# Scales



## George Caplan (Oct 29, 2011)

anyone ever gotten a book on scales. like the phrygian scales or pentatonic. are these scales important and does anyone use or think about them when theyre writing music.

any good tips on an easy to understand book?


----------



## Danny_Owen (Oct 29, 2011)

Hi George

Even easier to understand than a book (you don't have to even be able to read music), and free 

: http://www.looknohands.com/chordhouse/piano/

Enjoy!

As for how to make use of them, I'd buy a book on harmony as opposed to just a scales book.

Danny


----------



## wst3 (Oct 29, 2011)

George Caplan @ Sat Oct 29 said:


> anyone ever gotten a book on scales. like the phrygian scales or pentatonic.



There are scale dictionaries out there, I don't own any because I was lucky (didn't know it at the time) enough to have a piano teacher that FORCED me to learn about a dozen different scales and all the modes. I had to play them, recite them, define them, and (shudder of horror) apply them to both composition and improvisation. He drove me nuts - wish I could find him now to thank him for that!



George Caplan said:


> are these scales important and does anyone use or think about them when theyre writing music.



This is one of those debates - akin to how important is it to be able to read and write standard notation - that may never be resolved completely. Most of us (I'm just guessing) go through at least one phase where we eschew the use of knowledge about such pedestrian things as scales, harmony, etc. The we decide that maybe it's not so bad to know it after all.

I try to compose using nothing but my ears and the chromatic scale. And every once in a while I can translate what's in my head to paper without having to resort to scales and rules and math. And when that happens, well, it is kinda cool.

I try to improvise using the same concept - what's in my head. I find I fall back on scales and even riffs and patterns far more often than I'd like. However, every once in a while I have a night, or even just a chorus, where I'm just channeling me!

And it is nice, in both settings, to be able to fall back on solid knowledge!

I also get the biggest kick out of academic analysis of jazz - no disrespect meant, in fact I'm in awe of people like Rayburn Wright - I have to wonder sometimes was the artist consciously thinking "I'll use a Dorian mode over that 13flat5, and then a diminished scale over that minor7" - or were they just playing from the heart? I don't know, Professor Wright may know. Read his series called "Inside the Score" and you will begin to appreciate the value of the 'rules' of harmony and scales and chord spelling and so on.



George Caplan said:


> any good tips on an easy to understand book?


I'd start with any of the current crop of basic harmony texts. For information about scale construction and application I'd look towards books that address improvisation. For some reason (might be me) I've found them to be more applicable, or maybe more easily applicable.

Have fun!


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 29, 2011)

wst3 @ Sat Oct 29 said:


> in fact I'm in awe of people like Rayburn Wright - I have to wonder sometimes was the artist consciously thinking "I'll use a Dorian mode over that 13flat5, and then a diminished scale over that minor7" -




thanks Danny & Bill. that little chart is interesting and helpful too but i need to have a book i can read and use as a reference. that quote above is way over my pay grade Bill. :D


----------



## José Herring (Oct 29, 2011)

This is like the scale bible. But, it's not for the faint of heart.

http://www.amazon.com/Thesaurus-Scales-Melodic-Patterns-Text/dp/082561449X (http://www.amazon.com/Thesaurus-Scales- ... 082561449X)


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 29, 2011)

thats great jose. thats the one for me. outstanding!


----------



## poseur (Oct 29, 2011)

josejherring @ Sat Oct 29 said:


> This is like the scale bible. But, it's not for the faint of heart.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Thesaurus-Scales-Melodic-Patterns-Text/dp/082561449X (http://www.amazon.com/Thesaurus-Scales- ... 082561449X)



hmmm.
i think this is def not a good choice for folks who're not yet conversant w/music theory.

maybe something like the boge/clough/conley book might prove more immediately useful?

http://www.amazon.com/Scales-Intervals-Triads-Rhythm-Meter/dp/0393973697

i dunno.


----------



## bryla (Oct 29, 2011)

Honestly George, that book is not the one you're looking for.... I still don't know what to use it for...


----------



## gsilbers (Oct 29, 2011)

id got the EIS-type-way-of-thinking-route 
and learn by heart the most useful scales in every
key. EIS= 13 scales and no key signatures (at least up to what i learned 
then no matter where you are u can alternate between the ones u know by heart. 
does that make sense?! :-s
hope that helps


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 30, 2011)

bryla @ Sat Oct 29 said:


> Honestly George, that book is not the one you're looking for.... I still don't know what to use it for...



which one? the first one or the second one?


----------



## chimuelo (Oct 30, 2011)

You should get some books that actually show you the benefits of scales and teach ampidextrity like Czerny, or Hanon.
Your sitting down and playing with both hands in different directions and then the same direction will teach you theory and composition at the same time too.


