| Snarky answer says "why would you learn to improvise from a textbook?" Actual answer is: because after 10 years of having a mediocre classical piano teacher beat the love out of my must-syncopate-Beethoven-fingers I decided to learn guitar on my own terms. I spent hours a day in my room with music I wanted to sing, screwing around with tabs and chord charts and fingering charts. Later when I took a jazz theory course (at a university no less!) I was handed staff music with all these weird scales: mixolydian, dorian, phrygian -- I had no idea this stuff existed. Since I never learned to read staff music on guitar, but I know it on keys, I had to translate by ear. Since I was learning improvisation I wanted a map of the "acceptable" notes that I could mess around on my just hitting them at random. (In a way this is like a hack's Wayne Krantz improv exercise.) Every autodidact builds their own ruts and then when it's time to learn new tricks they have a choice: build on the rather particular foundations already laid and see if some interesting and useful architecture can be laid on top, or tear it down and do it the "normal" way. I chose expedience and uninterrupted passion, but had to hack my way into it. And I still love the instrument, and I still play in those mental visuals scribbled onto yellow legal paper. There are myriad ways to approach the guitar, and it seems I found mine. When I check out something like the Pat Martino video course[1] I find it completely baffling, if not profoundly impressive. In my read people think guitar is easier than it is because the 4-chords pop chart is not hard to achieve, but if you want to exceed that the learning curve shifts quickly. I think Chris McQueen of Forq / Snarky Puppy / etc explains this all rather well. [2] [1] Pat Martino sees different things than I do on the fretboard: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wc7Qvp8Zs6U&list=PL2TrPkuyjM... [2] Chris McQueen knows he makes it look easier than it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aCLv-tiQBuk |