So let's have this CAGED conversation...

[Sascha Franck]

By that logic C in the 13th position from low to high would be possible how?

Here you are:

E to F would be index if the middle/ring are anchored at 14/15. And that's a no go.

Correct. That's why you don't play the E on E6. The entire pattern spans 2 octaves and a third, though - just as any other "in position" scale pattern (should've possibly added that to the list of criteria).

Then a and d string both would be index middle ring (12 14 15)

No, they're middle, ring, pinky and 14-15-17 each. With your pattern, you'd left 13th position already.

G string would be I m p (12 14 16)

No, it's just 14-16 (middle, pinky)

B would be I r (13 15)

Correct.

And high e would be same as low e ...I I r

No, the E is covered on the B string already. And it's not covered at all on E6 (see above), which would break the in position criteria.

This pattern suits all the criteria.

Just don't get mad at me - I didn't come up with that nonsense. And as said, I'm almost sure that Leavitt was aware of all that just being a rather academic, mind- and finger-twisting thing. Just try to play the pattern as I did in the video. Actually took me around 5 minutes to get it done even remotely in time because it's so horrible. Yet, it fits all criteria perfectly.

 

[Sascha Franck]

The Reddit guitar experts advise against knowing the notes on a guitar neck in lieu of studying the interval structures and just moving them around. While that info is essential, ignoring the note names redefines idiotic.

IMO these are two different issues/aspects. One being playing oriented, the other being a general music one.
Once you're in play mode, it's obviously a fantastic idea to make use of the easy transposibility of the guitar, so you rather "think" in intervals and their shapes.
But when it comes to communication, reading sheets, exploring things and what not, it's as well sort of essential to know the note names.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Just dug out the Leavitt books. So he breaks his rules by stretching both index and pinky for that 13th position thing.

Oh, does he? Didn't remember that. However, 13th position does work nonetheless (see above), it's just super-awkward. Too bad Leavitt isn't alive anymore, otherwise we could have punished him from breaking his rules - by forcing him to play the "real" 13th position up and down and in all interval pattern permutations up to 180BPM/16ths.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Here you are:





Correct. That's why you don't play the E on E6. The entire pattern spans 2 octaves and a third, though - just as any other "in position" scale pattern (should've possibly added that to the list of criteria).



No, they're middle, ring, pinky and 14-15-17 each. With your pattern, you'd left 13th position already.



No, it's just 14-16 (middle, pinky)



Correct.



No, the E is covered on the B string already. And it's not covered at all on E6 (see above), which would break the in position criteria.

This pattern suits all the criteria.

Just don't get mad at me - I didn't come up with that nonsense. And as said, I'm almost sure that Leavitt was aware of all that just being a rather academic, mind- and finger-twisting thing. Just try to play the pattern as I did in the video. Actually took me around 5 minutes to get it done even remotely in time because it's so horrible. Yet, it fits all criteria perfectly.

We’re talking about two different things I get back to it when I’m up again in the morning

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

Caged is an unnecessary rehash of stuff that already has been organized in the musical system, and the nature of the instrument.
It’s like deviding the letters of the alphabet in 5 groups and declare you have found a system to help people spell words.

The nature of the instrument is that equal shapes lead to equal sound of intervals. There is no reason to cage (gotta love words ) that nature into 5 options and call it a system……other then the need for a vibe word to sell a book or a video.

We have a musical system, guitar is tuned a certain way…for GS, spend a week trying to understand it. Then seeing the shapes of caged happens, as a result of your understanding, it is not something that drives understanding.

 

[Sascha Franck]

We’re talking about two different things I get back to it when I’m up again in the morning

Well, you wanted C major scale in 13th position...

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Well, you wanted C major scale in 13th position...

You’re right. I violated his “rules” with e to f index logic. This way makes sense.

Funnily when it comes to minor he differs 9 positions.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Caged is nothing but an unnecessary rehash of stuff that already has been organized in the musical system, and the nature of the instrument.
It’s like deviding the letters of the alphabet in 5 groups and declare you have found a system to help people spell words.

