understanding modes

[rastachild]

i agree with most of what martyr machine says, but to say that modes are not important for a guitarist is shortsighted. they aren't of vital importance (many players do just fine with the pentatonic), but there's a lot that can be done with modes that does not require us to resort to the limiting style of modal music. for example, in rock music, many progressions are very simple and sometimes aren't even fully fleshed out chords, but instead are 'riffs'. one that you'll hear over and over again is a simple b7 to 1 (think intro to war pigs) and if there are chords, they are usually root-fifth parallel chords. over simplistic progressions like this, you usually have a choice of modes you can utilize. over the b7 to 1 'progression', you could use any scale or mode that features that interval (i.e., dorian, phrygian, mixolydian, aeolian, locrian). i actually do this often in my own tunes and it does work well. of course, the more complicated the chord progression, the less options you will have to play over it. but the modes are very useful and guys like satch and vai are using them constantly.

[tobe]

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

No, you couldn't. That progression is not modal; it clearly establishes a tonality of C major, so you would use C major. Modes don't factor into it at all, and have nothing to do with key based music. Modes are harmonically unstable, and aren't used to construct chord progressions. If you want to play F lydian (which is what you meant, not F dorian), drone an F note over and over and over and play F lydian over it. If your tonal center is C (which it is), you are not playing F lydian or G mixolydian.

Another point: Ionian is not the same as major, and the terms aren't interchangeable. Ionian implies modal music, which is incredibly rare and doesn't utilize clearly diatonic chord progressions like you're doing. Your progression is in C major, not C ionian.



Modes aren't used to build chord progressions. Most of those would be ridiculously harmonically unstable and would resolve to the relative major/minor.

Most all of what was just stated is totally wrong. My suggestion is to go to the bookstore and get a theory book. A good place to start for most guitarists would not be a general theory book, but one geared for guitarists. I have found that for most guitarists find it easier to learn theory on how it applies to their own instrument, and then go back and understand the basics of overall music theory. Its kinda of like putting the cart before the horse, but it often works. Scales and modes in the beginning, I can not remember the author, is a great tool. Not trying to be a jerk, but instead of all sorts of mis information you can find on a forum, either get a book, if you are in college, ask the music department for a suggestion, if you do not know where to start, or do a google search. I'm not trying to get into a p*ssing match with anyone, but if you really do not have a background in music theory, please do not post your notions as facts and mess some one up thats trying to learn. Heck even Wikipedia has some better info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatonic_and_chromatic

Have a great weekend everyone! Tobe

[Martyr Machine]

Originally Posted by tobe

Most all of what was just stated is totally wrong. My suggestion is to go to the bookstore and get a theory book. A good place to start for most guitarists would not be a general theory book, but one geared for guitarists. I have found that for most guitarists find it easier to learn theory on how it applies to their own instrument, and then go back and understand the basics of overall music theory. Its kinda of like putting the cart before the horse, but it often works. Scales and modes in the beginning, I can not remember the author, is a great tool. Not trying to be a jerk, but instead of all sorts of mis information you can find on a forum, either get a book, if you are in college, ask the music department for a suggestion, if you do not know where to start, or do a google search. I'm not trying to get into a p*ssing match with anyone, but if you really do not have a background in music theory, please do not post your notions as facts and mess some one up thats trying to learn. Heck even Wikipedia has some better info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatonic_and_chromatic

Have a great weekend everyone! Tobe

Perhaps you could point out exactly what is wrong with my statement, instead of making vague accusations.

[rastachild]

well, you CAN build chord progression from modes. although your key signature will reflect the relative major scale, you can have a key center that is in whatever relative mode. the key center being the tonic note that the chord progression or piece is based from. take for example the song 'flying in a blue dream' by satriani. this tune is in lydian, has a chord progression that supports the lydian mode and is nowhere close to being modal music. which is why i assert that modal usage is more important and more prevalent than you are saying, at least in modern music. your assertations are correct in the context of when modal music first came around, which if i remember correctly was around the renaissance era, predating the baroque and classical periods.

but i don't it's necessarily a great idea to learn modes in relation to your instrument only. music is music and the theoretical concepts generally are the same regardless of the instrument you learn them on. it may be easier for someone to learn modes this way though.

[tobe]

Originally Posted by rastachild

but i don't it's necessarily a great idea to learn modes in relation to your instrument only. music is music and the theoretical concepts generally are the same regardless of the instrument you learn them on. it may be easier for someone to learn modes this way though.

