| Author |
Topic: A Leavitt Question |
John Ficken
From:
Sunny Southern California, USA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 9:52 am |
|
Hi guys! I'm in the begining stages of puzzling out the Leavitt tuning for 6-string NP steel, spelled C#-E-G-Bb-C-d (low to high).
In reading past threads, I have seen the experts in this field list a dozen or more chord possibilities from one position. I have reasoned that some of these are parital chord diades, which can then "imply" a full chord in a ensemble setting, where another instrument picks up the root, etc.
My question is this: What full triads do I get with what notes with a straight bar? Lets say for the sake of clarity (for me   ) that we use the low "E" at third fret as a starting point...any takers?
On a side note (no pun--really!  ), I have found this tuning brings to light just how sloppy my playing is. I guess I didn't realize this, but in the past, I have tuned to "strum" type tunings, i.e., open chords, and I (apparently) tend to slop my way through them, as just about any note you hit sounds good with what you're playing. Not so with the Leavitt--you're either right, or very wrong!
_________________
OK...I'm gonna try and tune this thing...again! |
|
|
 |
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 12:21 pm
|
|
Just for starters, here's some chords found on the open strings.
C#dim7, C7b9, F#7b9, A7b9, Eb7b9, C9, Ebmaj7 or maj6, Gm, Bb6, Em, Ab#5, Cm9, Eb13, F#7#11 and there's still more.
You're right, most are partials and you have to be VERY careful about the string groups or you'll play some really bad notes, but, the result is worth the extra hassle.
Mike |
|
|
|
John Ficken
From:
Sunny Southern California, USA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 2:56 pm
|
|
Thanks, Mike--I think it was a recent post you made that described that huge list of chord possibilities.
Now, I was taught at one time that it takes a triad, with at least a root and a third to define it, to make a chord.
With this in mind, if I pick up my guitar and start grabbing various groups of 3, 4, or 5 strings, what do I end up with? How many chords/which notes/what are their names, etc.
And what chord does the whole mess spell anyhow?
Signed,
Confused in California
_________________
OK...I'm gonna try and tune this thing...again! |
|
|
|
Bill Hatcher
From:
Atlanta Ga. USA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 5:08 pm
|
|
| John Ficken wrote: |
Thanks, Mike--Now, I was taught at one time that it takes a triad, with at least a root and a third to define it, to make a chord.
With this in mind, if I pick up my guitar and start grabbing various groups of 3, 4, or 5 strings, what do I end up with? How many chords/which notes/what are their names, etc.
And what chord does the whole mess spell anyhow?
Signed,
Confused in California |
Don't worry about all the rules and such about music and if a chord can have only two notes and what the names are and what the whole mess is. Just start finding chords on your guitar and matching them with the chord progressions you hear in your head. All the musical rules can be an energy/creativity vampire. |
|
|
|
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 5:58 pm
|
|
What makes the Leavitt tuning so good is the way you can use chord partials instead of full chords. I know you'd like to play a Cmaj7 with a C, E, G and B in it, but all you can get is E, G and B which is also Em. The way Bill (Leavitt) looked at it was, you don't need roots when you have a bass player. I think that's why I never looked much further than the original 6 strings. With Bill Hatcher's extended 10 string version, he can get more roots and fuller chord voicings. It all depends on what you want.
Do you have my CD and TAB book? If you do, you can just look at the chord name, see where it's played and memorize it. Then when you need a Bb7#5 you'll know it's on the 2nd fret on strings 2, 3 and 5. The actual notes look more like a D7 chord but they can funtion as a Bb9#5 as well.
Make some tracks for yourself in Band in a Box and just start playing. You'll get it figured out eventually. |
|
|
|
ebb
From:
nj
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 6:10 pm
|
|
| i really like the partial suggestions, even without a bass player, better than the fully formed chords. i think it is more instructive in voice leading and the implicit importance of the tritone. |
|
|
|
John Ficken
From:
Sunny Southern California, USA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 6:30 pm
|
|
Bill and Mike:
Thank you both for your help and responses!
I really want to go the direction of being a chord melody type player, and I love Jazz and Standards songs, as well as traditional Hawaiian playing. Hearing what you guys do has convinced me that this is the direction I need to go.
_________________
OK...I'm gonna try and tune this thing...again! |
|
|
|
Bill Hatcher
From:
Atlanta Ga. USA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 7:10 pm
|
|
John.
If this is the way you want to go then you must have the chord progressions in your musical vocabulary to begin with. Just having the tuning there won't do you a bit of good unless you have the chord movements and the connecting phrases in your mind first.
