Chords and their corresponding modes

[Stick_Player]

"it DOES NOT SPEAK TO THE LISTENER ABOUT THE CHANGES"

That depends. If one plays the chord tones, then you'll hear the changes.

First off I don't find it complicated at all. Secondly, not to musically sound academic as a player but to know the player understands there is an Academic Way to approach it. Other than to just run one scale over a group of chords. It's a
shortcut, it makes playing actually harder and to me it is novice. I guess it just depends on how much the Hard Drive between your ears could hold & who you are auditioning for.

Been where you are already - back in my college days. It's a time waster to play different scales/modes over every successive chord change. You just sound like you are running a different scale or mode - like an etude. Find a tone collection and work that. A ii-V-I is in ONE key, not three different modes. Simply harmonize a Major scale, for example, and you'll discover the ii, V and I chords. They are ALL in there, in one scale. Wow!

You pretty much say it with your statement: "In the case of this thread the Ionian Scale (W-W-H-W-W-W-H)& Modes of it. From
these scales you build chords & in turn the chords then dictate scales to be used or to draw further information from to be applied how one sees fit or to how another expects it."

But it's an unnecessary step to assign different modes to every successive chord. You only need ONE scale or Tone Collection - all the notes are in the one.

If you want to go beyond novice add some chromaticism. Then you'll be among the very hip.

he thinks that playing in Key Centers is a weak concept & he will sit with anyone and prove it.

Prove it? Bring it on.

 

[mambo4]

Modes (reasonably close to what we use today) predate jazz by a thousand years.

true, but reverse-engineering classic jazz solos of the 50's in terms of "mode X over chord y" formulas does not, which was my point.

 

[dpbass66]

That depends. If one plays the chord tones, then you'll hear the changes.



Been where you are already - back in my college days. It's a time waster to play different scales/modes over every successive chord change. You just sound like you are running a different scale or mode - like an etude. Find a tone collection and work that. A ii-V-I is in ONE key, not three different modes. Simply harmonize a Major scale, for example, and you'll discover the ii, V and I chords. They are ALL in there, in one scale. Wow!

You pretty much say it with your statement: "In the case of this thread the Ionian Scale (W-W-H-W-W-W-H)& Modes of it. From
these scales you build chords & in turn the chords then dictate scales to be used or to draw further information from to be applied how one sees fit or to how another expects it."

But it's an unnecessary step to assign different modes to every successive chord. You only need ONE scale or Tone Collection - all the notes are in the one.

If you want to go beyond novice add some chromaticism. Then you'll be among the very hip.



Prove it? Bring it on.

How many books by the great masters of jazz pedagogy would you like me to list?

David Baker
Ramon Roicker
Jamey Aebersold
Harold Danko
Jerry Bergonzi
Walt Weiskopf
Dick Grove
Dan Hearle
Chuck Sher
Mark Johnson
Bruce Gertz
Jerry Coker
Gary Keller

shall I continue....and these are just SOME of the books in my personal library...they all espouse the chord/scale concept of improvisation....it is a basic tenet of learning to play over changes. Does that mean that on perhaps one "chorus", or over the bridge of a tune as it goes by one particular time, that a seasoned jazzer wont use some pentatonic over a barrage of changes? No, not necessarily, but to be sure it is just ONE of the many approaches in his tool box, and a not oft used one, as it is an indiscriminate way to play.

NOW...you name for me one source that discourages the modal/scale approach IN FAVOR OF the "common tone" or chord tone approach?

You cited "Spain" earlier. Geez, when I go back and listen to Chick himself solo on that tune, I really hear each chord going by...not "mashed potatos" of some 6 note common tone scale.

I would like to know where you learned about improvisation? Who did you learn from? Where does that person teach? I ask because the common tone approach is really a way that alot of "learning" improvisors get by, and if you were told that NOT digging deeper into the harmony and being more specific (ie using chord scale relationships) is OK, then you've been disserviced.

BTW on Spain the second chord (F7) is a secondary dominant. it has a very unique sound, and just playing a selection of common tones over that chord insults the song. Really. Listen to it. Do you hear that? Can you tell what note in the F7 is really unique and should be emphasized?

Ugh.

 

[Stick_Player]

How many books by the great masters of jazz pedagogy would you like me to list?

Don't choke on your list.

