Some questions

[Pacman]

Sorry I misunderstood you, Garrett. I think you'll probably start to like theory once you get a better working knowledge - when you don't really have a grasp of something, it makes it tough to enjoy. Tough it out, and ask any questions here - there's a lot of 'theory nazis' here

 

[cassanova]

Originally posted by Pacman
Locrain has a flat 2,3,5,6, and 7. No raised 5th degree.

If it had a raised 5th degree wouldnt it read as an augmented chord on the chart?

Originally posted by moley


But in the case of Locrian, it's a flat 5, not a sharp 4.

like wise wouldnt it be shown as a dim chord on the chart???

Or does one have nothing to do with the other?

 

[geshel]

Originally posted by moley
Then think of it in some visual way - maybe in the form of notes on the piano keyboard, whatever works. The point is to think of it in some way that relates to what notes you're playing - not to where you're playing them.

c'mon Moley, think about those two sentences a little bit. Find the contradiction, I know you can. You can have an irrational distaste for tab, but don't try to pawn it off on the rest of us.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by geshel


c'mon Moley, think about those two sentences a little bit. Find the contradiction, I know you can. You can have an irrational distaste for tab, but don't try to pawn it off on the rest of us.

What are you saying, Geshel? There's no contradiction. Notes on a piano relate directly to what notes you're playing, because on the piano there's one key for each note. It's easy to see intervals, and it's easy to see scales in a way that's helpful.

When you play scales on a piano, you're very much aware of what notes your playing, because you can see them right there. From a theory point of view, piano is a great instrument to have and to use as a learning tool. Whereas with a bass, if you're gonna think in terms of visual shapes and patterns, you're reduced to thinking in terms of fret numbers and strings. As soon as you're thinking in terms of fret numbers rather than note names, you're limiting yourself, IMO.

On a piano, you think C, and you play C, it's right there. There's no "translation". There's no "C, ok that's 3rd fret A string", or whatever. Really, there's not two ways of thinking about the same thing. There's just C!

Likewise with horn players actually. I can't speak for anyone else, but I'm pretty sure horn players don't go around describing what they play in terms of what valves or keys they're pressing.

They don't think "ok, 1st valve and 3rd valve". They think "D", and their fingers know to play 1st and 3rd valve.

Why should it be any different with bass or guitar? You think "D", and your fingers automatically go to 5th fret, A string, or the open D string - or whatever's nearest.

But when you think about it purely in terms of fret positions, then, IMO, you deprive yourself. Particularly as a multi-instrumentalist myself, I think the aim is to be able to do this on any instrument you play. That is, think the note, and have your fingers know what to play to get the note. Rather than bypassing the "note" stuff altogether, and just thinking of fingering. If you do that - how do you play any other instruments? And how do you communicate with others?

Pac, do you agree?

I have no irrational distaste of tab, I just don't think it's particularly useful and I don't think it's particularly helpful to someone learning to be a musician.

 

[moley]

Originally posted by cassanova


If it had a raised 5th degree wouldnt it read as an augmented chord on the chart?

Quite possibly. Or, an altered chord. Either way, you're talking about chords there, rather than scales.


like wise wouldnt it be shown as a dim chord on the chart???

A chord with a flat 5th might be a dim chord. But, we were talking about scales, weren't we?

 

[Pacman]

Originally posted by moley

Pac, do you agree?

Like is was the gospel, baby!

I've actually been bitten by something that illustrates this recently. I played a lot of music using the patterns and boxes approach for a long time. And don't get me wrong, I did some good work, and played at a high level. But, in the past two years playing upright, I've realized I didn't know the music I really wanted to play. I just knew the patterns - which doesn't help you on upright, and it doesn't help you with the larger concept of playing what you hear, anywhere on the bass.

Take it from me, learn the music, and learn it completely. Then it will translate to any intrument you want to use.

 

[thrash_jazz]

Originally posted by cassanova




like wise wouldnt it be shown as a dim chord on the chart???

Or does one have nothing to do with the other?

If I understand what you're asking (to do with b5 vs. #4 in Locrian) it's a b5 and not a #4, since you already have a perfect 4th in there. IIRC you cannot have two of the "same" interval in a diatonic scale, therefore it is referred to as the next interval up (the 5th, in this case). This is why you sometimes see double flats and sharps in some keys.

And Garrett - as far as the theory question goes, think about giving it another shot. It can be frustrating at times, but these fellows are absolutely right when they say there's no looking back once you get it. And if you have more questions, TB will be here!

 

[Garrett Mireles]

Originally posted by thrash_jazz
And Garrett - as far as the theory question goes, think about giving it another shot. It can be frustrating at times, but these fellows are absolutely right when they say there's no looking back once you get it. And if you have more questions, TB will be here!

Yeah I do my normal posting at AB, but I come here for theory questions. I get more responses here, at AB I can always count on some know it all to use giant words and confuse me even more.

I'll be at a hotel until Sunday, then the movers are coming on Monday until Wednesday..so I'll have nothing to do for a week. Good time to bust out the theory books..