I know what I want to play. I hear the chord voicings, I hear the substutitions, I hear what I want to do on the first ending to get me back to the verse and on the second ending to get me to the bridge. I spend my efforts just finding these on the guitar and coming up with the best combination I can of the chord voicings and good sensible fingerings and smooth ways to play it so that it sounds very natural and relaxed. Even if you have to sit down and write out the chord melody or the chords to the song first then that is at least a plan of attack.
To get to this point, you have to do a study of chord progressions how ever you can. You can get you some books on chord progressions and chord voicings or you can get you some records by some great musicians you like to listen to who play great chord work and listen to them and analyze the chord voicing they use. I would suggest Bill Evans, Johnny Smith, Wes Montgomery, Jim Hall, Oscar Peterson and a host of others. There is a vocabulary that they all share that will give you the foundations of chord work.
Best to you. |
|
|
|
Papa Joe Pollick
From:
Swanton, Ohio
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 7:20 pm
|
|
 Mike I have ordered your CD and the course from b0b,it's on back order.Really lookin forward to getting started on it.
I have the option to put the Leavitt tuning on a 6 string or 8 string.If I put it on a 8 string what would the other 2 strings be? Or should I just use the 6 string? Thanks PJ. |
|
|
|
Jeff Au Hoy
From:
Honolulu, Hawai'i
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 8:01 pm
|
|
I hope no one takes offense at this, but if I endeavored to be a chord melody player on the steel guitar... I'd much rather look into pedal steel.
The Leavitt tuning is a beautiful thing, but with a given set of changes, you're going to be playing the same voicings under the melody every time. And I think to come up with a melodic chord solo over those same changes would be very, very, very challenging... if not impossible. No problem with that, of course. |
|
|
|
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 8:21 pm
|
|
Jeff,
To me, the Leavitt tuning is a pianistic way of playing lap steel, that is to say, a new string group for every melody note. This is something that was never available until Bill created this tuning. I also agree that you lose a lot of the beauty of the sliding sound associated with lap steel when you use it. Although many players with extended tunings have been able to incorporate more than the 6 string version allows.
Lap steel is a unique and personal instrument and if I had a double neck, one neck would be C6/A7 and the other Leavitt so I could have the best of both worlds.
Jeff, did you hear Bill's verson of "The Nearness of You?" If Bill Leavitt were still around, I'm sure he would be amazed that such a beautiful chord solo could be created "without" pedals. |
|
|
|
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 16 Apr 2007 8:24 pm
|
|
| Pap Joe, Stay with the 6 string version for now. Mine and Bill's material is all for the 6 string steel. After you get comfortable with that, you might want to try an 8 string version. |
|
|
|
John Ficken
From:
Sunny Southern California, USA
|
Posted 17 Apr 2007 8:19 am
|
|
Hi Jeff!
I also have necks tuned to C#min, E7th and C6. Each has its advantages, and very often the mood I'm in will dictate which guitar I pick up.
My thinking on the Leavitt is to maximize my personal enjoyment, sound and song recognizability (is that even a word?), as I will be playing alone. Hence, the "pianistic" idea set forth by Mike I.
At this point in my life, I'm not a musician, just a campfire player, and I don't have time to be anything more. I do have time to learn a few songs well, and be able to play them in a manner that friends and family will know what it is I'm playing--does this make sense? 
_________________
OK...I'm gonna try and tune this thing...again! |
|
|
|
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 17 Apr 2007 2:11 pm
|
|
| Makes all the sense in the world. If you audience can't appreciate and recognize what you're doing, what's the point. |
|
|
|
Jeff Au Hoy
From:
Honolulu, Hawai'i
|
Posted 17 Apr 2007 2:41 pm
|
|
| Quote: |
| If you audience can't appreciate and recognize what you're doing, what's the point. |
Personal enjoyment, fulfillment? |
|
|
|
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 17 Apr 2007 3:13 pm
|
|
Jeff,
True as well. I was just responding to his statement about playing for friends. |
|
|
|
Scott Thomas
|
Posted 17 Apr 2007 5:18 pm
|
|
John, (and if Mike Ihde doesn't mind)--
I will be glad to give you my copy of Mike's teaching materials "A Different Slant" w/CDs.
I have had it for a couple of years now without ever getting into it. My initial sense of the Leavitt is that one must be willing to delve into it to really give it its due.
I'd rather see you getting started in it since you are showing so much interest, which I think is great!
pm me your address if you'd like it. |
|
|
|
Mike Ihde
From:
Boston, MA
|
Posted 17 Apr 2007 6:37 pm
|
|
Scott,
I'd rather see someone enjoy Bill Leavitt's creation than make a few bucks. |
|
|
|
