anything larger than a seventh here, because things would get cluttered and confusing.

I think both the OP and Paul Gilbert are correct in saying that most guitarists equate arpeggios with sweeping. The guitar is a very pattern-oriented instrument, so it makes sense: your fingers connect a shape with an idea, and you pretty much go with it. I try to think of things in terms of telling my hands what to do so that they're not doing the thinking for me (at least when I'm composing; learning and performing are different).


----------



## Necky379 (Dec 5, 2010)

that video was pretty cool. i like the part about octaves at the end, didnt really think of things like that before.


----------



## getaway_fromme (Dec 6, 2010)

As Mr. Gilbert probably agrees, Octaves with tons of distortion is the coolest effect ever for melodies. This is awesome.


----------



## theclap (Dec 8, 2010)

That's pretty funny I just saw this video on youtube the other day. I immediately started applying this to my playing I like the string skipping and thinking of the neck in octaves. I've seen a lot of shred dudes, the one that comes to mind is JP, teach the same technniques in videos by playing melodic phrases in the octaves, but I've never seen anyone break it down so logical as Paul does. I find playing diagnol more natural and a lot more impressive looking lol. a lot of the best jazz guys play the same way a la birelli lagrene and wes montgomery. To me playing diagnally makes the most since as opposed to horizontal because then you are just looking for the same note on the fretboard and just repeating a pattern, adjusting properly to the B string. Another guy who gets this concept very well is Frank Gambale.


----------



## Skanky (Dec 8, 2010)

I've always been a diagonal player - after watching this vid, I'm glad I learned things this way. 

I've been working a lot lately though on learning the same scales in the horizontal direction.

I'd say both are equally important. I sure wish I had the chops that Paul has though!


----------