----------



## poseur (Oct 30, 2011)

George Caplan @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> bryla @ Sat Oct 29 said:
> 
> 
> > Honestly George, that book is not the one you're looking for.... I still don't know what to use it for...
> ...



i can't speak for bryla, obviously, but i can repeat.....
you may be better off skipping the slonimsky thesaurus, for the moment,
for something more basic & theoretically explanatory & "grounding".

it's pretty difficult to give advice to strangers, though;
ya never know.


----------



## bryla (Oct 30, 2011)

Sorry: I was speaking of the Thesaurus.


----------



## mducharme (Oct 30, 2011)

It's hard to give specific "rules" for using those unusual scales in the 20th Century - while there were rules that applied to the church modes in 16th century music, those are not necessarily used in the 20th Century, and there is a much greater range of what you can do with them.

If you are specifically looking at scales outside major/minor tonality (i.e. church modes, octatonic, other such scales) you might consider Vincent Persichetti's "Twentieth Century Harmony" book, which you can probably find pretty cheap as a used book (new it's quite expensive, I bought it used for $5).


----------



## José Herring (Oct 30, 2011)

bryla @ Sat Oct 29 said:


> Honestly George, that book is not the one you're looking for.... I still don't know what to use it for...



Well. Instead of learning scales by rote memorization you actually learn how to build scales with the Slomnimsky book. The only thing that makes that book hard to use is that it a) forces you to think and b) the nomenclature is ridiculously silly but easily learned.

I like the book because like Bartok you can learn to build your own scales thus opening up a new way of harmonizing.

But I will admit that it has taken me until now to even begin to understand that book and I've had it for three years. So like I said, not for the faint of heart.

José


----------



## J van E (Oct 30, 2011)

Probably a very stupid remark, but what's the use of knowing scales...? I suppose it can be helpfull if you really (for some odd reason) want to write something on paper in a specific scale, but when you are simply creating music, translating what's in your head, then I wonder how scales would help me.

I never think about scales: I just think about what sounds 'good' to my ears. I made three pieces for strings this weekend, one of them has everything in harmony, so I suppose it uses a certain scale, but don't ask me which one. Another one ONLY uses 5 dissonant notes which are repeated 16 times with the exact same intervals but 16 times at a different pitch... I can't imagine a scale I could have used for that one. In fact, if I had scales in the back of my mind, I would never have created that piece...

Hence my question: what's the use of scales? I am probably stirring up a hornet's nest, but that's okay.


----------



## José Herring (Oct 30, 2011)

Kind of like asking, "what's the use of knowing the names of the keys on the keyboard...?".

We are all taught by our exalted harmony books to think of harmony vertically in chords. It's backwards thinking imo. If one thinks of harmony in a linear fashion then it becomes self evident that scales are the linear progression of harmony. Then from this you can derive more interesting parts which then lead to better music. Knowing scales allows you to be more in control of your music rather than wandering around aimlessly looking for what sounds good you'll know more or less what something will sound like even before you begin to write and from that you can spring off into more interesting melodies, bass lines and acc. melodic patters.

The gimmick of using "5 dissonant" notes to create a piece is workable, but you'll soon find after about 3 or 4 pieces that you'll run out of gimmicks like that to use to create pieces. At that point you'll want to unlock the true potential of music and that's when you'll start reaching for more knowledge of what you're doing.


----------



## J van E (Oct 30, 2011)

How did you guess my next question...? 8) 

Seriously, of course specific knowledge is good, but I think that scales themselves are less important then for instance knowing how chords are build up. Then you'd probably say 'You need to know scales to know chords' but I work with chords all the time (well, most of the time...) but without thinking of their names. I know the intervals etc. and that's where I usually build my music on. I often don't even know in which key I am working. Not that I can't figure it out, but usually I don't care when I simply try to translate what's in my head. 

Of course I know this will get me into problems when I try to compose for real musicians because I might end up out of range for certain instruments, but I am a virtual composer and transposing is done with one mouse click... :wink: 

About the dissonant gimmick: obviously I won't use the 'trick' I used today anymore for future pieces, at least not n the exact same way. But I like to do different things everytime (going from almost mathematical music to over the top romantic stuff) and today this was something new. It's old now. :wink: 

The last week I've been doing some searching and reading about harmony but everytime I had read something (very interesting btw and nice to know!) I thought 'Ok... but this won't change how I make music'. And that's my point: in the end to ME it's aal about what's in my head and I only care how to get it out of there into my PC. And so I couldn't care less about scales. At the moment anyway. :wink:


----------



## poseur (Oct 30, 2011)

great post, josé.




josejherring @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> Kind of like asking, "what's the use of knowing the names of the keys on the keyboard...?".



i agree.....
but, it shld still be noted there are those who rely more on the arrangement & creation of musical sound
as the basis for their compositions,
than upon classic scalar/harmonic approaches;
some rather musically successfully, i'd say.

