How do you'all go about practicing arpeggios?
Press on....
Waldo
Press on....
Waldo
Arpeggio Practice
- Thread starter Waldo
- Start date
- Status
Multiple octaves with a metronome playing in 8th notes and 8th note triplets. Starting slow to make sure I’m using the right fingering.
Also good to practice other patterns of the notes such as c, e, g, e, g, c+1, g, c+1, e+1 Etc… and reversed coming back down.
Also good to practice other patterns of the notes such as c, e, g, e, g, c+1, g, c+1, e+1 Etc… and reversed coming back down.
How do you'all go about practicing arpeggios?
The same way you should be practicing everything else... lol
#1 is fingering. As I mentioned to Tom, the whole trick is being ready for the next note comfortably, THIS is what mostly determines proper fingering.
#2 is starting VERY slow, I mean ridiculously slow.
#3 is start with 1 octave, once that is comfortable at this ridiculously slow level, go to 2 octaves.
#3a - There are 2 ways I like to practice arpeggios, straight through and in triads, DO BOTH!
#4 is that once you are comfy with 2 octaves up and down, use a metronome (digital, old school manual or online one) start SLOW and develop a steadiness and rhythm. 40 BPM and playing them in 1/4 note time (1 metronome pulse, 1 note). Play 5-10 times whatever you need, move to 45 and start over. Then move to 50, start over... move to 55 and start over(get the idea?)
#5 is that once you get to 100BPM, this is your sign to move to the next key, starting over there and while you are getting your next key to 100BPM, you are getting your previous one to 100BPM too, but this time move back to 50bpm and play them in 8th notes (2 notes per metronome pulse), and move that FIRST one up to 100BPS again. What's the ultimate speed goal? 200BPM... at 16th or 32nd notes... lol
... and the cycle continues.
Now, arpeggios are great, but I'd NEVER recommend starting with arpeggios alone, start with SCALES... and when doing arpeggios, also do major chords too.
So, order of events... scales, and arpeggios/chords.
So you've done all the major scales? (C-G-D-A-E-F#-F-Bb-Eb-Ab-Eb-Db)? Great, start over and now to your set of major scales, add Minor, 7th and diminished scales. Done those? Wonderful, you've just spent about 2 years getting to where you need to be here, IF you were very dedicated, motivated and spent a good amount of time per week doing just this.
This wasn't motivating enough in terms of exercises? Add the 30-ish Hanon exercises, and do THEM in all the keys and variations mentioned above eat the same time you start any given key.
Congratulations you have a very high level of technical skills! Now go and apply them to playing real music (ie: songs) and enjoy the ease with with you no longer need to concentrate on the fingers, but the music.
The same way you should be practicing everything else... lol
#1 is fingering. As I mentioned to Tom, the whole trick is being ready for the next note comfortably, THIS is what mostly determines proper fingering.
#2 is starting VERY slow, I mean ridiculously slow.
#3 is start with 1 octave, once that is comfortable at this ridiculously slow level, go to 2 octaves.
#3a - There are 2 ways I like to practice arpeggios, straight through and in triads, DO BOTH!
#4 is that once you are comfy with 2 octaves up and down, use a metronome (digital, old school manual or online one) start SLOW and develop a steadiness and rhythm. 40 BPM and playing them in 1/4 note time (1 metronome pulse, 1 note). Play 5-10 times whatever you need, move to 45 and start over. Then move to 50, start over... move to 55 and start over(get the idea?)
#5 is that once you get to 100BPM, this is your sign to move to the next key, starting over there and while you are getting your next key to 100BPM, you are getting your previous one to 100BPM too, but this time move back to 50bpm and play them in 8th notes (2 notes per metronome pulse), and move that FIRST one up to 100BPS again. What's the ultimate speed goal? 200BPM... at 16th or 32nd notes... lol
... and the cycle continues.
Now, arpeggios are great, but I'd NEVER recommend starting with arpeggios alone, start with SCALES... and when doing arpeggios, also do major chords too.
So, order of events... scales, and arpeggios/chords.
