neutron619 Posted 11 hours ago Posted 11 hours ago Hello chaps. I'm a very occasional poster here, although I lurk a bit from time to time - please be kind! I'm trying to work out what direction to take my playing and I'm looking for advice. I've been trying to learn electric guitar for about the last 4 years. I've been doing pretty well and am approaching an "intermediate" kind of ability (at least in rhythm playing), but I know I still have practice to do / things to learn before I can properly back that up. For example: I've been able to play a few services at my local church when they've had no other instrumentalists available, but I'm not always particularly comfortable doing it. I'm usually their bassist and often in the "just me" situations I'll still sometimes play piano in preference to guitar, depending on the music. I also sometimes play rhythm in a little trio I've got going with a couple of mates, but again, they really prefer me to play bass, as do I. So, mostly with the church thing in mind, I started looking at the start of the year for an electro-acoustic, thinking that having one would probably be another string to my bow as far as church band goes. Some of the repertoire just seems a more suited to acoustic tone (although I have a Helix and various other bits and pieces for tone shaping, so an acoustic would be a nice-to-have rather than a necessity). Not liking the size of a dreadnought (or anything large) I picked out a nice Alvarez parlour guitar and put a deposit down on it, started saving up etc. Due to delivery / customs issues, it won't be here before October, but I thought I'd use the time to ponder whether I really wanted to spend the money and I'm in no particular rush. I even put some 11's on my LP to improve my finger strength a bit in anticipation of its arrival (it's working so far!). Obviously the waiting time has given me space to think about other things. The main thing is obviously whether spending £400-500 on a(n acoustic) guitar is the best use of the money - a decision made harder by my choice last year to upgrade my other guitar - a strat. Moving from a cheapo £100 strat copy to a Fender Player was something of an eye-opener. Before that purchase I was again concerned whether it would be a wise use of the money - would I end up with the same thing at 6x the cost for the name on the headstock? Afterwards, I saw and felt the difference: playability, tone, tuning stability etc. - all vastly better (even on a MIM) than anything I'd ever played before. So now I'm sitting here wondering whether, rather than buying that acoustic, I should be looking to upgrade my current LP - an Epiphone Stuido LT (pickups Warmanized) instead. Up until recently, I've always been really happy with it. In fact, even post-new-strat, I've tended to use it in church as the tone is fuller and it just seems to work better in lots of songs. But it does also have it's annoyances - tuning stability has never been great (which a new nut didn't cure) and although I've made one or two aesthetic modifications, it was always "what I could afford" rather than "what I wanted" (or at least, "could justify"). On the flip side, it's got some humbucker-sized P90's in it and sounds amazing with the other kit I have. Having moved away from humbuckers, I'd worry that I'd be going back in a direction I'd tried and disliked if I upgraded to a better quality Epiphone (or simillar) that had them. And if I put the P90s in a new guitar, why am I upgrading at all? I'd also be giving up - at least for the foreseeable - the prospect of developing my playing into acoustic guitar and learning the styles and techniques for that. So there's a bit of new kit desire going on, but also a wider question about developing as a player and whether it's better to focus more on what I'm doing already, or branching out into something new. I'd appreciate hearing any experience / opinions. Thanks. Quote
Dad3353 Posted 10 hours ago Posted 10 hours ago (edited) 1 hour ago, neutron619 said: ... I'd appreciate hearing any experience / opinions. ... Jack of all trades, Master of none..? It sounds as if you're doing very well, with a quite eclectic set of strings to your bows. I think, however, that it might be fruitful to stand back a bit, chill a little, and concentrate on one main 'work in progress', whilst still maintaining 'contact' with your current acquired skills. I'd suggest that a spell on the acoustic would be a Good Thing, in general, and will serve you in good stead for all the rest. You have a very decent stable of equipment (no real 'quality' issues with what you've described...); an acoustic will complement this, and give you something to make progress on, if you can keep your mind on the goal that you set yourself. I'm not a church-goer, myself, but an acoustic would fit very well in that setting, as an option over your other instrumental arrangements. If, by 'rhythm playing', you mean strumming chords from charts, that, in itself, is a very healthy skill to have. It can be developed into a whole host of styles, around picking, chord-melody, drop-two chords, alternative rhythms... The list is endless. Whilst waiting for reception of an acoustic, leave the Epiphone 'upgrades' and try thinking of playing it in a new style, as if it were an acoustic. Never mind the 'tone', just the approach to chord choice, right-hand techniques to try, new sets of substitute chords etc. Take, for instance, any church song that you know well, and look for substitute chords (replace any Major chord by a Maj7th, so 'C' becomes 'CMaj7' etc...)..? If such a chord repeats for a few bars, try moving for 'C' 'C' 'C' 'C' to 'C' 'Cmaj7', 'Cmaj6', 'Cmaj7' instead..? Find these chords at different position on the neck, to get different 'colours'..? There is so much that can be done under the heading of 'rhythm guitar'..! Hope this helps, a little. Edited 10 hours ago by Dad3353 Quote