..... which also might bring to light those who approach from various integrated perspectives.....




josejherring @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> We are all taught by our exalted harmony books to think of harmony vertically in chords. It's backwards thinking imo. If one thinks of harmony in a linear fashion then it becomes self evident that scales are the linear progression of harmony.



yes, though..... and, no: not always;
some interesting reading in w.a. mathieu's "the harmonic experience", there, fwiw,
amongst other sources.
(see/hear: lou harrison, terry riley, harry partch, conlon nancarrow & etc etc etc.....)

scales & harmony do derive from a time when tunings were untempered, not "equalised"
to accommodate our now more facile & handy approach to harmony;
harmony, within untempered tunings, is a much, much different thing,
ime & imo.


----------



## poseur (Oct 30, 2011)

if you're composing for other musicians & have any need to communicate well & clearly,
or are _*committed to music for life*_,
you would do well to study continuously.

1) it cannot hurt you, and
B) it will enhance your writing experience.

it will NOT replace the spark of inspiration;
no, it won't.
that's a wholly separate & somewhat ephemeral thing, but.....
neither will it snub-out those sparks;
rather, 
knowledge (&, thereby, insight) can & should actively facilitate
an increasingly broader perspective for the actual, long-term development of your music & your sound(s).....

you're already using the material; you're aware of that, and have acknowledged such.
so,
how could it hurt to be able to communicate its inherent qualities both internally (to yourself!),
and to critical others..... the musicians & etc who are performing the material?

in the end:
you really don't _need_ these basics in order to create great music, but.....
at the moment, it sounds as if you're already part-way there, so.....

ymmv, of course.
just saying.




J van E @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> How did you guess my next question...? 8)
> 
> Seriously, of course specific knowledge is good, but I think that scales themselves are less important then for instance knowing how chords are build up. Then you'd probably say 'You need to know scales to know chords' but I work with chords all the time (well, most of the time...) but without thinking of their names. I know the intervals etc. and that's where I usually build my music on. I often don't even know in which key I am working. Not that I can't figure it out, but usually I don't care when I simply try to translate what's in my head.
> 
> ...


----------



## J van E (Oct 30, 2011)

poseur @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> knowledge (&, thereby, insight) can & should actively facilitate
> an increasingly broader perspective for the actual, long-term development of your music & your sound(s).....
> 
> you're already using the material; you're aware of that, and have acknowledged such.
> ...


The day you stop learning, you are dead, I think. :wink: I am doing some sort of online course about harmony now, so it's not that I don't WANT to learn! I love to learn things! Moving to the more classical side of music opened up a lot of interesting stuff for me! However, right now, even though I am interested in figuring out what I am doing exactly 8) I still wonder how that knowledge might help me creating music. It may be fun knowing what scale I had been using yesterday, but I don't need to know the scale I'll be using tomorrow. Something like that. 
But who knows, maybe in time I will discover that knowing some more theory actually helps me: I didn't start a topic on this forum about which books to read for nothing. :wink: But to me it's all because I like learning and knowing things, not because I think I won't get any further musically without that knowledge.


----------



## mducharme (Oct 30, 2011)

Writing in unusual scales can help to free one's mind from restrictions imposed by major/minor tonality. I know people who were taught in this day and age rules like "balanced phrase lengths" and "always keep the same time signature for an entire composition" - rules that belonged in the classical period to some extent, but not anymore.

People operate with a self imposed set of rules all the time for composition - mostly, people are stuck to the chords they know, and are stuck to the scales they know. Beginners write music all the time where they feel like the only choices for chords are within the major/minor scale they are using - as though some imaginary music rule is telling them it's wrong to do otherwise. If you are one of those people (and it is very common) then forcing yourself to write in unusual scales can really free the ear. Those unusual scales dictate unusual harmonic progressions (phrygian for instance will often have weird things like vii (minor)-i, or bII-i, both of which would be very unusual for major/minor tonality.

Eventually, you should be able to think of ideas in such a way that you do not really necessarily need to think of a particular mode or scale anymore, while not limiting yourself to banal I-IV-ii-V progressions that all fit perfectly in the key. So I would say, for the most part, the scales are useful in freeing the ear/mind to think of other possibilities, and afterwards, they are very useful in creating certain moods or evoking exoticism. Multiple modes at once has been used as a compositional device by many composers.


----------



## J van E (Oct 30, 2011)

mducharme @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> Eventually, you should be able to think of ideas in such a way that you do not really necessarily need to think of a particular mode or scale anymore, while not limiting yourself to banal I-IV-ii-V progressions that all fit perfectly in the key. So I would say, for the most part, the scales are useful in freeing the ear/mind to think of other possibilities, and afterwards, they are very useful in creating certain moods or evoking exoticism. Multiple modes at once has been used as a compositional device by many composers.