So you've done all the major scales? (C-G-D-A-E-F#-F-Bb-Eb-Ab-Eb-Db)? Great, start over and now to your set of major scales, add Minor, 7th and diminished scales. Done those? Wonderful, you've just spent about 2 years getting to where you need to be here, IF you were very dedicated, motivated and spent a good amount of time per week doing just this.
This wasn't motivating enough in terms of exercises? Add the 30-ish Hanon exercises, and do THEM in all the keys and variations mentioned above eat the same time you start any given key.
Congratulations you have a very high level of technical skills! Now go and apply them to playing real music (ie: songs) and enjoy the ease with with you no longer need to concentrate on the fingers, but the music.
Last edited:
Thanks Jerry! I'm following your method now, working on key of C with grim determination. I can hardly imagine getting to 200 bpm or those scales with 17 flats, but it's a good goal!
So, and this is a real question, not rhetorical, because I am one of those guys that wants to always know the science behind the task:
How, exactly does this practicing of scales benefit one's musicality? Isn't it the same as learning new tunes for the same amount of time? Will it help you remember your repertoire so you don't "f* up" (to use the non American vernacular ?) in an event?
I don't really get it but I am willing to try because nothing else has worked so far....
So, and this is a real question, not rhetorical, because I am one of those guys that wants to always know the science behind the task:
How, exactly does this practicing of scales benefit one's musicality? Isn't it the same as learning new tunes for the same amount of time? Will it help you remember your repertoire so you don't "f* up" (to use the non American vernacular ?) in an event?
I don't really get it but I am willing to try because nothing else has worked so far....
I'll demo it for you this Saturday in our time together... but the simple answer is that chords, arpeggios and scales are all parts of songs. If you are all accomplished In these things, you are not taking the time to learn a part of an arpeggio or part of a scale to play a line from a song... you just play it and move on to the next phrase!
The
The way I look at is that a melody is made up of bits of scales and arpeggios. If you master playing them you start see them in the music instead of individual notes. You can compare it to a vocabulary in language. If you’ve never seen a word before you have to look at each letter and pronounce it phonetically it takes time, but words you know you immediately understand and can speak without conscious thought. Practicing these building blocks in music builds good technique as well as your musical vocabulary.
The other thing with practicing scales, arpeggios, chords, etudes and their variations in 12 keys is that we can learn the entire instrument. I can't remember a time when I played in the key of B Maj on the accordion, for example. My mindset is in the 'learn more tunes' mode at the moment. But, I plan on spending time learning the instrument once I have 3 sets of material. I have lots of work to do though.
In the genre that I play, there are often times virtuistic flurries of arpeggios. I leave them out most times, but it would be nice to get them up to speed. It would also be nice to instantly know all chord shapes so I can do more chordal melodies or add some arpeggios and scaler patterns while accompanying a singer, etc.
In the genre that I play, there are often times virtuistic flurries of arpeggios. I leave them out most times, but it would be nice to get them up to speed. It would also be nice to instantly know all chord shapes so I can do more chordal melodies or add some arpeggios and scaler patterns while accompanying a singer, etc.
I can site a case where being proficient in multiple keys is when you have a band and have singers... singers for some odd reason NEVER want to sing in "the standard" keys. It was that if there was singing in the song, it was Eb, Ab or Db simply because that is where the band leader and his wife (who were the singers in the group) were most comfortable in with their vocal ranges.
Being proficient in all keys makes it somewhat easier to transpose on the fly... 100% impossible if you are not practiced in those keys!
Being proficient in all keys makes it somewhat easier to transpose on the fly... 100% impossible if you are not practiced in those keys!
Another instance where proficiency of multiple keys becomes important are for tunes with key changes. Its not unheard of for a song to go to a key one half step up.
JeffJetton
Prolific poster
Yup. Well, there is a physical benefit, in and of itself, of just doing an exercise that builds finger dexterity and gets you used to finger crossing, shifting positions, and all that. But that dexterity sure tends to come in handy when actually playing things.
And really, in order to really understand western music, you need to understand chords and harmonic movement. And in order to understand those things, you need to know your intervals (not just fifths!). And in order to know intervals, you need to know scales.
And the best way to know scales is to just sit down and practice them.
