major scale modes

[neilsss]

so i know that you can get different modes by playing a major scale and keep the same pattern but changt the root note. what im a little 7confused about is wether or not there are different types of modes.someone the other day was saying that you can get your modes by making some notes flat/sharp e.g. you can get d dorian by playing d major and making the 3rd and 7th notes flat. is that right or not?

[Slappin De Bass]

Originally Posted by neilsss

so i know that you can get different modes by playing a major scale and keep the same pattern but changt the root note.

Not sure if I've misunderstood you or not but that's not quite correct. You get the modes of the major scale by changing the root note and keeping the notes the same e.g. starting on G and playing the notes of C Major to get a Mixolydian (playing an F instead of the F# that would be in G Major).

That's where the idea of flat/sharp notes you mentioned comes in - it's the changes made to the major scale 'shape' that occur for each mode.

Hope that makes sense, it's kinda hard to explain in words only!!

[bassybill]

This may be helpful:

Bassy Bill's Beginners' Basic guide to scales and modes

I keep promising to update it and I feel bad that I haven't had the time, but the first couple of pages will certainly do a bit to answer your questions.

[Shakin-Slim]

^ That link is mighty helpful. Just as a side note, it's good to think of modes as being the same scale, that is the same notes, not the same shape, and starting and finishing in a different place. For example, play C major from C to C, you have an Ionian mode, play C major from D to D, you have a Dorian mode. You'll find the 6th, that is in C major, A, the Aeolian mode, the same as a natural minor, A to A all natural notes, like C major. Therefore A Aeolian, D Dorian, C Ionian, E Phrygian, F Lydian, G Mixolydian and B Locrian are all other ways of playing C major for a different mood. That's how you should like at modes, like moods. Well, IMO

[MalcolmAmos]

Yep only reason for doing modes is for their mood. I find parallel modes let's me do that easier.
Here is the other way (parallel modes) with the sharps and flats.

http://www.ibreathemusic.com/forums/...698#post143698

I have trouble using relative modes making them is easy but using them I find difficult. So I have settled on Parallel modes. If you want Dorian's attractive jazz mood - yep, flat the 3 and 7. Want Lydian's dreamy mood just sharp the 4th.

But, the rest of the story has to do with the chords under the mode. The chords give the mode it's mood. The above gets into that.

Have fun, pick a way that works best for you.

[JTE]

ARGHH!

Modes are specific scales with specific functions, and the absolute worst way to think of them (but the easiest to show so it looks like the teacher knows something) is the silly "major scale starting on a different note" bit. It's useless to think to think of D Dorian as a C scale played from D to D. You need to understand that Dorian is W H W W W H W instead, that Dorian has a specific sound.

John

[bassybill]

Originally Posted by JTE

ARGHH!

Modes are specific scales with specific functions, and the absolute worst way to think of them (but the easiest to show so it looks like the teacher knows something) is the silly "major scale starting on a different note" bit. It's useless to think to think of D Dorian as a C scale played from D to D. You need to understand that Dorian is W H W W W H W instead, that Dorian has a specific sound.

John

I think that may be an over-generalisation in some cases, John. Personally, I find it useful to think of modes in both ways depending on what I'm doing at the time. Most often the sequence of intervals is helpful, but sometimes I do find it useful to relate it back to the scale from which the mode is derived (if only to remember the key signature ).

I shoud reiterate that learning modes is not the musical be all and end all that some might think it is, based on the frequency with which this gets discussed here.

[mambo4]

I wrote this up a while ago, inspired by bassy bill's thread. It may help answer your question...tho bassy bill's thread is a good beginners discussion.
-------------------------------------------------------------


+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Modes (for beginners)
Note: this assumes you know
1.) the major scale
2.) basic note names , flats and sharps, preferably on your fingerboard.

What are Modes?
-Modes are particular category of Scale.
-The exact musical meaning of "Mode" has changed over the centuries.
-In contemporary music theory, the modes are generally considered to be variations of the 7 note "diatonic" scale.
-The Major and Minor scales are the first examples diatonic scales we usually learn.
-Beyond the diatonic scale, a modal approach has also applied to other scales, such as the melodic minor and harmonic minor.

There are 2 ways to explain /understand modes: Realtive and Parallel.

Relative Modes:
same set of notes (one key), different root.
Usually the first way modes are learned.
For example, these modes are relative to C major:

Root 	      Mode		Scaletones 				
 C 		Ionian 		CDEFGAB (aka C Major)   
 D 		Dorian 		DEFAGBC
 E 		Phrygian	EFAGBCD
 F 		Lydian		FGABCDE
 G 		Mixolydian	GABCDEF
 A 		Aeolian		ABCDEFG (aka A Minor*)
 B 		Locrian		BCDEFGA

Each relative mode is in the same key, C major in this example.
This pattern can apply to any major scale, not just C major.