Aaaaah, okay... So perhaps I already passed that phase... But then again, I never really never knew other scales, so I wonder what 'made me free'? Maybe simply listening to music and not let rules dictate what I do musically? (Mind you, I wrote my share of I-IV-ii-V songs...! :wink: )


----------



## poseur (Oct 30, 2011)

don't wonder, in that way, too much;
just do.
and do.
and do.

life is shorter than we ever realise;
do what needs doing, and enjoy the actualities of the process as much as is possible.

commitment to music is one of the great conundrums,
the great snake eating its own tail: ourobouros.
music is about life; without our life-experiences & perspectives & feelings,
music as zero/zilch/zip/none meaning, whatsoever.
if you're committed, life is not quite about music, but it is:
we need to live it as if it is so, while not ignoring the life which _lends_ it its meaning.

sorry.
prattling, there.
psycho-babbling, here,
probably in order to avoid facing my problems w/another piece of music..... facing the music,
which i've apparently already defaced.

ymmv.
fwiw.
imo.


----------



## mducharme (Oct 30, 2011)

Well, if you look at the chromatic scale, you have an unlimited series of choices. You do need to have some means to limit things, because saying you can do anything is a bit overwhelming, because when you can do anything, what do you do?

Besides the purpose I mentioned before of freeing the ears, artificial scales / modes are one type of limiting device you can use to help to limit what are otherwise an endless series of possibilities. There are many other techniques - old fashioned common practice harmony being one, 12 tone technique, pitch class sets, the harmonic series, isorhythm.

Not everybody can just start writing in the chromatic scale and have everything work - you need some unifying device. Some people have amazing ears and can write unified music without thinking about how, other people need to have some fabric to glue onto.


----------



## Rob (Oct 30, 2011)

J van E, composing following only what's already in your head/ear limits your imagination... most people that compose using that method find walls soon or later. The most imaginative composers get new sounds and harmonies/melodies thinking "what if I do this?" and thinking a lot... that's why we learn things like scales, they are really much more that linear sequences of notes. You say, for instance, you've had your share of I-IV-ii-V... have you ever tried to apply this to a mode different from major or minor? To a phrygian mode? In C phrygian you'd get: Cm-Fm-Db-Gmb5 which isn't a banal progression... build a melody on it, and you might discover solutions your ear would have never found... my personal experience, of course...


----------



## George Caplan (Oct 30, 2011)

ok thanks all. very informative.


----------



## J van E (Oct 30, 2011)

Rob @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> J van E, composing following only what's already in your head/ear limits your imagination... most people that compose using that method find walls soon or later. The most imaginative composers get new sounds and harmonies/melodies thinking "what if I do this?" and thinking a lot... that's why we learn things like scales, they are really much more that linear sequences of notes. You say, for instance, you've had your share of I-IV-ii-V... have you ever tried to apply this to a mode different from major or minor? To a phrygian mode? In C phrygian you'd get: Cm-Fm-Db-Gmb5 which isn't a banal progression... build a melody on it, and you might discover solutions your ear would have never found... my personal experience, of course...


Good post, thanks!


----------



## david robinson (Oct 30, 2011)

josejherring @ Sat Oct 29 said:


> This is like the scale bible. But, it's not for the faint of heart.
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/Thesaurus-Scales-Melodic-Patterns-Text/dp/082561449X (http://www.amazon.com/Thesaurus-Scales- ... 082561449X)



thumbs up on this, jose.
i have the first edition hard cover.
lol.
j.


----------



## david robinson (Oct 30, 2011)

josejherring @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> Kind of like asking, "what's the use of knowing the names of the keys on the keyboard...?".
> 
> We are all taught by our exalted harmony books to think of harmony vertically in chords. It's backwards thinking imo. If one thinks of harmony in a linear fashion then it becomes self evident that scales are the linear progression of harmony. Then from this you can derive more interesting parts which then lead to better music. Knowing scales allows you to be more in control of your music rather than wandering around aimlessly looking for what sounds good you'll know more or less what something will sound like even before you begin to write and from that you can spring off into more interesting melodies, bass lines and acc. melodic patters.
> 
> The gimmick of using "5 dissonant" notes to create a piece is workable, but you'll soon find after about 3 or 4 pieces that you'll run out of gimmicks like that to use to create pieces. At that point you'll want to unlock the true potential of music and that's when you'll start reaching for more knowledge of what you're doing.



excellent summation, jose.
j,


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (Oct 30, 2011)

"I think that scales themselves are less important then for instance knowing how chords are build up"


Chords and scales are inseparable.