ezbass Posted 5 hours ago Posted 5 hours ago Every guitar player should have an acoustic in their arsenal IMO. 1 Quote
neutron619 Posted 2 hours ago Author Posted 2 hours ago 7 hours ago, Dad3353 said: Jack of all trades, Master of none..? ....an acoustic will complement this, and give you something to make progress on If, by 'rhythm playing', you mean strumming chords from charts, that, in itself, is a very healthy skill to have. 2 hours ago, ezbass said: Every guitar player should have an acoustic in their arsenal IMO. Thank you both for your replies - they are appreciated. In response to the bits I've picked out (although all was appreciated): Yes, certainly "master of none". I've come to the guitar through a variety of instruments, most of which I ended up being "very intermediate" at! It took me a long time to accept I was never going to be brilliant at any one of them (although I did sing professionally when I was younger, which I suppose is as near as I got to being "good" at anything). However, it means that, now I'm over that psychological hump, whatever progress I make with whatever I'm playing, I'm happy with - but I do have to make some progress, I think, keep things fresh, or else I end up moving onto something else anyway. The reason for saying all that isn't outrageous boasting (I promise!), but to acknowledge the 100% of popular opinion so far that says "go with the acoustic". I'm happy to be led. Either choice would probably be "fresh" but the acoustic (this one, in case anyone is interested - https://www.andertons.co.uk/alvarez-artist-parlor-acoustic-electric-non-cutaway-eq-tuner/ ) does offer a bigger departure from what I've been doing and more scope for new technique than a new LP as you've observed. I particularly wanted to say that I appreciated your comments on "rhythm playing". To be frank, musically, I've ended up doing things in completely the wrong order. Again, intended humbly, I grew up in a classical background and for various reasons relating to early education, my theory knowledge is good and was in place long before I was ever good (or intermediate!) at playing anything. But on the flip side, much more significantly, the repertoire of music that I know for guitar is very, very limited (worship songs, mostly), even in terms of listening (I'm trying to remedy this) and I find lead guitarists / shredders / anyone who can move around the fretboard at speed downright intimidating! Being brutally honest, I lack both idiomatic sense for any particular genre and much of the experience of listening to bands, knowing their songs and trying to copy / learn them and so on. As such, I've sort of defaulted to trying to learn rhythm playing and chord progressions as it's the closest thing to traditional harmony you can do on a guitar and probably the thing that matches up best with my previous experience. No doubt my constant looping around satisfying progressions irritates my family and the neighbours! But I have been working slowly through Rhythm Guitar 365 by Troy Nelson and to be honest, it was the exercises marked "Acoustic Guitar" in that book that put the idea for acquiring an acoustic into my head in the first place. Whatever it is I do, it's enough for a few songs at church (not my thing either TBH, but it my wife's and I love to play) every now and again. So in a sense I have an advantage as far as attempting your suggestion of trying chord substitutions, which I will try to incorporate: at least I'll understand the instructions and should be able to apply them sensibly! I'm going to have to look up "drop-two chords", but the rest of your pointers I think I can follow and although some of them are within what I already try to do, I'll use your suggesting them as an opportunity to refocus on technique and less on playing personally-pleasing, but probably not developmental things for the foreseeable. Sometimes, I guess, you need someone else to tell you to do what you know deep down you should be doing but let slide. ATB. 1 Quote
Dad3353 Posted 29 minutes ago Posted 29 minutes ago (edited) I had a quick look at the method book you're using, and it looks good, if maybe a little repetitive in some respects. It's good that it covers a variety of styles, though; that's very useful, and there is much that can be 'crossed over' into other aspects of one's playing. That guitar looks to be splendid; it will surely give satisfaction, and inspire you to even greater heights. As for 'drop-two' chords, I can't give a better explanation that this one, from the Jazz Guitar Online site (an excellent site, by the way, even for those not 'into' jazz...)... Drop 2 Chords ... It's useful to understand that chords do not have to be played across all six strings of the guitar; in fact, it's quite rare that I do this. I'm much more inclined to 'pluck' several strings (pluck like a claw...), or simply attack the three of four top strings, or bottom strings, depending on the chord and effect wanted. I never use a plectrum (I've often tried, but have yet to keep one between my fingers for long...) I'll be trying again shortly, using a version which curls over the fore-finger, and may stay in place a little better. This is to attempt 'hybrid picking', whereby the plectrum sounds out the melody, and the other fingers 'claw' the other strings. I'm working on stuff from the 'Sandra Sherman' videos; here's the one on Hybrid Picking... So much to learn; so little time. You're doing great, keep it up. Hope this helps. Douglas Edited 24 minutes ago by Dad3353 Quote