It's like learning your multiplication tables. Sure, if you know the theory of multipication you can figure out what 6 times 7 is by adding up a bunch of sevens until you'd added six of them. But it sure is convenient to just instantly recall the answer without having to think much about it, isn't it? Scale work is sort of the same way.
(Anyway, as to the original question, my old piano teacher would often have me play arpeggios right after each scale, as a "second half" of one single exercise rather than a separate exercise. It's a habit I still have to this day.)
I think I phrased my question improperly. My take on arpeggios is the playing of the individual notes of a chord, as opposed to playing all the notes of a chord on one "strike". A second take is to play the notes of a chord in a "staircase" fashion. That is, C and hold, add an E to the sustaining C and hold the two notes, and then add a G on top of the previous two sustained notes, resulting in a "normal" chord.
If there are other ways to play an arpeggio, I'm not aware of them. Please advise.
My question should have been; When playing an arpeggio, what progression of notes do you play/practice?
I think Ben-J touched on the answer, way up there. I'd like to practice arpeggios in a fashion that I'm likely to encounter in music, as well as what sounds good when doing fills and color.
Octaves, mentioned above; Would that be C-E-G, up an octave and C-E-G, up an octave and C-E-G, (and so on)? For variety, I have been moving up (or down) scale thru the appropriate inversions. That is; C-E-G, drop down to the previous E and add G-C, drop down to previous G and add C-E, and so on (all individual pitches, going up scale). This keeps me in the proper Key, and good for the quiver, but will I ever encounter this sort of progression in notation?
On the practice side; Is it still an arpeggio if I "mix it up", like, C-C-G-E-C-G? Following a "straight" arpeggio pattern (C-E-G or G-E-C) gets boring and predictable pretty quickly. There is a lot of stuff in music (read: Rules) that is known to work well. In my world, rules are meant to be broken (creativity), but, I'd like to also incorporate "normal stuff" in my development. What about rhythm variation within the arpeggio (2 count C- one count E-, one count G)?
Is it acceptable, regarding arpeggios, to move around thru the IV and V chord pitches as well? Or would this be outside the definition of "arpeggio"?
Thanks for the input and,
Press on...
Waldo
If there are other ways to play an arpeggio, I'm not aware of them. Please advise.
My question should have been; When playing an arpeggio, what progression of notes do you play/practice?
I think Ben-J touched on the answer, way up there. I'd like to practice arpeggios in a fashion that I'm likely to encounter in music, as well as what sounds good when doing fills and color.
Octaves, mentioned above; Would that be C-E-G, up an octave and C-E-G, up an octave and C-E-G, (and so on)? For variety, I have been moving up (or down) scale thru the appropriate inversions. That is; C-E-G, drop down to the previous E and add G-C, drop down to previous G and add C-E, and so on (all individual pitches, going up scale). This keeps me in the proper Key, and good for the quiver, but will I ever encounter this sort of progression in notation?
On the practice side; Is it still an arpeggio if I "mix it up", like, C-C-G-E-C-G? Following a "straight" arpeggio pattern (C-E-G or G-E-C) gets boring and predictable pretty quickly. There is a lot of stuff in music (read: Rules) that is known to work well. In my world, rules are meant to be broken (creativity), but, I'd like to also incorporate "normal stuff" in my development. What about rhythm variation within the arpeggio (2 count C- one count E-, one count G)?
Is it acceptable, regarding arpeggios, to move around thru the IV and V chord pitches as well? Or would this be outside the definition of "arpeggio"?
Thanks for the input and,
Press on...
Waldo
Siegmund
Well-known member
JeffJetton mentions in passing 'shifting positions'. The instruction books seem to have very little to say about 'positions', instead just suggesting which finger to use for which note. Coming from violin, this is strange to me; we have names for each hand position and when we learn a new piece, our parts are littered with pencilled-in notations as to when to shift. I do this with my accordion music too (had to make up my own system of naming the finger-positions since I found none) but was surprised to have to make it up from scratch. Especially on CBA, just saying which finger to use on a given note doesn't tell you where to put the rest of your hand.