----------



## EastWest Lurker (Oct 30, 2011)

josejherring @ Sun Oct 30 said:


> Kind of like asking, "what's the use of knowing the names of the keys on the keyboard...?".
> 
> We are all taught by our exalted harmony books to think of harmony vertically in chords. It's backwards thinking imo. If one thinks of harmony in a linear fashion then it becomes self evident that scales are the linear progression of harmony. Then from this you can derive more interesting parts which then lead to better music. Knowing scales allows you to be more in control of your music rather than wandering around aimlessly looking for what sounds good you'll know more or less what something will sound like even before you begin to write and from that you can spring off into more interesting melodies, bass lines and acc. melodic patters.
> 
> The gimmick of using "5 dissonant" notes to create a piece is workable, but you'll soon find after about 3 or 4 pieces that you'll run out of gimmicks like that to use to create pieces. At that point you'll want to unlock the true potential of music and that's when you'll start reaching for more knowledge of what you're doing.



Yep.


----------



## CouchCow (Oct 30, 2011)

Not sure if it's what you're looking for but Ron Miller's Modal Jazz and Composition

http://www.sheetmusicplus.com/title/Mod ... -1/3811721

has some nice information on building scales using tetrachords. Because the terminology used might be a bit arcane it requires some trust in the author...kindda like a lot of early 20th century music text. 

Modern Jazz Voicing 

http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Jazz-Voicings-Arranging-Ensembles/dp/0634014439 (http://www.amazon.com/Modern-Jazz-Voici ... 0634014439)

is a pretty good reference on the variety of scales//scale substitutions and all that jazz, plus its much easier to find and accessible

Have fun studying :D


----------



## Dave Connor (Oct 31, 2011)

One should definitely know all the major and minor scales for practical reasons including at least having the facility to use them (in a traditional or non traditional way.) Not to mention they are the basis of music you hear all day every day, everywhere. If someone really isn't interested in that sort of fundamental understanding of a language they may consider tired, than you have the Schoenberg or Bartok approach: the former a 12 tone system of his own devising and the latter a modal system based upon folk elements of his native land (i.e. come up with your own thing.) Both however, were heavily steeped in traditional harmony so that influence is unmistakable in both their music. So they thoroughly understood what it was they _weren't_ doing as well as what they were doing.

Others such as the numerous neo-classic composers of the 20th century developed highly personal styles based upon the major/minor system (often times in an abstract way as in Stravinsky, Shostakovich and Prokofiev or even in a very deliberately tonal way as in Barber, Bernstein or Copland.) 

I think it's endemic in the well versed composer in the tonal musical system to distrust the work of those who haven't done their homework. The main reasons are the proof of history (almost all the radicals were well schooled before they broke) and the music of the unschooled itself. Ultimately though one does have to admit that most of our heroes (as fundamentally sound as they are) have intangibles not found in any system that make them and their music who and what they are.


----------



## wst3 (Oct 31, 2011)

just a couple more thoughts - and given the breadth of info in this thread I'm surprised this hasn't come out!

As several folks have pointed out, if you know the scales and modes you know "the rules" - you can follow them, or you can break them, but at least you know what rules you are breaking!

I think if can go one step further... if you know the scales and modes it is ever so much easier to translate what you hear in your head to whatever instrument you have at your disposal.

I still practice scales and modes - though not in as disciplined a manner as I ought - to train my hands and my ears. Sometimes I forget about that second part, but I think it is just as important as the first.

To that end...

Learn to spell the various scale forms, in terms of the intervals they use. Don't worry about learning C Major or A Minor - just learn the patterns that make up the major and various minor scales. Then learn the patterns that make up the modes.

You don't really need a book for that part - there are seven modes, and that covers the major and minor scales as well<G>! There are a couple of additional minor scale forms (harmonic and melodic), and that's a great starting point.

Once you have that you can start to investigate things like pentatonic and octatonic scales, and scales from other cultures and times - spoken like a true 21st century westerner, but hey, I am what I am!

Oh, and the other thing I'd suggest, if you have not already looked into it, is to study the relationships BETWEEN the scales. The Circle of Fifths is a good starting point, but after that skip the textbooks and just spell out scales and see where the similarities - and differences - lie. It is fun!


----------



## poseur (Nov 1, 2011)

NB:
this may be a bit of a laterally-oriented thrust, here.

many moons ago, i was a player in one of jan garbarek & eberhard weber's bands,
for a couple/few years.
at some point, we were playing a new piece that jan had written, to be performed & recorded;
improvisational approach to all of the band's material was, indeed,
part of the core of the band's intents & interests.....
..... my own, included.

so, jan presented me w/the aforesaid new piece to play.
i read it, played it, loved it --- i found it beautiful:
simple, yet very rich..... _harmonically_ rich..... it almost felt like "coming home", to me.
but:
improvisationally, harmonically, scalarly?
i could not quite find my "inside" of the harmony, with consistency;
i couldn't find its center, the blocks from which it was conceived.

i did find many things to play,
but was quickly frustrated by my lack of centralising ear-sight into this simple piece's harmonic weave.
this was daunting, to me:
i was already often considered to be --- at that time, i may even have considered myself, lol! --- a very skilled player & improvisor.