Parralell Modes:
Different sets of notes (many keys), same root.
for Example, these modes are paralell to Cmajor:

 C Ionian 		CDEFGAB 		(aka C Major)
 C Dorian		CDEbFGAbB 		(CMaj with a b3, b7)
 C Phrygian		CDbEbFGAbB 		(CMaj with a b2, b3, b6)
 C Lydian		CDEF#GAB 		(CMaj with a #4)
 C Mixolydian		CDEFGAbB 		(CMaj with a b7)
 C Aeolian		CDEbFGAbBb  	(CMaj with a B3,B6,b7) aka C Minor)
 C Locrian		CDbEbFGbAbBb 	(CMaj with a b2,b3,b5,b6,b7)

Each parralell mode is in a different key.
This pattern can apply to any root note, not just C.

Relative and Parallel Modes are 2 approaches to the same concept, they are *not* different concepts.
Learn to see how the 2 illustrations above are actually the same idea operating in different ways.

Points to consider:
1.) Relative modes are the simplest way to show how modes are constructed,and how they relate, but can easily be misunderstood/misused if oversimplified.
2.) Thinking in Parrallel modes emphasizes that each mode has a feel of its own, and is not "just" a major scale, but how they relate to each other may be less clear.
3.) Modes have been used to analyze what notes "work" over various chords (usually in the context of a Jazz solo)
4.) As a result, there are many "Chord N = play Mode X,Y or Z" type formulas, often seen by beginners as an easy answer to navigating chord progressions.
5.) Some feel that such formulas can lead to "playing scales" instead of music, and are not as useful as understanding harmony and using your ear.
6.) As a result, beginners are encouraged to learn Intervals*, Arepggios*, Chord Tones*, Harmonizing Scales*, and other fundamental things before Modes.
7.) because full understanding of Modes requires full undertanding of the above fundamentals, some argue that Modes themselves are fundamental.
9.) The 3 biggest "contoversies" over Modes that tend to erupt on TalkBass:
A.) Which is "correct" or "best" way to explain /understand Modes: relative or paralell?
B.) Are Modes the "correct" or "best" way to determine what notes to play for a given chord progression?
C.) Nit-picking poorly worded/ misunderstood explanations or examples.
10.) If it you like how it sounds, none of the above matters.

*If you don't understand what these terms mean, STOP WORRYING ABOUT MODES and learn those first.

[bassybill]

mambo - that's a very helpful post that takes things to a level that I'm sure will be very useful to some folks once they've covered the basic stuff in the thread of mine to which you refer. Thanks for taking the trouble to do a good job.

[MalcolmAmos]

Mambo - that is - dare I say - the best explanation I've seen on relative and parallel modes. Needless to say I bookmarked it.

I'll give you credit, for awhile, but, I'm sure I'll start taking bits and pieces of this and start using them as if they were my original thoughts, in a year or so.

Great post.

What's needed -- a paper on modal vamps. Which one and why. Game?

[Richard Lindsey]

I tend to agree with JTE. The way modes are typically introduced in the earlier stages of learning these days is IMO premature and largely unnecessary, as well as even potentially misleading.

But we've been around this subject many times on this forum (mambo4 and JTE in particular know what I'm talking about), and rather than write a lot more about it, and essentially say the same old thing, I'd suggest the OP search out some of the older threads.

[Hookus]

Yeah, I am a parallel method proponent myself, as I feel it helps more with improvisation. I also think that is how modes should be taught initially, as it is the most practical example of mode use.

Learning the actual modes however, will better prepare you to deal with chord inversions.

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally Posted by Hookus

Yeah, I am a parallel method proponent myself, as I feel it helps more with improvisation. I also think that is how modes should be taught initially, as it is the most practical example of mode use.

Learning the actual modes however, will better prepare you to deal with chord inversions.

Honestly, though, I don't think the modes have anything at all to do with chord inversions per se. To me that's where a misapprehension comes in. If you play a C in 1st inversion (with an E in the bass) in a passage that's in the key of C, you're not playing in E phrygian all of a sudden, you're still playing in C. To put a modal explanation onto that kind of thing just adds complication without bringing any increase in explanatory power.

[Minotauros]

I don't know if this will help anyone, but it's every scale in every mode (.xls) and a brief description (.txt). I didn't make them, I glommed them off the 'net and just tidied them up.

[MalcolmAmos]

Yes we sometime forget that there is a WWH pattern involved with each mode. With each scale for that matter.

[Hookus]

Originally Posted by Richard Lindsey

Honestly, though, I don't think the modes have anything at all to do with chord inversions per se. To me that's where a misapprehension comes in. If you play a C in 1st inversion (with an E in the bass) in a passage that's in the key of C, you're not playing in E phrygian all of a sudden, you're still playing in C. To put a modal explanation onto that kind of thing just adds complication without bringing any increase in explanatory power.

How so? You can play E phrygian over that inversion, and it fits the chord much better than plain jane C. Technically, you could play C over any of it's modes, the notes never change.

