How Important Are Scales?

[Scottgun]

It's this. Right here... People want to jump all over the "learn chords" bandwagon. Most have no idea what the wagon is even hitched to...

Except we're not hitched to it because our position isn't, and never has been, "don't learn scales". As I said at the very beginning, scales are important for musical knowledge. They are part of basic Music 101 and will always be. But once one has Music 101 and moves into specialization i.e., playing bass in a semi-serious group, your job is clearly defining the harmonic content of the music, and that means primarily, not exclusively of course, chords. So it is perfectly acceptable to say that scales are of lesser importance as long as we aren't too wonky about it. I recommended Chord Studies for Electric Bass. Read the intro for it. It explicitly says it's not a beginner's book. It assumes you already know the basics and are ready to move on to the advanced stuff, the stuff that's going to be the working bass player's bread and butter.

 

[Koshchei]

At the end of the day:

1) You need a working knowledge of the same musical language and terminology that other musicians communicate in;
2) You need an understanding of not just what, but why you're playing what you're playing. Knowing this will push your own basslines into another league.

How you choose to go about it is up to you. Once you're past the basics (scales, chords, modes, cadences, rhythm), you're into harmony anyway.

 

[edro]

Point of reference: OPie Taylor didn't say anything about playing scales over and over yadda yadda.

OPie asked "I'm serious, how important for a bass player is scales? "...

Folks have said intervals...chord structure....etc....

To do intervals, one most know the launch note to figure the landing note.
That is defined by the key/scale... KNOWING what the notes are...

To do chords, pretty much the same with key/scales along with knowing intervals...

One doesn't have to actually know how to read to sign their name. They can draw a picture of their name, taught by rote. Think it out.

One can play a basic chord too....and not have a damn clue what it is.

If one knows the mechanics of ALL scales/keys and intervals, then one can understand the mechanics of chord structures, incidentals, passing tones, etc.. All keys/scales work the same.... You've learned what is true for all... You know what the numbers after the chord names mean and what the notes are... You can apply to all keys...

Don't want to know, simple, don't learn em... One can always stare at the guitarists fret hand all night...
Can one play with a band not knowing much? Sure. Plenty of folks having fun playing but not knowing diddley about what they are doing. Pure visual rote...

Some don't want to know anything technical.
There are guitar players that can't proficiently put new skrangs on a guitar too...
Drummers that can't tune drums...
Musicians that can't check a fuse...
Singer with a tambourine ( tossed that in on general principle)

If it is one's 'craft', I would think one might be very receptive to anything to improve and simplify one's craft...

Just views. Not busting on anyone...

 

[GreggBummer]

Anyone reading this should also keep in mind that learning this stuff doesn't happen overnight. Some people pay good money to go to university to learn it. Some people get a teacher/mentor and learn it that way. Some people teach themselves.

You don't need to be an expert or music academic to learn the basics. You can enjoy playing music without a PhD level knowledge of theory. However, you need to have some. I don't know what "some" is. As I grow older, and enter my third decade of playing bass, I find that a better understanding of theory is important to me. Don't let it overwhelm you.

 

[Spin Doctor]

Kind of interesting that TB folks here have different perspectives on chords and scales.

Where I went to school the last two semesters, there was a big divide between the folks in classical vs jazz studies on musical issues. It was if we were speaking foreign languages.

Interesting... Apparently all of these long, drawn out scale/mode debates come down to perspective and application. I play jazz for the most part, so I need to have a fairly wide view of the fretboard and what I can do with it to get my ideas out. I don't have the option of just leaning on one approach to music. I have to (or want to) come at it in every way I can.

 

[LBS-bass]

Interesting... Apparently all of these long, drawn out scale/mode debates come down to perspective and application. I play jazz for the most part, so I need to have a fairly wide view of the fretboard and what I can do with it to get my ideas out. I don't have the option of just leaning on one approach to music. I have to (or want to) come at it in every way I can.

I think you need that level of familiarity with your fretboard and muscle memory to go wherever your ear tells you to go if you want to play anything at an advanced level, and certainly if you want to improvise. Learning scales and chords is certainly a big part of that. I'd also suggest that playing a lot of varied material is also a big part of that, as someone else said above. It comes down to playing a lot of music and training your ear to hear an interval and your fingers to follow what your ear is hearing.

There probably is a world of difference between the way classical and jazz musicians learn, and I'd argue that there's probably a world of difference between the way a person with an excellent, intuitive, ear for music can learn as opposed to someone who really needs to study hard to do ear training. I don't think one is superior to the other. As someone who started as a play-by-ear person, I know that it left big holes in my ability that I've been working for years to close. I was lucky enough to have a mentor in my early days who taught me a lot of theory on the fly, and later I was lucky to take private instruction with a good bass teacher. But I wouldn't recommend anyone do it the way I did it. If you have an ear, by all means, get out there and play, but study, too. It'll be so much easier for you in the long run.

 

[Doc Blue]

Nearly 150 responses in less than 48 hours. I say this indicates the community ranks scale importance pretty high.