so, i asked mssr. garbarek:
me: "is there some specific harmonic character, here, with an attendant scalar rationale,
that might make this clearer to me?"
he queried back: "are you familiar w/olivier messiaen's music?"
me: "yes! to some degree. i love 'the quartet'!"
he: "have you not learnt messiaen's modes of limited transposition? try the 5th mode, one of the 9-note scales".
me: "ok! will do!"

so, i did, and.....

harmonising the "messiaen modes" has served me well, & continues to do so;
a lifetime's worth of "well".....
even within my regular job,
which usually includes the challenge of composing _primarily_ diatonic, or primarily unitonal, music.
this has been edifying, enriching --- beyond my previously-unbroadened expectation-horizons.
as with any course of study, small or large, religious or irreligious,
it wasn't merely "an exercise", for me;
as w/everything musical, inner absorption seems required, somehow,
in order not to become one more pointlessly intellectualising distraction.

some absorption of _other_ approaches to music/scales/harmony, as well,
have done similarly, for me;
maybe this has damaged me, in some way..... but, it feels good,
& seems to serve this overarching/underpinning sensibility that, for me,
music remains an open sky of possibilities.

in any case, the learning doesn't fool me, too often:
i'm always reminded that music is not really _about_ music,
as it's (similarly) not _about_ it's current version of possible-technologies-employed;
it's about life.

fwiw.
ymmv.
ime.


----------



## Rob (Nov 1, 2011)

well this is one of the fantastic things that happen in forums... you don't know if you're talking to a kid or a grown up musician and then someone comes and tells you he's been playing with Jan Garbarek and EberhardWeber... wow! Hats off to you, Poseur! You're part of history, it seems...


----------



## poseur (Nov 1, 2011)

Rob @ Tue Nov 01 said:


> You're part of history, it seems...


history, yeah.....
like most musicians & composers:
some checkered past is included, along w/a definitively uncertain future.
ha!


----------



## wst3 (Nov 1, 2011)

poseur @ Tue Nov 01 said:


> NB:
> this may be a bit of a laterally-oriented thrust, here.
> 
> many moons ago, i was a player in one of jan garbarek & eberhard weber's bands,
> for a couple/few years.<snippity>



WOW! That must have been a most excellent adventure!!! I am not familiar with Mr. Weber (something I need to chance quickly I suspect), but I am a big fan of Mr. Garbarek! In fact, I am going to go grab some vinyl when I'm done typing and give a listen!!



poseur said:


> he: "have you not learnt messiaen's modes of limited transposition? try the 5th mode, one of the 9-note scales".
> <more snippity



The really strange thing is that as I was reading your post I knew exactly where you were going!

One of the few 'mistakes' my piano/guitar/theory/electronica teacher made was introducing me to Messiaen's Modes - it pretty much made my head explode! OK, my head did not explode, but I was so thoroughly and completely confused/overwhelmed that it took a bit to get back on track. Talk about frustrating! (The other 'mistake' was introducing me to quarter tone pianos - man I spent untold hours trying to make them sound good - I never succeeded.)

And mistake is actually not the right word - I gained so much in my too-short time with him, but every once in a while I think he forgot I was still in Junior High School!

Anyway, I have since gone back to revisit the modes of limited transposition a couple of times, and they are very liberating - now that I'm a bit older and have listened to a lot more music, and gained some perspective. I think I may have to revisit them again this evening... after I do a bit of listening!

Sadly I never got to use them in a jam with Jan Garbarek - hmmm...

Very cool tale Mr. Poseur - thank you for sharing!

PS- when my favorite teacher graduated and got a 'real' job his last official act was to find me a new teacher... there was this older guy who took care of recording all the student performances, and he turned out to be a monster jazz guitar player, and a great teacher, although I went from something different every week (which suited my short attention span) to a very focused, very disciplined course of study that started with playing arpeggios out of clarinet exercise studies, and chords and scales out of the Mickey Baker and Joe Pass method books. I was insanely lucky as a kid!!! Don't know what made me think about all this stuff, but it's fun!


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 2, 2011)

As I'm the only one on this forum to have a written two books from this perspective, my answer is yes, the scales are important but they are best learned harmonically as chord scales. This approach has a chord scale (mode) assigned to a specific chord in the key. This is also a useful aid in learning to improvise. 

Applied Professional Harmony is the beginning approach. 

The Instant Composer: Counterpoint by Fux is a more indepth approach where you're learning to harmonize and improvise a melody with a specific mode.

www.alexanderpublishing.com


----------



## Dave Connor (Nov 2, 2011)

poseur @ Tue Nov 01 said:


> Rob @ Tue Nov 01 said:
> 
> 
> > You're part of history, it seems...
> ...



Does Ralph Towner figure in there anywhere? In your adventures?