Anyway... getting back to arpeggios. In a nutshell the reason I practice them is to get used to leaping from place to place precisely, and to get my fingers used to moving from close-together (hovering over consecutive scale steps) to farther-apart positions.
For the moment, I primarily practice them as C-E-G E-G-C G-C-E C-E-G or C-E-G-C E-G-C-E G-C-E-G C-E-G-C, moving my hand once per inversion. "Someday" I will worry about larger leaps, and at that time I'd see more reason to play C-E-G-C-E-G-C-E-G upward. I need to spend more time practicing them downward. Both scales and arpeggios I seem to be better at ascending than descending.
An easy-ish variation is using I, IV, and V together, playing CEGC, DGBD, EGCE, FACF, GBDG, ACFA, BDGB, C.
If I really want to torture myself, I will try to play C-E-G-C, D-F-A-D, E-G-B-E, etc. (playing all 7 chords.) I am terrible at this still. For some reason my hand has a hard time moving from the "major" to "minor" config at the same time as it shifts upward one step. (I would not call this an arpeggio, but a series of arpeggios, but it's a good practical way to practice and especially if you alternate ascending and descending sequences it mimics what you'll see in real music where a leap one direction is usually followed by a step in the opposite direction.)
Waldo asks, about practicing C-E-G E-G-C inversions, "will I ever encounter this sort of progression in notation?" You sure will: I ran into it with just about the first simple folk tune I tried to arrange for myself: "We will miss your bright eyes and sweet smile", the second line of Red River Valley.
Anyway... getting back to arpeggios. In a nutshell the reason I practice them is to get used to leaping from place to place precisely, and to get my fingers used to moving from close-together (hovering over consecutive scale steps) to farther-apart positions.
For the moment, I primarily practice them as C-E-G E-G-C G-C-E C-E-G or C-E-G-C E-G-C-E G-C-E-G C-E-G-C, moving my hand once per inversion. "Someday" I will worry about larger leaps, and at that time I'd see more reason to play C-E-G-C-E-G-C-E-G upward. I need to spend more time practicing them downward. Both scales and arpeggios I seem to be better at ascending than descending.
An easy-ish variation is using I, IV, and V together, playing CEGC, DGBD, EGCE, FACF, GBDG, ACFA, BDGB, C.
If I really want to torture myself, I will try to play C-E-G-C, D-F-A-D, E-G-B-E, etc. (playing all 7 chords.) I am terrible at this still. For some reason my hand has a hard time moving from the "major" to "minor" config at the same time as it shifts upward one step. (I would not call this an arpeggio, but a series of arpeggios, but it's a good practical way to practice and especially if you alternate ascending and descending sequences it mimics what you'll see in real music where a leap one direction is usually followed by a step in the opposite direction.)
Waldo asks, about practicing C-E-G E-G-C inversions, "will I ever encounter this sort of progression in notation?" You sure will: I ran into it with just about the first simple folk tune I tried to arrange for myself: "We will miss your bright eyes and sweet smile", the second line of Red River Valley.
Please believe me that I am not trying to be insulting in ANY manner... but if I understand the above, you only want to learn/practice arpeggios that will appear in music you want to play and then you want to learn how to embellish them with arpeggios, and I actually chuckled when reading that.
There is near practically no piece of music where one doesn't see *some* variation of an arpeggio (or scale) in to some degree. It was kind of like reading "I'd like to drive a car, but only need to learn to turn right...".
You want to learn what you feel you want, not what you need.
The truth is that in your lifetime, you will find a TON of songs with things in them that you don't want to practice and know before you get to that piece... so in all fairness, if what you want is to use *specifically* exact variations of arpeggios, what you can do is just work in the same way that you likely have already been doing... and that is picking up a new piece, and stopping in the middle of it, every few measure to learn a portion of a skill that you need to play that ONE SONG, and not something that would serve you across all songs that you ever encounter. You may feel like you are saving yourself a few hours of practice time, when indeed what you are doing is extending the time it takes for you to learn each and every song you learn. If your foundations are weak, they may be hindering you from learning faster, playing quicker and better.