I don't exactly agree. I mean, well, ugh - I do of course somewhat agree, but by that logic, bog standard barré chords would possibly fall under that definition, too.
The idea behind both is: Take an already wellknown shape and move it. Then have a look at how you can modify it. And either model doesn't start with whatever "proper" musical model but with a model working well on guitar in open position.
Add to this that the guitar lends to these kinda approaches because of the easy transposibility.
So, I think that's a pretty valid idea in general, especially as not-so-advanced folks seem to get it quite easily.

What I personally (<-!) however don't exactly get is why some people don't make a "transition" to another more generally valid approach at one point in time. I mean, 4-part 7th chords (likely in their drop 2 incarnations) is something you can easily transfer to other instruments. Same for triads. It's also a means of general music communication. "C-shape in 7th position" doesn't make sense to anyone but a guitar player. Add to this that if you really want to get deeper into things, you will likely have to learn note relations, intervals, scale degrees, inversions and what not anyway.

Whatever, quite some high profiled players seem think all the way in the CAGED system, so it can't be complete nonsense. And in the end, it's mainly just a different POV of one and the same thing, possibly leading you to different playing ideas.

One thing I just never got is how the CAGED model would help you much with any scale related things. Sure, I somehow get it, but I think that more generally applicable ways to organize notes are a better tool.

 

[Eagle]

One issue with caged is I remember when tab books started to be published in the late 80s . The notes are often correct but the tab is pure 5 position bullshit. It was one reason I only use it for location.
Far Beyond the Sun tabbed out in 5 box positions is unplayable. Also no ready access to seeing it played. Troy Grady talks eloquently about this.
As a rock player at the time I wanted to see it to understand the mechanics. I also remember seeing Holdsworth play and trying to reconcile the sound with what I was seeing.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Funnily when it comes to minor he differs 9 positions.

Don't remember that, either (should possibly look around where my copies are, I think I haven't seen them in almost decades). Maybe because there's some interval "issues" possibly forcing you to break one or more of the "position rules" (such as either having to stretch out with both index and pinky) - too lazy to explore them all right now.
Anyhow, I still remember how back then I really applauded the guys efforts (I think he's really been kinda the first to explore things that thoroughly for guitars) but got put off at one point in time because I just realized how over the top some things were.

But then, one of his points has likely been to make things universally usable. Let's just get back to C major in 13th (or 1st) position. A full stop F barre chord is located just there, too, so we could possibly agree that it's a sort of relevant position in the realm of C major. And when you then start to embellish the chord by throwing in some scale notes here and there without leaving position, you willl likely end up with some things that just happen to be from the C major scale in 13th position.

 

[AFKAEjay(retired)]

Add to this that the guitar lends to these kinda approaches because of the easy transposibility.
So, I think that's a pretty valid idea in general, especially as not-so-advanced folks seem to get it quite easily.

I was (at least trying) to say in my post, that the general concept that movement of a shape results in the same intervals, is …well….fact..nature of the instrument. So understanding that, low hanging fruit. But Caged uses that nature, Caged is not the principle behind it.

Whatever, quite some high profiled players seem think all the way in the CAGED system, so it can't be complete nonsense. And in the end, it's mainly just a different POV of one and the same thing, possibly leading you to different playing ideas.

Hmm…examples?
My hypothese for players who really “see the neck”:They see “Caged”, but as a subset of a broader total package.
I also see the shapes of Caged, I just don’t call it Caged, and don’t limit the concept of moving stuff around to it.

 

[TSJMajesty]

If you haven't done this already, take a simple 3 or 4 chord song like Knockin On Heaven's Door, and play it in G in the open position using the standard shapes. Now put the capo at the third fret and again play it in G but this time your first chord will be an open E shape. Figure out the remaining chords. Then capo to the fifth fret. Now the first chord is a D shape. Figure out the remaining chords. Continue up the neck. Try this with more complex tunes, maybe something like Wild World. Don't worry about trying to incorporate CAGED into soloing. Just get really grounded and clear about how all these shapes fit together on the fingerboard.

That is a very simple, yet excellent idea!