BTW on Spain the second chord (F7) is a secondary dominant. it has a very unique sound, and just playing a selection of common tones over that chord insults the song. Really. Listen to it. Do you hear that? Can you tell what note in the F7 is really unique and should be emphasized?

Ugh.

It's an F#7, by the way. The Dominant Seventh of B Minor, so it's probably NOT a secondary dominant, but rather THE Dominant - I think I covered that already. And the "unique" note (whatever that means)? I'm presuming you are referring to an A# - it's also in the melody. Maybe not really that unique.

not "mashed potato[e]s" of some 6 note common tone scale.

Firstly, I suggested a Tone Collection comprised of the notes of a B Minor Scale - that would be SEVEN notes (B, C#, D, E, F#, G, A, B). Secondly, I suggested a FIVE-note scale - B Minor Pentatonic. I also suggested utilizing the A# over the F#7 chords as well as chromaticism.

I would like to know where you learned about improvisation? Who did you learn from? Where does that person teach? I ask because the common tone approach is really a way that alot of "learning" improvisors get by, and if you were told that NOT digging deeper into the harmony and being more specific (ie using chord scale relationships) is OK, then you've been disserviced.

Don't worry about that.

Look if you want to name a bunch of scales and modes for every chord change, go for it.

Back to "Spain", what Key Center should we pick? B Minor? That's the one I prefer.

Let me clear these scales/modes with you:

G Maj7, so that would that be G Lydian?

F#7, would be F# Phrygian Dominant? Are we are "temporarily" in B Harmonic Minor? But I wanna hear some -/+9's! Gimme a G##! An F# Half-step/Whole-step scale ain't gonna work.

Em7, would be an E Dorian?

A7, would be an A Mixolydian?

DMaj7, would be a D Ionian?

GMaj7, would be a G Lydian?

C#7, I have NO idea. Wait, maybe the V7/V7? But that assumes we are indeed in the key of B (major/minor?). I think I'm hearing E#s, A#s in the comping (from the record), but the melody seems to still be in B minor, I'm lost, this is so confusing. Better get out one of the books on the list for the answer. Alas, to make it easy, I'll just fall back on my "learning" improviser's boring ol' Tone Collection and perhaps work in an E# too impress - but, darn it, I like those -/+9's.... Ooh!!! Maybe a C# Half-step/Whole-step scale (C#, D, D##, E#, F##, G#, A#, B) could also work. Man, that would be impressive! But I kinda like -/+9's, +11, b13, too (D, D##, F##, A) extensions - geeze, back to my Tone Collection.

F#7, dang that Dominant Seventh chord again! Must be in B Harmonic Minor - but who knows. I'll get that F# Phrygian Dominant going again - since I'm hearing a b9.

Bm, Ah... feels/sounds like some sort of resolution - maybe we are in B Minor. Where is my music library, for verification?

B7, Dang another borrowed Dominant? Must be the V7 of E (Melodic) Minor, there must be some sort of music theory explanation for this Ah, this MUST be one of those Secondary Dominants I've heard about! So do I use a B Mixolydian b6 scale (there is a D# in the melody)? But I might want to hear a +9 (C##, enharmonic of D) to help get back to the first chord (GMaj7), after all, this last chord is really just a turnaround. Isn't it?

Dang, I have a headache.

But wait, what about the melody? A Tone Collection of these notes: B, C#, D, E, F#, A are ALL found in the melody... hmm, I might be onto something. I could add a G to this Tone Collection, it is a chord tone to MANY of the changes - GMaj, Em7, A7, maybe even an extension to F#7(b9) and C#7(+11). Too heady?

And, as i stated in an earlier post, utilize the A# (the "unique" note) on those groovy F#7 chords.

So in an effort relieve the headache brought on by that ridiculous list of scales/modes that redundantly have many of the same notes, I can utilize throughout, a Tone Collection made up of the notes found in B Minor Scale. Which is what the melody is drawn from.

... when I go back and listen to Chick himself solo on that tune, I really hear each chord going by

Yah, I do to. And chromaticism - those pesky notes that aren't in your scales/modes requirements.

If one feels the need to make endless lists of scales/modes that have their tonic based on the root of a given chord - do it. I used to. It was fun for a while.

Then I realized that I was needlessly reorganizing the same group of notes and labeling them as modes, when in fact I was never actually in those modes.

For the record, I hear "Spain" in B minor. That's it, one lil ol' mode.

 

[RWRLV]

That depends. If one plays the chord tones, then you'll hear the changes.