Oh, I agree, I was just saying its a good way for many guitarist, often whom seem to have a harder time with theory, most likely due to the more "contemporary" nature of the modern guitar. Alot of guitarists start off my learning the "mechanics" of the instrument and then later, if at all, why things work the way they do. Its often easier for people to see how they physically are constructed on the guitar, and then how they work within the frame work of music theory.

[tobe]

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

Perhaps you could point out exactly what is wrong with my statement, instead of making vague accusations.

Not trying to make any vague accusations. I am not sure how much theory you have taken, or studied, but go back and do a little research, and you will see the error of your statements. Like I said, not trying to get in a p*ssing match. Just try to correct misinformation. Take care, Tobe

[Martyr Machine]

Originally Posted by tobe

Not trying to make any vague accusations. I am not sure how much theory you have taken, or studied, but go back and do a little research, and you will see the error of your statements. Like I said, not trying to get in a p*ssing match. Just try to correct misinformation. Take care, Tobe

Correcting misinformation would require you to...correct it, not make dogmatic assertions. If you're going to claim that I'm wrong, you need to point out why.

[tobe]

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

Correcting misinformation would require you to...correct it, not make dogmatic assertions. If you're going to claim that I'm wrong, you need to point out why.

Like I said, do even an internet search and you can find out more, or read the other posts, the one about Satch was a good one. Do not mistake church modes, used in Gregorian Chant, for the modes. Sorry to rub you the wrong way, but I do not have the time to explain it all, simply do some research, I pointed out several resources, or if you really want some time, when I have time, I can send an e mail to you. Anyway, have a good weekend!

[Martyr Machine]

Originally Posted by tobe

Like I said, do even an internet search and you can find out more, or read the other posts, the one about Satch was a good one. Do not mistake church modes, used in Gregorian Chant, for the modes. Sorry to rub you the wrong way, but I do not have the time to explain it all, simply do some research, I pointed out several resources, or if you really want some time, when I have time, I can send an e mail to you. Anyway, have a good weekend!

No, it doesn't work that way. You don't get to back up an argument with "look it up", you need to actually point out the flaw you think is in your opponents position.

[gu1tar]

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

I would strongly advise studying the theory behind the major scale and diatonic harmony before worrying about modes. They really aren't nearly as common or important as guitarists make them out to be.

That's a very misguided opinion. Modes aren't important which is why Joe Satriani, Doug Doppler (who took over Joe's teaching), Terry Syrek (author), Paul Hanson (author, former GIT instructor), Adam Kadmon (author) of the very successful Guitar Grimoire books, well-renowned schools like Musician's Institute, etc., etc. all teach modes - because they are not common or important. And they are not common or important which is why players like Satriani, Vai, Malmsteen, Govan, etc., etc. use them.

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

The closest you're going to come to applying modes to modern musical conventions is over a one or two chord vamp, or by droning a single note over and over in the background.

Wrong. You just don't understand the modes yourself then. You are using them whether you realize it or not whenever you play a major or minor scale. If you don't choose to think of them that way, and prefer to think of Ionian as the major scale or Aeolian as the natural minor, that's up to you. But it doesn't change the fact that you are still "applying modes".

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

As for the modes themselves; it's best not to think of them as major scales starting starting on a different root.

Yet that is what they ARE.

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

Ionian (Not the same as major)
C-D-E-F-G-A-B
1-2-3-4-5-6-7

Aeolian (not the same as minor)
C-D-Eb-F-G-Ab-Bb
1-2-b3-4-5-b6-b7

Ionian IS the same as major:

Major:
C-D-E-F-G-A-B
1-2-3-4-5-6-7
or W W H W W W H

Ionian:
C-D-E-F-G-A-B
1-2-3-4-5-6-7
or W W H W W W H

Aeolian IS the same as natural minor:

Natural Minor:
C-D-Eb-F-G-Ab-Bb
1-2-b3-4-5-b6-b7
or W H W W H W W

Aeolian:
C-D-Eb-F-G-Ab-Bb
1-2-b3-4-5-b6-b7
or W H W W H W W

They look the same, because they ARE the same.

Originally Posted by CalledToArms

Sorry for these noobish questions but modes really interest me, and I just want to make sure I am thinking about them the right way before I really dive into them, because learning something wrong can be very detrimental.

Looks like you have done exactly what he didn't want.

Originally Posted by tobe

I am not sure how much theory you have taken, or studied, but go back and do a little research, and you will see the error of your statements.

He's right. Do some research. Check out books by the folks I mentioned above and you will be well on your way toward the path of enlightenment, riches, and better understanding of music, modes, scales, and the geetar.