To answer your second question, and I really like this question... is that do you ever play chords in 4ths and 5ths? Personally I love the sound of more advanced chords, and in many cases will use them along with more advanced chords... but rule #1 cannot be bypassed... we need to build our home on a solid foundation, because building on quicksand is a waste of time and effort, so, the foundations are as I listed above, do them before going "all fancy".
@Waldo
Strictly speaking, the definition 'arpeggio' refers to the chord being broken up and played sequentially note by note. Only the starting point may vary: root, or 3rd, 5th etc.
I will notate a pure arpeggiated chord on tab like 'D arp.' but if I need to mix it up in say D major, I will simply notate as 'melody'.
Rhythm has little to do with it AFAIK
Strictly speaking, the definition 'arpeggio' refers to the chord being broken up and played sequentially note by note. Only the starting point may vary: root, or 3rd, 5th etc.
I will notate a pure arpeggiated chord on tab like 'D arp.' but if I need to mix it up in say D major, I will simply notate as 'melody'.
Rhythm has little to do with it AFAIK
Most of us grew up in a world (which still exists) where there were arbitrary rules (that made little sense) about everything under the sun. As adults (within the constraints of not wanting to get locked up), we can do anything we want. When it comes to music, there are no rules. Each of us can do anything we want. There are facts, such as you can't play any notes that aren't available on your instrument, and certain conventions, such as notation systems and chord symbols, have become standardized. But when it comes to performing and composing, you can still do anything you want. All of the practice tips that people offer are simply ways to develop the skills necessary to play a particular instrument. Similarly, athletes commonly engage in calisthenic activities that have nothing to do with their particular sport in order to develop strength, endurance and agility. Practice scales and arpeggios however you want, or don't practice them at all. Do whatever it is that you think is necessary to accomplish whatever it is that you want to accomplish. Again, there are no rules governing the composition or performance of music.
Music is created by people who can do anything they want. Only afterwards are music theory books and dictionaries written in an attempt to describe that music, ideally in an attempt to help people perform that music or to compose music that is similar. Music theory and method books aren't intended to restrict anything. Of course, there are bad teachers and badly written books.There also are bad people who do things for reasons other than helpfulness. That is why the guillotine was created (undoubtedly without following any rules, but definitely conforming to the fact of gravity).
Music is created by people who can do anything they want. Only afterwards are music theory books and dictionaries written in an attempt to describe that music, ideally in an attempt to help people perform that music or to compose music that is similar. Music theory and method books aren't intended to restrict anything. Of course, there are bad teachers and badly written books.There also are bad people who do things for reasons other than helpfulness. That is why the guillotine was created (undoubtedly without following any rules, but definitely conforming to the fact of gravity).
"There are no rules..."
I think we are falling a bit off topic, but if you want to do anything in life... randomly, let's choose push-ups, and you want to do one single power-pushup (where the entire body is lifted off the ground by arm power alone), you don't start by struggling doing power push-ups for 2 years before you get to 1, because you won't make it past a month before you are fed up of trying and moving on... you start with standard easy to do pushups, then move to 1-hand push-ups then move to hand-stand push-ups and finally to power pushups.
Our friend Tom is a great example of this... 10 years of playing and still struggling. I am confident that Tom is going to advance more in 30 days than he has in YEARS, because of a few rules (but we can see the results in a month).
The absolute same thing can be said about anything... let's take language... we can post and type whatever we want... but if you don't know how to spell, well, you end up sounding like communicating in baby-talk... lol.
Same with music. There *are* rules, ( actually lots of them!)... but you can choose to ignore them, or not. A lot is based on needs and goals.
I think we are falling a bit off topic, but if you want to do anything in life... randomly, let's choose push-ups, and you want to do one single power-pushup (where the entire body is lifted off the ground by arm power alone), you don't start by struggling doing power push-ups for 2 years before you get to 1, because you won't make it past a month before you are fed up of trying and moving on... you start with standard easy to do pushups, then move to 1-hand push-ups then move to hand-stand push-ups and finally to power pushups.
Our friend Tom is a great example of this... 10 years of playing and still struggling. I am confident that Tom is going to advance more in 30 days than he has in YEARS, because of a few rules (but we can see the results in a month).