I generally do, however, not visualize it as another mode, but rather superimpose my major scale on top of wherever I'm at, since the intervals between notes don't change.

My point was simply that I really find learning modes unnecessary for the most part, and that it is better to learn how to adapt your major scale based off chord structure. At least for me.

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally Posted by Hookus

How so? You can play E phrygian over that inversion, and it fits the chord much better than plain jane C. Technically, you could play C over any of it's modes, the notes never change.

Well, the bolded part is exactly why I'd say there's really no point in doing so in diatonic settings. If you're not getting any new harmonic material to play with--which, as you point out, you're not--there's no sense dragging in another musical concept that adds nothing but complication.

E phrygian does NOT fit the chord better than plain C. It can't, since as you say, the notes are the same. The chord is still a C, your chord tones are still C E G, your lowest note is still E, your nonchord notes are still D F A B. What, exactly, would anybody gain by dragging in E phrygian?

Playing in C doesn't mean you have to lean on C all the time. Going to a root of D or E or F doesn't automatically take you out of C. The concept of being in a key allows for movement within the key, which means emphasis of different notes at different times.

I think we do a disservice to learners if we try to suggest to them that every time they change to a chord with a different root, they are automatically going to another mode or even key. IMO, this actually obscures rather than enhances understanding of key and harmonic function.

I'm not saying you were doing or intending to do that, just that this stuff comes up a lot, and to me the way it's often introduced is, at best, beside the point.....

[JTE]

Originally Posted by Richard Lindsey

I think we do a disservice to learners if we try to suggest to them that every time they change to a chord with a different root, they are automatically going to another mode or even key. IMO, this actually obscures rather than enhances understanding of key and harmonic function.

I'm not saying you were doing or intending to do that, just that this stuff comes up a lot, and to me the way it's often introduced is, at best, beside the point.....

Indeed. Especially for harmonic music based on chord changes, modes are a huge disservice. Why? Precisely because you're encouraging thinking of each chord as a separate entity when the key is to find the commonalities and how the chords function together. If someone says "play D Dorian for the ii, G Mixolydian for the V, and C Ionian for the I", they're obliterating the critical nature of these chords- that they're all in the same key.

Thinking in terms first of chord tones then of primary passing tones gets one to the same notes, with a lot less mental gear shifting. Seeing that ii V I as D FA C then G B D F, then C E G B, all superimposed over the C diatonic major scale tells you all the notes you need for your primary targets.

It's even more confusing to start throwing in modes as a response to inversions. The point is that whatever you're doing, do NOT think of it from root to root. The Dmin7 chord is D F A C, it's the ii chord in C, but it's also the iii chord in Bb, and vi in F. That means you still need to know both the chord tones AND the key center where the chord is in the progression. So, if you know the key center and chord tones, you don't need the added level of complexity to tell you what your likely passing tones can be. Just use the simple information you already have.

John

[Hookus]

Richard-

That makes sense, I see your point. TBH, I really never worry about scales and modes beyond all the major scales.

I tend to think more in term of chord structure and how it affects the scale.

I also think people get more wrapped up around practicing modes than they should, and firmly believe they would be much better off as a bass player by learning chord structure first. For example, if you know your major scale, and someone is playing a minor chord on the same root, the bassist should instantly just know that he should flatten the third and seventh. In the same vein, seeing something like an A6 chord, I think it does the bassist much good to try and incorporate the 6th as a passing tone, same with 7th chords.

I will always believe knowing how a certain chord quality changes your major scale will get you much further, faster, as a bassist than wailing every mode in the book.

The exception for me are arpeggios, which I think should be practiced in two octave runs, and later, running them all the way up the neck. The third, fifth, and octave make good mile markers for running basslines, so if you know where those notes are up and down the neck for any given major scale, you can adjust the notes of your scale on the fly to match the chord more easily.

[Richard Lindsey]

Originally Posted by Hookus

Richard-

That makes sense, I see your point. TBH, I really never worry about scales and modes beyond all the major scales.

I tend to think more in term of chord structure and how it affects the scale.

I also think people get more wrapped up around practicing modes than they should, and firmly believe they would be much better off as a bass player by learning chord structure first. For example, if you know your major scale, and someone is playing a minor chord on the same root, the bassist should instantly just know that he should flatten the third and seventh. In the same vein, seeing something like an A6 chord, I think it does the bassist much good to try and incorporate the 6th as a passing tone, same with 7th chords.

I will always believe knowing how a certain chord quality changes your major scale will get you much further, faster, as a bassist than wailing every mode in the book.

The exception for me are arpeggios, which I think should be practiced in two octave runs, and later, running them all the way up the neck. The third, fifth, and octave make good mile markers for running basslines, so if you know where those notes are up and down the neck for any given major scale, you can adjust the notes of your scale on the fly to match the chord more easily.

I think we're not too far apart. My own bias is that especially in the initial learning stages, most people will be better off spending a whole lot more time on basic harmony (including chord structure, harmonic function, and tonality) than on modes.