----------



## George Caplan (Nov 2, 2011)

Peter Alexander @ Wed Nov 02 said:


> The Instant Composer: Counterpoint by Fux is a more indepth approach where you're learning to harmonize and improvise a melody with a specific mode.
> 
> www.alexanderpublishing.com



i have a book by fux actually but i cant remember if it deals with modes or not now. i will look again. explain what is meant by harmonizing with a specific mode if you would please.


----------



## poseur (Nov 2, 2011)

Dave Connor @ Wed Nov 02 said:


> poseur @ Tue Nov 01 said:
> 
> 
> > Rob @ Tue Nov 01 said:
> ...



1.9 degrees-of-separation, maybe?
rt & i don't really know each other very well.

but, those degrees:
little bits..... back in those mid-'80's, we did some shows together w/oregon.
and, we're both attached to the ecm label.
and, we have some friends-in-common..... john abercrombie, paul mccandless, trilok gurtu and, of course, manfred eicher..... and etc.


----------



## Peter Alexander (Nov 3, 2011)

George Caplan @ Wed Nov 02 said:


> Peter Alexander @ Wed Nov 02 said:
> 
> 
> > The Instant Composer: Counterpoint by Fux is a more indepth approach where you're learning to harmonize and improvise a melody with a specific mode.
> ...



You're referring to the translation done by the late Alfred Mann. Our work is based on a newly commissioned translation. Inside the original, which isn't as clear, the socratic discussion between teacher and student has the student doing examples in Dorian, Phrygian, Lydian, Mixolydian, Aeolian and Ionian. You are therefore learning to write and harmonize in each mode. My teaching approach brings this out.

http://alexanderpublishing.com/Products/The-Instant-Composer--Counterpoint-by-Fux-Home-Study__AU-Fux-HomeStudy.aspx (http://alexanderpublishing.com/Products ... Study.aspx)


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Nov 3, 2011)

Scales are a very important tool for me. I use them specifically when i have to compose under tight time constraints. I have a strange way of dealing with scales in my head as i learned most of my music theory on my own, but that is a whole different story.

Basically different scales evoke different emotions for me. So when i am given a score to do I first define the scale or emotion I want. Dick Grove told me that the human ear defines scales by where the 1/2 steps are. So to save myself time when I am under pressure (and sometimes when I am not), I search out the 1/2 steps in the scale to create a motif to start composing instead of hunting and pecking at a melody.

It is a great technique to develop and use...


----------



## chimuelo (Nov 4, 2011)

Write out a Charley Parker solo, that's a practical lesson.
Bloomdido is a good starting point.


----------



## George Caplan (Nov 4, 2011)

Jimbo 88 @ Thu Nov 03 said:


> Scales are a very important tool for me. I use them specifically when i have to compose under tight time constraints. I have a strange way of dealing with scales in my head as i learned most of my music theory on my own, but that is a whole different story.



id be very interested in hearing some examples if at all possible.


----------



## bryla (Nov 4, 2011)

@Jimbo, I too often find myself concerning with halfsteps.... funny


----------



## Jimbo 88 (Nov 4, 2011)

George Caplan @ Fri Nov 04 said:


> Jimbo 88 @ Thu Nov 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Scales are a very important tool for me. I use them specifically when i have to compose under tight time constraints. I have a strange way of dealing with scales in my head as i learned most of my music theory on my own, but that is a whole different story.
> ...





Well I'm not sure what you mean by an example, but I'll expain it this way. I really never memorized scales the traditional way, but more of an interval way or how each note relates to a tonal center. Or how a note relates to the major scale. I might have a scale in head that has a b3rd and b7th, but in the past i would not realize that was a Dorian Mode. But I would know how each note would sound in relation to the tonal center.

As far as composing I'll give this example. If Disney was to call me and ask for a happy/magical type melody I automatically think of a major scale with the 4th raised (Lydian). I know the 1/2 steps for that is the +4/5th and the 7th/Root. I want to convey as quick as possible to the listener that "lydian" feeling so I'll compose a motif that grabs the +4 and/or Maj 7th right off the bat or within 2 or three notes. So my point is, I know to grab those notes instead of wondering or hunting for a melody.

Simple theory stuff, but great to know if you are a beginer.


----------



## Rob (Nov 4, 2011)

George Caplan @ 4th November 2011 said:


> Jimbo 88 @ Thu Nov 03 said:
> 
> 
> > Scales are a very important tool for me. I use them specifically when i have to compose under tight time constraints. I have a strange way of dealing with scales in my head as i learned most of my music theory on my own, but that is a whole different story.
> ...