The absolute same thing can be said about anything... let's take language... we can post and type whatever we want... but if you don't know how to spell, well, you end up sounding like communicating in baby-talk... lol.
Same with music. There *are* rules, ( actually lots of them!)... but you can choose to ignore them, or not. A lot is based on needs and goals.
It's true!!!! I am the poster child of "I've played for 10 years and I still suck!" (Actually, I consider myself intermediate, and I have restored, played with friends and volunteered for years, but have been stuck here on this plateau.) Hence my newfound interest in "how to practice." Then one day Jerry said he would mentor me if I promised to work hard and do exactly as he says. Wow, do I feel privileged! So, here I am, practicing these scales and arpeggios/inversions and it's HARD!!!!!! But I will not give up, I'm getting to the next level if it kills me!"There are no rules..."
I think we are falling a bit off topic, but if you want to do anything in life... randomly, let's choose push-ups, and you want to do one single power-pushup (where the entire body is lifted off the ground by arm power alone), you don't start by struggling doing power push-ups for 2 years before you get to 1, because you won't make it past a month before you are fed up of trying and moving on... you start with standard easy to do pushups, then move to 1-hand push-ups then move to hand-stand push-ups and finally to power pushups.
Our friend Tom is a great example of this... 10 years of playing and still struggling. I am confident that Tom is going to advance more in 30 days than he has in YEARS, because of a few rules (but we can see the results in a month).
The absolute same thing can be said about anything... let's take language... we can post and type whatever we want... but if you don't know how to spell, well, you end up sounding like communicating in baby-talk... lol.
Same with music. There *are* rules, ( actually lots of them!)... but you can choose to ignore them, or not. A lot is based on needs and goals.
Dingo40
Been here for ages!
It's true: in many areas. The acquisition of relevant rules (if only subconsciously) is the key to progress.
One area I'm very familiar with is the teaching/ learning of reading (English).
In recent times, it became a (erroneous) notion /fad that in order to learn to read (effectively), all one needed was " exposure " to print.
That's like saying, all you need to become an accomplished player is access to an accordion.
There are about as many accomplished readers by this "modern" approach as there are skilled accordionists ?
Consequently an entirely new terminology has arisen to explain away the failures of the new doctrine, but that's another story!?
One area I'm very familiar with is the teaching/ learning of reading (English).
In recent times, it became a (erroneous) notion /fad that in order to learn to read (effectively), all one needed was " exposure " to print.
That's like saying, all you need to become an accomplished player is access to an accordion.
There are about as many accomplished readers by this "modern" approach as there are skilled accordionists ?
Consequently an entirely new terminology has arisen to explain away the failures of the new doctrine, but that's another story!?
Last edited:
"Rules are for the obediance of fools and for the guidance of wise men."
― Douglas Bader
...a prodigious breaker of rules and achiever of great things, even if he did have a habit of coming 'unstuck' rather frequently.
In this context, though, rules are particularly "...for the guidance of..." and where they are not beneficial to the individual student can be stultifying and inhibiting.
Watching many music videos and live performances over very many years it has been evident that the absolute top performers have adapted and/or ditched the 'rules' which many teachers impose on students as immutable.
"Those who can, do - those who cannot, teach." may not be univerally true, but it is applicable in an altogether-too-large cohort of pedagogues.
On the other hand, those who had difficulties learning but who ultimately succeeded in their goals are often the best teachers, since they are acutely aware of the pitfalls and problems and usually more sympathetic to the needs of their students.
― Douglas Bader
...a prodigious breaker of rules and achiever of great things, even if he did have a habit of coming 'unstuck' rather frequently.
In this context, though, rules are particularly "...for the guidance of..." and where they are not beneficial to the individual student can be stultifying and inhibiting.
Watching many music videos and live performances over very many years it has been evident that the absolute top performers have adapted and/or ditched the 'rules' which many teachers impose on students as immutable.
"Those who can, do - those who cannot, teach." may not be univerally true, but it is applicable in an altogether-too-large cohort of pedagogues.
On the other hand, those who had difficulties learning but who ultimately succeeded in their goals are often the best teachers, since they are acutely aware of the pitfalls and problems and usually more sympathetic to the needs of their students.
- Status
Similar threads