 

[TSJMajesty]

Courtesy of Randy Vincent (Julian Lage's teacher)

Let’s start with a “universal” scale fingering system that simplifies the fingerings into just three items that can be used to play all four scale types in all keys anywhere on the fingerboard (thus the term “universal”).

In classical theory scales are usually broken into two halves of four notes each called “tetrachords.”

I get what he's saying, but what is this "all 4 scale types" comment? Those 3 fingerings- w-w, w-h, & h-w, don't cover a harmonic minor scale.

Saying "all 4 scale types" implies, by the use of the word, "all", that there are only 4 scale types.

But whatever he means by that, those 4 don't include harmonic minor, because you need a minor third interval. (Maybe he covers it later, but that's as far as I've read, so far.)

 

[Eagle]

I also spent some considerable time working on this as it matches my own self taught approach.

Allan Holdsworth's 10 Most Usable Scales - Fretboard Knowledge

Allan Holdsworth was one of the greatest musicians of the 21st century. His musical depth in improvisation was second to none and understood by few. When a REH video came out in which he talked about his "probably ten of the most usable scales", it impacted heavily.

fretboardknowledge.com

Also Alan didn’t really have “avoid” notes in a scale. If it was in he was going to use it .
I use a caged grid in my head to remind myself of this stuff. As long as you are 100% with the major scale and the new scale spelling.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

I get what he's saying, but what is this "all 4 scale types" comment? Those 3 fingerings- w-w, w-h, & h-w, don't cover a harmonic minor scale.

Saying "all 4 scale types" implies, by the use of the word, "all", that there are only 4 scale types.

But whatever he means by that, those 4 don't include harmonic minor, because you need a minor third interval. (Maybe he covers it later, but that's as far as I've read, so far.)

Means I only photo’d the unaltered major scale. If you’d like I’ll do the others later

 

[TSJMajesty]

There is no reason to cage (gotta love words ) that nature into 5 options and call it a system……other then the need for a vibe word to sell a book or a video.

1000%

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

I also spent some considerable time working on this as it matches my own self taught approach.

Allan Holdsworth's 10 Most Usable Scales - Fretboard Knowledge

Allan Holdsworth was one of the greatest musicians of the 21st century. His musical depth in improvisation was second to none and understood by few. When a REH video came out in which he talked about his "probably ten of the most usable scales", it impacted heavily.

fretboardknowledge.com

Also Alan didn’t really have “avoid” notes in a scale. If it was in he was going to use it .

I think most of us worked through a bunch of different approaches. To get to one gumbo of them that works for us.

These days the only thing I care about is lines and how to connect them.
Scales as a frame for improvisation I completely abandoned.

Plus I place extremely high emphasis on what note location don’t trip the flow. And does the line sound better on this or another string set.

 

[Eagle]

I think most of us worked through a bunch of different approaches. To get to one gumbo of them that works for us.

These days the only thing I care about is lines and how to connect them.
Scales as a frame for improvisation I completely abandoned.

Plus I place extremely high emphasis on what note location don’t trip the flow. And does the line sound better on this or another string set.

That’s only possible because you have internalised all this to a point of not needing to think about it.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Hmm…examples?

Guthrie Trapp:



Molly Miller (I like her quite a bit):



Marty Schwartz:



I also seem to remember John Mayer, Andy Wood and and whom not talking about.

However - with either of them, I always happen to think that things could be explained easier in other ways. So I'm in no way defending the system at all (which you should know by now)

I also see the shapes of Caged, I just don’t call it Caged, and don’t limit the concept of moving stuff around to it.

Exactly the same for me.
Also, there's situations when I have to transpose open chord stuff and go like "how the hell am I going to play this without a capo?" - that's certainly when it comes in handy having learned to move those basic open chord shapes up and down the neck as good as possible. But as you, I'd never use it as a means of organisation.

 

[TSJMajesty]

And does the line sound better on this or another string set.

For me, it's, "What's the easiest place to play it?"

I'm mostly kidding.

I've been working on string-skipping arpeggios, and they are much easier to play using hammer-ons/pull-offs, but I'm going for an "all notes picked" sound, so that's the way I'm practicing it.