George, here I've played a phrase a few times, changing the mode, going from major to dorian, lydian, phrygian, eolian and locrian... don't know if you mean something like this though:

www.robertosoggetti.com/Modes.mp3


----------



## George Caplan (Nov 4, 2011)

thats good information from jimbo 88 and rob. thats a great example rob. so i take it that you play the first melody in a major key and then literally substitute the notes to coincide with whatever type scale that comes next in your list. certainly makes for an interesting juxtapose and mood change. the difficult bit must then be the harmony.


----------



## KEnK (Nov 4, 2011)

poseur @ Tue Nov 01 said:


> he: "have you not learnt messiaen's modes of limited transposition? try the 5th mode, one of the 9-note scales".
> me: "ok! will do!"


Fascinating post Mr. Poseur.

I've long been a fan of ECM music,
and in fact have always considered it a "style" of jazz.

Certainly that label has it's own sound not found much elsewhere.

I've heard of the Messiaenic Modes, but never checked them out until now.
I've always favored the so-called "Octatonic" mode, 
so maybe a few others will come somewhat naturally to me.

If any one's curious, here's a wiki link:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modes_of_l ... nsposition

It's likely an over simplified, or even vague explanation, but it seems like a good start.

Thanks Dr. Poseur, for steering me to this.

Ken


----------



## J van E (Nov 5, 2011)

Rob @ Fri Nov 04 said:


> George, here I've played a phrase a few times, changing the mode, going from major to dorian, lydian, phrygian, eolian and locrian... don't know if you mean something like this though:
> 
> www.robertosoggetti.com/Modes.mp3


This, and your previous post, really got me interested... I think I will have to figure out more about those scales after all and specially what kind of mood they represent.

BTW If I am not mistaken I could write a piece in regular major and then change the scale of the song by simply raising or lowering specific notes all at once... right...? That could be an interesting thing to test, I guess: it may transform something rather normal into something more interesting. Of course it's better to compose in a certain scale right away, I guess, but doing what I just said might help me understanding what the differences are and what mood each scale gives me. (Of course I have to watch out what happens with notes that are made flat or raised 'out of the scale' or however you call that: guess I'd best create something with all notes belonging to the basic scale for this test).

Interesting... :wink:


----------



## Rob (Nov 5, 2011)

@ George Kaplan and J van E - yes, this is what I did... wrote a short phrase in four part harmony, taking care to start/end with the I chord to reinforce the feeling of key, and then changed the pitches to adapt it to various modes. This is one of the possible uses of modes, that I call "modal system" in that it works as the common tonal system, with its hierarchy of degrees and cadences, but founded on a mode that's neither major or minor in the common western sense. We must remember that the evolution of western music, with the final acceptance of the sole major and minor modes, although has given birth to many masterpieces, is in reality a pauperization of music materials, and we had to wait until the end of XIX century to see a rediscovery of ancient modes... jazz has fully made use of modes, with wonderful results...


----------



## poseur (Nov 5, 2011)

KEnK @ Fri Nov 04 said:


> poseur @ Tue Nov 01 said:
> 
> 
> > he: "have you not learnt messiaen's modes of limited transposition? try the 5th mode, one of the 9-note scales".
> ...



i think that the wiki is basically informative,
useful for anyone already familiar w/the process of scale internalisation,
and with harmonising scales in order to hear their vertical attraction.....
and their personally musical viability, as it were.

as far as ecm is concerned:
i'm quite thrilled to be "back in the fold", as it were:
i'd gone elsewhere for nearly 20yrs, until 2007.

as with many who record w/the support of ecm,
i am def not a "jazz" musician, per sé --- certainly, eicher's ecm is not really "about" jazz,
but about music that he loves, often spanning a crazy multitude of idioms:
arvo pärt, tigran mansurian, kim kashkashian, nik bartsch, terje rypdal, steve reich, heiner goebbels, giya kancheli, ilena karaindrou, meredith monk, jon hassell, steve tibbetts, gidon kremer & etc etc etc.....


----------



## Question (Nov 13, 2011)

poseur,

I have always been interested in your "Oblique strategies" approach to questions posed on this forum.

Are you David Torn?


Thanks


----------



## reddognoyz (Nov 13, 2011)

The internet is a wonderful thing. I came in this Sunday morning to work on a cartoon about a girl who heals stuffed animals.

I read this thread and I have now read the wiki brief on modes of limited transportation and am Listening to Messiaen Chronochromie


Mehttp://open.spotify.com/album/2CAy2rWqnICWNsyYoqeu5C

Just crazy music, but as a cartoon scorer there is some VERY interesting things in that music.


----------



## poseur (Nov 13, 2011)

Question @ Sun Nov 13 said:


> poseur,
> 
> I have always been interested in your "Oblique strategies" approach to questions posed on this forum.
> 
> ...



i don't employ b.e.'s estimable "oblique strategies";
i never have, though i've been party to some of them
--- to a very minor, entertaining degree ---
in regards to some of my work w/david bowie & tony visconti.

yes, that's me.


----------