I am convinced most people in these threads don't read nor comprehend 100% before they reply.

Been where you are already - back in my college days. It's a time waster to play different scales/modes over every successive chord change.
You just sound like you are running a different scale or mode - like an etude.

Where I am & where I've been for 26 years of this has nothing to do with me giving the OP the information he desires. His questions & examples tell me he may be confused about the matter, so I decided to lend a hand. Steering him to the same information I received from my instructors. I never said to play different scales/modes over EVERY successive chord change. I gave him links & information to the building blocks ..the basic foundation of Western Musical information. It is his option to decide what to do with it.

If you want to go beyond novice add some chromaticism. Then you'll be among the very hip.

I've been at the Matrix for a while Stick Dude!
G D# B A# G# A C E C# F F# D
B G D# D C C# E G# F A A# F#
Etc, etc!

Though when I am hired as a side person I know I will never really use any of it. The basics is what is called for. I further my education for me & my art. I play bass for others.

Prove it? Bring it on.

Have at it yourself. He loves to debate this stuff to a point.
[Invalid or Expired Link Removed]
or
Link Removed
Or find his July 1996 Beyond Chops article in BP. Dug threw the magazine rack next to the throne today. What he has to say about it is all in there.

Let me clear these scales/modes with you:

Every example you give that follows the above statement in your last post has made my point. " Academically" you are aware. The OP is not! He desires to be able to do so. Hence from a learning point of view you didn't waste your time learning scale/chord relations regardless of how you approach your art & neither would he.

 

[Stick_Player]

I am convinced most people in these threads don't read nor comprehend 100% before they reply.

I read it all. As far as comprehending, well, some posters are incomprehensible.

Hence from a learning point of view you didn't waste your time learning scale/chord relations

Reflecting back, I know there is a less complicated, less time consuming way.

I'm hoping to help others to NOT waste their time.

If one wants to assign a different scale or mode to each and every chord - go for it!!! I've indicated that in many of my posts (maybe you didn't read that?).

I've been at the Matrix for a while Stick Dude!

Wow! First the President and now me. I don't know what to say!

Play on people!

 

[dpbass66]

Stick Player I'll bet , given your apparent knowledge of harmony and chord scale theory, and your admission that you once approached playing that way, that without even thinking about it, your ears and your brain call on the aural and muscle memory of that approach from way back, when you improvise. My argument about an approach is purely from an academic sense, and relates to what we should be thinking about when we PRACTICE and when we are learning about harmonic function. When I 'm on a gig I just play what I hear; I play what I think sounds good. I dont think about anything, with regard to theory/harmony or whatever you want to call it. The sounds of all those modes/scales and chords are already in my subconscious and my muscle memory.

Another story from school goes something like...teacher to me , "Hey that sounded great what did you play on those changes...", me to teacher, "Honestly I dont know i was just playing.....", teacher to me, "Right answer...".

You are quick to disregard the references I put forth because you know that all those known educators are proponents of the "scale for each chord method". Do understand, no person is saying that finding common tones over certain passages is invalid. It is, however, just one of the many ways in which improvisation can be approached, and certainly not one of first resort. All of the harmonic function you cited in your analysis of Spain relates to certain sounds, a sound for each chord. It all does not have a singular sound of the home key, and I can promise you that if you were playing on that tune around some serious players using your approach, said serious players would hear your common tone approach in one measure. Doesnt that bother you? Why would you want your playing to be more profound? I dont get it?

The goal of crafting an improvised solo is not just to "get by", or get through the changes without playing any wrong notes, the goal is to make an artistic statement. Getting by without "wrong' notes is just an beginner-intermediate level achievement.

IMO your approach to all this is analogous to going to an art museum and not recognizing that you see Van Gogh, Picasso and Warhol. You are only seeing that its all paint on canvass.

Please explain to me why you think this is better? You come off sounding like you think it is better becasue it is easier, so please clarify for me.

 

[RWRLV]

Reflecting back, I know there is a less complicated, less time consuming way. I'm hoping to help others to NOT waste their time.

Start a thread & do so. Share! I'm all eyes & fingers. Maybe others will be to.

If one wants to assign a different scale or mode to each and every chord - go for it!!! I've indicated that in many of my posts (maybe you didn't read that?).

