Music theory/modal arpeggios question

[IJBurns]

It's amazing to me that a site created to bring bass players together to share ideas has turned into a CNN vs FOX website! Jesus man!!! If a guy wants to arpeggiate modes or call a 5th inversion the 139,000 inversion, so what!? As long as the frequencies produced in mid shaging air are produced and it's the desired effect of whomever is making those frequencies sound from whatever medium they want sounds like what they were going for then what is the point!

 

[IJBurns]

I'd refer to Frank Zappa here but it's likely to spark a debate full of personal insults so I'll refrain

 

[Reedt2000]

I'm wrong, you're wrong, he's wrong, she's wrong, Jenner is wrong, it's all wrong. When music becomes perfunctory in lieu of music, what's the f***** point? So we can all jack off to who had the most intellectually composed come back? Because that's all this is. Who can one up the other guy to prove his bass balls are bigger. We all play the same 12 notes!!!

Yes these conversations can end up having an air of music-school-snobbery (of which I may be guilty) but I assure you there is no ill will attached. If anything it is a just a window into the wide variety of thought proccesses on just this single musical concept.

You are exactly correct, we all play the same 12 notes. Please don't see any of this as a declaration of superiority, in the long and short of it we all play what we feel and that is as it should be.

 

[Groove Doctor]

Hope it wasn't one of my comments.... (I wasn't aiming anything at you at all !!).

I seldom write in threads on Modes bc it brings out the worst in normal people, and won't say what I want to say about the other type. Why do people make it harder than it needs to be??

 

[Whousedtoplay]

I was mistakenly calling the playing of a mode by playing the 1 3 5 7 and extensions 9 11 13 one note at a time

Definition of arpeggio
plural
arpeggios

1. 
   
   
   • : production (playing/singing) of the tones of a chord in succession and not simultaneously.

From here:
Invalid Link Removed

me playing a 1 3 5 7 9 #11 13 one note at a time all over the fingerboard

You are arpeggiating the major 13(#11) chord.

 

[russosborne]

I really shouldn't ask, but I guess I am a glutton for punishment.

In the above book excerpt, why for some of the chords does it say things like "reflects the Dorian", "conveys the Phrygian", etc, while for others it says "Pure" or no other adjectives, meaning it IS the mode?
I guess my real question is how do those chords "reflect" or "conveys" the mode while not (if I am reading that right) actually BE the mode?

Thanks,
Russ

 

[Nickweissmusic]

Eegads, we can debate which system of theory we most ascribe to but: in ANY system used and validated by any academic music theorist after about 1920 or so, there's no such thing as a "third inversion."

100% wrong. I graduated music school in the 21st-century, All the inversions for 7th chords were taught. This screenshot is from Tenuto, an ear training/ note recognition app that I use and recommend to my students. A# b13 Phrygian Sus isn't one of the options

 

[Whousedtoplay]

I really shouldn't ask, but I guess I am a glutton for punishment.

In the above book excerpt, why for some of the chords does it say things like "reflects the Dorian", "conveys the Phrygian", etc, while for others it says "Pure" or no other adjectives, meaning it IS the mode?
I guess my real question is how do those chords "reflect" or "conveys" the mode while not (if I am reading that right) actually BE the mode?

Thanks,
Russ

Let's take that C major 13 chord - C E G B D F A - and rearrange the notes as
C D E F G A B (the same notes from the C maj13 chord)
Does it look like "pure" Ionian?

Fmaj13(#11) - F (1) A(3) C(5) E(maj7) G(9) B(#11) D(13), and, once again, let's rearrange the notes as

F G A B(#11) C D E F which looks like F Lydian; therefore, it's the Lydian mode.

Now, try the G13 chord - G B D F A C E or G A B C D E F (G) with is "pure"/"perfect" Mixolydian Mode.

Let's take one more the Am11(b13) - A C E G B(9) D(11) F(b13). After rearranging those notes, we have
A B C D E F G (A) - is a "pure" A natural scale or Aeolian Mode, and so on...

 

[inanimate_carb]

Music theory helps people get on the same page for analysis, composition, and rehearsal. If I rattle off the note names F A C E, most musicians will recognize that as F major 7. It's been documented that Paul McCartney calls the sound that occurs from those tones the "pretty chord", and somewhere another guy might call it a "green hornet". Different names, same sonic result, but previously agreed upon academic indentifiers save a lot of time.

 

[DrummerwStrings]

Eegads, we can debate which system of theory we most ascribe to but: in ANY system used and validated by any academic music theorist after about 1920 or so, there's no such thing as a "third inversion." I myself am primarily of the Schenkerian school, wherein the concept of "inversion" only carries to the FIRST, i.e. the 3rd of the chord in the bass. A so-called "second inversion" is a dissonance, creating an interval of a fourth in the lowest two voices, which is not a consonance (i.e. a stable harmony). It is a dissonance that must resolve. I know, we commonly refer to 6/4 "inversions" but in Schenkerian and other systems of explaining Western tonal music, they are not truly thought of as "inversions." Thus, certainly ANYTHING with the 7th as the lowest voice, or above (9th, 11th, etc.) in the bass, is a dissonance requiring resolution and not an "inversion."

This is the first time I've heard of the Schenkerian academic music theory. This is also the first time I've heard that second and third inversions are not chords - my various teachers & sources of information called them chords, and dissonant chords chords (that want to be resolved).

"in Schenkerian and other systems of explaining Western tonal music"

Sounds like it's a way to analyze a work, like you can find in an English or an Art History Department. A theory about music, yes - but is it Music Theory? I don't know, I'm asking. Logically, an inversion derives from a chord. Many would say it's a chord, if you don't consider dissonant chords chords, Ok; but the OP's question was about how to play arpeggios and modes. The above post is about When to play; I don't see much on How.

Thanks for exposing me to something new, I'll look up Schenker & Schenkerian music theory.

 

[SteveCS]

...

Thanks for exposing me to something new, I'll look up Schenker & Schenkerian music theory.

In essence it's a fancy way of deriving a chord sheet and getting the names wrong. YMMV.

 

[mambo4]

As long as the frequencies produced in mid shagging air are produced and it's the desired effect of whomever is making those frequencies sound from whatever medium they want sounds like what they were going for then what is the point!

It is certainly true that , at the end of the day, how it sounds is what matters.
But communicating clearly with other musicians also matters.

The challenge to communication is that most theory concepts overlap and intertwine :
It's always just the same set of 7 notes viewed through different lenses.
And it is very easy to disagree over which of the many possible lenses is "correct",
especially when a generalized question has no specific composition providing a concrete context.

 

[davidhilton]

I'm a bit new to modes and have not really looked at modal arpeggios yet.

If I'm playing a Cmaj7 arpeggio starting from the low E instead of the C (E G B C E G B C), would that still be called a Cmaj7 arpeggio or could it be called a two octave E phrygian minor 6 arpeggio?

I'm a bit confused as by that logic a normal E phrygian arpeggio would be E G B D E but that's the same notes as E aeolian. Are they just they same or is there a common way that each mode is arpeggiated to outline its differences?

Hopefully this makes sense.

Cmaj7 arp in 1st inversion.
www.basslessonslosangeles.com