I remember reading about chord tones for the first time. A third and fifth of what? I was thinking 1/3rd, and 1/5th. It wasn't until I studied scales this made any sense. Agree with a lot of posts here. Music 101 to learn the language and get started learning chords and harmony.

 

[IamGroot]

That's an interesting observation. I wonder if you could elaborate? It would be interesting to compare/correlate with the backgrounds of the perspectives demonstrated here. Really good would be for people to better understand and respect the different perspectives which might even help us avoid getting into entrenched right vs wrong positions.

Be happy to share some. It really opened my eyes to there is no absolute right or wrong in music, just what is traditional in a given context.

Scales: in classical, scales are a key pathway to fluent and beatiful technique (esp. if you are Russian). In jazz, scales and the interrelationship between modes are a key to improvisation. Classics guy will ask you why would you want too improvise, but if you did, you would do it from leading tone/resolution rather than 1 6 25 whatever the hell that means. 3/7 s...what does that mean. Lets talk subdominant and supermediant. And you confuse the ascending and descending forms of the melodic minor. And dont swing those notes!!! Etc. Preference for diminished vs half diminished. Etc.

In beginning piano, I would always try to play the tune in all 12 keys, which drove my instructor crazy. She had perfect pitch btw.

I showed her the hand signals for the keys and she very coldly told me they didnt do that in the symphony.

I love my classic studies buddies and teachers and i dont mean to imply any disrespect. What they do is awesome.

My mentor has his PhD in classical saxophone and plays in the symphony as well as being a significant star in jazz. Having feet in both streams can be enormously beneficial to your understanding of music and what you can hear and play.

 

[IamGroot]

Btw, the Ray Brown Method book and John Patituccis Scale and Etudes are good resources. Johns book is especially nice as he shows fingering for both upright and electric and for modes.

I personally believe there are multiple valid fingerings if you want to zoom around the neck with agility. Helpful if you play sax solos or Bach. You may start with a F major on the low end but run it up the neck fadter with a D natural minor. Upright players are cool to this. I posted a thread on this months back and got reamed by the experts.

And btw, thinking of melodic minor modes as a "flavor" of the major mode is helpful except for the Lyd aug and altered scales. You are more likely to incorporate it in your soloing with this mindset.

 

[IamGroot]

I think you need that level of familiarity with your fretboard and muscle memory to go wherever your ear tells you to go if you want to play anything at an advanced level, and certainly if you want to improvise. Learning scales and chords is certainly a big part of that. I'd also suggest that playing a lot of varied material is also a big part of that, as someone else said above. It comes down to playing a lot of music and training your ear to hear an interval and your fingers to follow what your ear is hearing.

There probably is a world of difference between the way classical and jazz musicians learn, and I'd argue that there's probably a world of difference between the way a person with an excellent, intuitive, ear for music can learn as opposed to someone who really needs to study hard to do ear training. I don't think one is superior to the other. As someone who started as a play-by-ear person, I know that it left big holes in my ability that I've been working for years to close. I was lucky enough to have a mentor in my early days who taught me a lot of theory on the fly, and later I was lucky to take private instruction with a good bass teacher. But I wouldn't recommend anyone do it the way I did it. If you have an ear, by all means, get out there and play, but study, too. It'll be so much easier for you in the long run.

Tagging onto LBS's post.

Learning scales and modes is nice.

Being able to hear those scales and play them like an outfielder catching a fly is the goal.

Someday, you may be chained to a playful pianist in a restaurant who wants to screw with you so every chorus of Bye Bye Blackbird is going to have different chord substitutions and cadence inserts plus modulations. If can hear scales/modes, you will do well. If you cant, tip his drink over into his lap accidentally.

 

[Spin Doctor]

You may start with a F major on the low end but run it up the neck fadter with a D natural minor. Upright players are cool to this. I posted a thread on this months back and got reamed by the experts.

This seems valid to me. F major and D natural minor are all the same notes. So what's the problem according to the "experts"?

 

[SteveCS]

Be happy to share some. It really opened my eyes to there is no absolute right or wrong in music, just what is traditional in a given context.

Scales: in classical, scales are a key pathway to fluent and beatiful technique (esp. if you are Russian). In jazz, scales and the interrelationship between modes are a key to improvisation. Classics guy will ask you why would you want too improvise, but if you did, you would do it from leading tone/resolution rather than 1 6 25 whatever the hell that means. 3/7 s...what does that mean. Lets talk subdominant and supermediant. And you confuse the ascending and descending forms of the melodic minor. And dont swing those notes!!! Etc. Preference for diminished vs half diminished. Etc.
...
I love my classic studies buddies and teachers and i dont mean to imply any disrespect. What they do is awesome.
.... Having feet in both streams can be enormously beneficial to your understanding of music and what you can hear and play.