Along the way but your first suggestion I first read is the following:

"If you try to attach a different scale/mode to each and every chord, you will go insane. This is NOT what is going on with a great soloist or composer. Find a single scale OR group of notes (i.e., some form of a pentatonic scale, note-cluster) that will work over a larger harmonic progression."

My argument is you missed what the OP asked for. He is learning not a soloist or a composer. Academics & performance are two different things. Do you comprehend?

You must be insane you did it a few posts back...(friendly humor)

 

[dpbass66]

Stick Player I'll bet , given your apparent knowledge of harmony and chord scale theory, and your admission that you once approached playing that way, that without even thinking about it, your ears and your brain call on the aural and muscle memory of that approach from way back, when you improvise. My argument about an approach is purely from an academic sense, and relates to what we should be thinking about when we PRACTICE and when we are learning about harmonic function. When I 'm on a gig I just play what I hear; I play what I think sounds good. I dont think about anything, with regard to theory/harmony or whatever you want to call it. The sounds of all those modes/scales and chords are already in my subconscious and my muscle memory.

Another story from school goes something like...teacher to me , "Hey that sounded great what did you play on those changes...", me to teacher, "Honestly I dont know i was just playing.....", teacher to me, "Right answer...".

You are quick to disregard the references I put forth because you know that all those known educators are proponents of the "scale for each chord method". Do understand, no person is saying that finding common tones over certain passages is invalid. It is, however, just one of the many ways in which improvisation can be approached, and certainly not one of first resort. All of the harmonic function you cited in your analysis of Spain relates to certain sounds, a sound for each chord. It all does not have a singular sound of the home key, and I can promise you that if you were playing on that tune around some serious players using your approach, said serious players would hear your common tone approach in one measure. Doesnt that bother you? Why would you want your playing to be more profound? I dont get it?

The goal of crafting an improvised solo is not just to "get by", or get through the changes without playing any wrong notes, the goal is to make an artistic statement. Getting by without "wrong' notes is just an beginner-intermediate level achievement.

IMO your approach to all this is analogous to going to an art museum and not recognizing that you see Van Gogh, Picasso and Warhol. You are only seeing that its all paint on canvass.

Please explain to me why you think this is better? You come off sounding like you think it is better becasue it is easier, so please clarify for me.

 

[OPBASSMAN1994]

My approach is to just break down the guitar chord into the individual notes that it's made of, and play what of those notes work easily in a sequence in a bassline. For instance, for an E minor chord, I'd hit a progression of G-E-B-E. I'm still learning different chordal structures, but it's improved my playing a ton, and I love the melodic/countermelodic sound I get from that.

 

[Stick_Player]

"... Honestly I dont know i was just playing.....".

That's what Sonny Stitt said to me. Of course he was old and probably tired of that question. But still, the perfect answer.

... you know that all those known educators are proponents of the "scale for each chord method"

I can only speak of the 2 years I had with Dan Hearle - great teacher. Yes, that's his method (not to mention the hours and hours of time with the Jamey Aebersold music minus records) - and so tedious, but perfect for college. However, over at the classical side of the building, they were not teaching it that way. They had a different concept of modes, which I prefer, by the way.

... your common tone approach in one measure...I dont get it?

You don't get it? It's not what I said. This isn't "One Note Samba". I will try it again. Instead of thinking G Lydian, then F# Phrygian Dominant (or F# Phrygian), then E Dorian, then A Mixolydian, then D Ionian, then etc.... just use a B Natural Minor - they ALL are comprised of the SAME NOTES - common toneS!!! Call it a Tone Collection. And of course, within that bag, there are better-to-best notes to pick from depending on which chord you are extemporizing, where they are rhythmically placed, the resolution that is created (dissonance/consonance), and oh so more.

You come off sounding like you think it is better becasue it is easier, so please clarify for me.

Use a single Tone Collection. It IS so much easier. There is already too much to think about, why add in a ton of mode and scale combinations? So yes, it is better - for me.

In analyzing the melody, from this section of "Spain", do you not hear that it is ALL in B Minor (except for the last measure)? For me, that is the brilliance of this composition. It's like a simple, singable folk melody. It probably could be reharmonized, 'cept the changes are so ingrained in the membrane now.

Or, does each measure actually clearly state a new mode? I don't believe so. I think the concept or understanding of modes is then being misused.

Look, you do it your way and hang with the big cats and i'll putter along with my way in a closet. Deal?

My argument is you missed what the OP asked for.