[Martyr Machine]

Originally Posted by gu1tar

That's a very misguided opinion. Modes aren't important which is why Joe Satriani, Doug Doppler (who took over Joe's teaching), Terry Syrek (author), Paul Hanson (author, former GIT instructor), Adam Kadmon (author) of the very successful Guitar Grimoire books, well-renowned schools like Musician's Institute, etc., etc. all teach modes - because they are not common or important. And they are not common or important which is why players like Satriani, Vai, Malmsteen, Govan, etc., etc. use them.

I didn't say they weren't important, I said they weren't as common or important as guitarists make them out to be. They're useful to know, certainly, but a solid grounding in tonal and diatonic theory is vastly more important.

Wrong. You just don't understand the modes yourself then. You are using them whether you realize it or not whenever you play a major or minor scale. If you don't choose to think of them that way, and prefer to think of Ionian as the major scale or Aeolian as the natural minor, that's up to you. But it doesn't change the fact that you are still "applying modes".

"Ionian" and "major" are not synonymous, nor are "aeolian" and "minor". The former would imply that the song is modal, which my music never is. Modal music is not the same as modern tonal music.

Yet that is what they ARE.

Modes predate the "major scale" by centuries.

[gu1tar]

Originally Posted by Martyr Machine

I didn't say they weren't important, I said they weren't as common or important as guitarists make them out to be. They're useful to know, certainly, but a solid grounding in tonal and diatonic theory is vastly more important.

"Ionian" and "major" are not synonymous, nor are "aeolian" and "minor". The former would imply that the song is modal, which my music never is. Modal music is not the same as modern tonal music.

Modes predate the "major scale" by centuries.

I can see now that Tobe was the smart one not to get into this with you. You are misinformed and I'm out.

[Martyr Machine]

Originally Posted by gu1tar

I can see now that Tobe was the smart one not to get into this with you. You are misinformed and I'm out.

That's not how debate works. Generally, you would offer some sort of defense for your position.

[CalledToArms]

i think ill talk to my teacher heh. I start the summer sessions up tonight. I appreciate everyone's opinion and I'll let you know what he says too.

[Champagne Mist]

In the interest of re-centering this thread...

A modes discussion could easily get too technical (and beyond my knowledge), but there has been a lot of good info here, and I'll try to offer my interpretation of modes and draw upon some good posts.

Yes, modes are shifted major scales, but this view is only useful in deriving the modes themselves. The power in modes is, as previously mentioned, the various tonal varieties they offer on the normal relative major or minor scales. My approach to modes is simply that they allow the melody to interact with the accompaniment in an interesting or appropriate manner.

One way to use them would be to suggest a particular tonality; for example, playing C mixolydian over a C major triad would suggest a dominant 7 sound rather than just playing C ionian.

To review, C lydian = C major with a raised 4th, C mixo = C major with a flatted 7th.

As mentioned in several posts, no one would play C ionion, F lydian, and G mixo over a C,F,G chord progression and claim they were playing "modally". That would be a misunderstanding of the modes, as clearly you are just playing C major and emphasizing the relevant chord tones. But suppose you use an alteration in the progression, and play C,F,Gmaj7, where the Gmaj7 chord now includes the non-diatonic note F#; you may choose to play C ionian over C and F and then switch to C lydian over the Gmaj7 (review C lydian to see why this would work). Of course this would be equivalent to playing G ionian over the Gmaj7. Now since G lydian also contains the major 7th like G ionian does, you could opt to play G lydian over the Gmaj7 chord for a slightly different flavor.

I think it was martyr machine who brought up a good point about being 'boxed in' by modes. From the above example, if we wish to play some modal variant of the G major scale over the Gmaj7 (our motivation for this is purely to add variation or interest), we are somewhat limited in that out of the 3 modes with a major tonality, G ionian or G lydian are really our only two options to play over the Gmaj7 chord (G mixolydian has the minor 7th). So we really only have two options, thus, the idea of being boxed in. Of course, you are free to alter the modes or add chromatics as you see fit. If I read correctly, I think martyr machine's idea was to somewhat gloss over the modes and play the major or minor scale more or less, adding chromatics when necessary (correct me if I misinterpret you). Still, I think the modes are highly useful in that they do give you SOMEwhere to go without throwing you completely out on your own to stumble around with chromatics.

I have to echo whoever suggested Dave Weiner's riff of the week lessons on modes that he has done. Check the tube or his website. I really like his explanations as they are very practically based and guitar-oriented.