Interesting. My background is pretty diverse. I had a lot of classical training as a young child, from about 7-11 years, mainly choral and piano. I could sing at sight from about 8 years old, with perfect pitch. Then I stopped music altogether for about 5 years due to family breakup, after which I took up guitar at about 16, turning to bass at 18. This was early 80s. By then my interests had moved on to rock and pop, so I rode back in on the post-punk new wave thing, learning to play mainly by ear until about 1984. Fretless players like Pino (everyone!), Karn (Japan and others), Webb (Talk Talk) and Alan Thompson (John Martyn and others) were in high fashion around that time, so out came the frets.

As my peer group developed, it turned out a friend's mother was a tutor at the Royal School of Music. She agreed to take me on for theory lessons - she didn't play bass and I no longer had a piano. A couple of years later I sat and passed the higher grade exams.

Then I discovered Stanley, Jaco, Berlin, Levin, Jones, etc. Mind blown! But with such a diverse background and broad grounding I find it hard to imagine having fundamental gaps in the basics. Hence my whittering analogy earlier. On the plus side, I find it easy to consolidate the differing perpectives you describe. I don't prioritise any one purpose of scales over any other. I love classical music as a first love. But I also love to improvise, although as you mentioned, I probably fall into the more for a classical flavour in my melodic structures.

Putting all of that aside, I have to admit I've never heard of a supermediant before today...

 

[SteveCS]

This seems valid to me. F major and D natural minor are all the same notes. So what's the problem according to the "experts"?

I suppose it depends if you are thinking fingerings or note function. Even if the fingering was a D natural minor option, I would still be thinking F.

 

[TheLowDown33]

Didnt read all 8 pages...but having a working knowledge of music theory makes playing any instrument exponentially more enjoyable. Not being able to articulate musical ideas from your head to your fingers is like an internal language barrier.

 

[IamGroot]

Interesting. My background is pretty diverse. I had a lot of classical training as a young child, from about 7-11 years, mainly choral and piano. I could sing at sight from about 8 years old, with perfect pitch. Then I stopped music altogether for about 5 years due to family breakup, after which I took up guitar at about 16, turning to bass at 18. This was early 80s. By then my interests had moved on to rock and pop, so I rode back in on the post-punk new wave thing, learning to play mainly by ear until about 1984. Fretless players like Pino (everyone!), Karn (Japan and others), Webb (Talk Talk) and Alan Thompson (John Martyn and others) were in high fashion around that time, so out came the frets.

As my peer group developed, it turned out a friend's mother was a tutor at the Royal School of Music. She agreed to take me on for theory lessons - she didn't play bass and I no longer had a piano. A couple of years later I sat and passed the higher grade exams.

Then I discovered Stanley, Jaco, Berlin, Levin, Jones, etc. Mind blown! But with such a diverse background and broad grounding I find it hard to imagine having fundamental gaps in the basics. Hence my whittering analogy earlier. On the plus side, I find it easy to consolidate the differing perpectives you describe. I don't prioritise any one purpose of scales over any other. I love classical music as a first love. But I also love to improvise, although as you mentioned, I probably fall into the more for a classical flavour in my melodic structures.

Putting all of that aside, I have to admit I've never heard of a supermediant before today...

I made a mistake or I was being sarcastic. Which do you think was more likely?

Nice post and description of your musical journey. The musicians that impress me the most are open to all, er almost all, forms of music.

Last day of semester, a guitar student came into my rehearsal room. I asked about music theory and metronomes and such and was told they were old school, elitest and not relevant to her music. I kept my mouth shut, but I wonder why she was there in the first place.

 

[Spin Doctor]

I suppose it depends if you are thinking fingerings or note function. Even if the fingering was a D natural minor option, I would still be thinking F.

Yeah, that's my point. It's all still just "F". I use modes to navigate the fretboard all the time.

 

[IamGroot]

I suppose it depends if you are thinking fingerings or note function. Even if the fingering was a D natural minor option, I would still be thinking F.

Edited
Yes, still think F by all means. Start in F, , but switch to the natural minor fingering for D which is "fast". And continue in C myxolydian. Finish with 6,7 an 8 of F scale. Crazy?

Pat Martino uses mostly dorian fingerings to navigate the neck, which requires more stretch or shift. Gives his solos a feel i dont want to copy.

 

[SteveCS]

Yes, still think F by all means, but use the natural minor fingering for D which is "fast". And continue in C myxolydian. Finish with 6,7 an 8 of F scale. Crazy?

Pat Martino uses mostly dorian fingerings to navigate the neck, which requires more stretch or shift. Gives his solos a feel i dont want to copy.

I think my point was that I don't associate fingerings with named scales, keys or chords. They (fingerings) are just a means to an end, i.e. moving to and from the right notes in the most appropriate way for the tune.

 

[IamGroot]

Maybe I should explain a little better.

When playing a 3 octave scale on Electri bass, you can
Play the first 5 notes as the major scale,
Switch over to the relative minor on the 6th degree
Switch to the mixolydian when you hit the 5.

 

[IamGroot]

Btw, apologies for hijacking thread