ALL the threads, and ALL the responses on ALL the topics stray FAR away from the OP - that's the nature of a forum. Otherwise, no one would come here.

 

[Chris K]

true, but reverse-engineering classic jazz solos of the 50's in terms of "mode X over chord y" formulas does not, which was my point.

And mine as well...

 

[Chris K]

:

Dang, I have a headache.

.

Mine starten at least 10 lines up - don't ever do that to me again

 

[Chris K]

However, over at the classical side of the building, they were not teaching it that way. They had a different concept of modes, which I prefer, by the way.

Hypothesis: Stick, JTE, Richard Lindsey, Chris K all studied classical harmony.

Maybe we just should not expect those who didn't - AKA The Others - to understand what we mean. Or how much we owe to, lean on and still need classical harmony.

So to The Others: get out of this thread, study classical harmony, then come back and we'll discuss the matter again.

 

[Art Araya]

So to The Others: get out of this thread, study classical harmony, then come back and we'll discuss the matter again.

I studied both Classical and Jazz harmony!

 

[bobknowsbass]

Trane soloed Harmonically
Trane soloed Modaly
Trane soloed Melodically
Trane soloed atonally

We really need to let go of our notions that one way is the best and look at what it is to be a completely devoted practitioner of the art. If you're into that, you know evolving, you should be open to trying new avenues every time you step up. I encourage every student I teach to improvise, no matter what their level. At first, they don't know what to do. Then I give them a melody, once their good at that, I give them a scale, then the chord tones, then the modes. If they get good enough, they simply speak from the heart and use a conglomerate of ideas.

When I hear a solo, I want to be MOVED. The soloists devices are inconsequential to me as a listener.

 

[dpbass66]

Hypothesis: Stick, JTE, Richard Lindsey, Chris K all studied classical harmony.

Maybe we just should not expect those who didn't - AKA The Others - to understand what we mean. Or how much we owe to, lean on and still need classical harmony.

So to The Others: get out of this thread, study classical harmony, then come back and we'll discuss the matter again.

1) This isnt classical music.

2) For the record, in terms of formal education, I do have a few semesters each of counterpoint and 4 part writing and analysis under my belt. IN addition I have taken many semesters of jazz/contemporary music harmony and analysis.

So, in terms of formal education, Ive studied both.

 

[Rob22315]

So to The Others: get out of this thread, study classical harmony, then come back and we'll discuss the matter again.

No.

FWIW, I'm an engineer (by education) who got tired of having my GPA brought down by liberal arts classes. I took a class in music theory so I could get a 4.0 that semester (which I did). We learned about scales and modes among other things. I also happen to play guitar (mostly classical) and now, bass. Don't get me wrong, music theory was as challenging as my electrical engineering classes. It's just a bit more mathematical than things like theater and psychology so I took to it better.

I'm surprised you music geniuses didn't point out that a whole sub-genre of jazz is based on modes. It emerged in the late 50's as a style, not just a method of analysis as a way of contemplating solos. It created unique of songs, albums, and adherents. Hmm, that sort of perspective wouldn't come across in a discussion whose sole participants didn't believe modes were useful.

 

[Stick_Player]

When I hear a solo, I want to be MOVED. The soloists devices are inconsequential to me as a listener.

Only a VERY few every rise to that level. I am NOT one of them, buy I am trying.

This isnt classical music.

Might be some day. Perhaps the over analyzing is an attempt to raise it to that level. We'll probably all be dead by then.

I'm surprised you music geniuses didn't point out that a whole sub-genre of jazz is based on modes. It emerged in the late 50's as a style, not just a method of analysis as a way of contemplating solos. It created unique of songs, albums, and adherents. Hmm, that sort of perspective wouldn't come across in a discussion whose sole participants didn't believe modes were useful.

While I am nowhere near a music genius, this is an interesting point.

When I am listening or playing in a so-called modal style/way, I hear a lot of changing chordal comping of the harmonized mode.

Example: Modal key center of D Minor - D, E, F, G, A, Bb, C. Harmonize this scale and comp with the chords of Dm7, Em7b5, FMaj7, Gm7, Am7, BbMaj7, C7. Probably some of these chords more than others, add some extensions, leave some of the chord notes out, have at it.

This is really the way I approach (and have tried to explain) the non-modal extemporizing.

 

[Kobaia]

i wonder how you explain tensions and extended harmony with out using chord scales.