# Difference between E Dorian and D Major?



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Hey, I'm first time ever trying out to use the modes and I noticed that E Dorian and D Major share the same keys. 

So what's the difference? I guess just the chord progression when working with fixed cadences?


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

I made a video which might help you.


----------



## Smikes77 (May 6, 2017)

Think of the modes like different flavours of ice cream.

Dorian is used often in blues as is mixolydian.

Lydian is used in comedy, etc.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

My question was not how the tonal dramaturgy of the dorian mode feels or how different the modes sound compared to each other,
but what the difference is between specifically E Dorian and D Major since they share the same keys. I could've also asked for C dorian and B minor, I am aware of that I will probably find a major or minor complement for any key I am starting the dorian (or any other) scale from.


----------



## Rob (May 6, 2017)

in all modal music (at least in the modern sense I know) what matters is the tonic of the mode... the bass has to be firmly rooted to the tonic. In a sense, being in E dorian means also we are in E minor/dorian... in the purest jazz modal forms, the bass, even when walking, gravitates around the tonic to give a clear modal color.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Rob said:


> in all modal music (at least in the modern sense I know) what matters is the tonic of the mode... the bass has to be firmly rooted to the tonic. In a sense, being in E dorian means also we are in E minor/dorian... in the purest jazz modal forms, the bass, even when walking, gravitates around the tonic to give a clear modal color.



Everything I can do in E dorian I can do in D major, so depending on what would one choose which scale of those two to write in? Or is it just as I assumed in my first post, the chronology of the chords, depending on what key is considered as tonic, dominant etc?


----------



## Rob (May 6, 2017)

if you are in E dorian you're not in D major, that's the point... you keep thinking in major/minor tonal harmony. This is why I ask my students, when they study modes, not to think of E dorian as second degree of D major, but as Tonic. It's an E scale, not D


----------



## Smikes77 (May 6, 2017)

Rob said:


> if you are in E dorian you're not in D major, that's the point... you keep thinking in major/minor tonal harmony. This is why I ask my students, when they study modes, not to think of E dorian as second degree of D major, but as Tonic.



Exactly.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Rob said:


> if you are in E dorian you're not in D major, that's the point... you keep thinking in major/minor tonal harmony. This is why I ask my students, when they study modes, not to think of E dorian as second degree of D major, but as Tonic. It's an E scale, not D



That is basically what I said, isn't it xD



Smikes77 said:


> Exactly.



All right! But that's then nothing different than taking the D major scale and just rearranging the order of the notes, I could make any note the tonica as long as I keep the keys from the scale.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> My question was not how the tonal dramaturgy of the dorian mode feels or how different the modes sound compared to each other,
> but what the difference is between specifically E Dorian and D Major since they share the same keys. I could've also asked for C dorian and B minor, I am aware of that I will probably find a major or minor complement for any key I am starting the dorian (or any other) scale from.



There is nothing specific about that question. Every major scale has a Dorian mode with the same keys as well as every mode has 6 other modes which share the same keys, and the difference is their feel. Mode, mood and such. And in the video I explain how to tell when you are in a certain mode and when you are in the major scale.


----------



## d.healey (May 6, 2017)

Best explanation about modes I've come across -


----------



## Rob (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> That is basically what I said, isn't it xD



no, you remain in a D major frame of mind if you think D major. Thinking in D means you have a tonic, D, which behaves as the gravitational harmonic center of the piece, and a series of accessory degrees that produce harmonic movement and tend to resolve to the tonic. E dorian has no need to resolve to D, it's a tonic scale/chord


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Rob said:


> no, you remain in a D major frame of mind if you think D major. Thinking in D means you have a tonic, D, which behaves as the gravitational harmonic center of the piece, and a series of accessory degrees that produce harmonic movement and tend to resolve to the tonic. E dorian has no need to resolve to D, it's a tonic scale/chord



That's what I said in post #1 and #6



Voider said:


> Or is it just as I assumed in my first post, the chronology of the chords, depending on what key is considered as tonic, dominant etc?


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> That is basically what I said, isn't it xD
> 
> 
> 
> All right! But that's then nothing different than taking the D major scale and just rearranging the order of the notes, I could make any note the tonica as long as I keep the keys from the scale.


Well, for one, re-arranging the "order of the notes" is quite important, isn't it?
D dorian has a specific order of second intervals that has nothing to do with C Ionian: whole,half,w,w,h,w.
Second, and it sounds like you are not registering that reply: if your bass line is repeatedly playing D, this will not sound like C Major/Ionian.
Third, there is one characteristic note in the dorian scale that makes it different from other minor modes derived from the C major scale: it is B, the 6th.
You are right in assuming that chordal cadences also emphasize the mode itself. So create a little chord progression, like D-7 to E-7 (Billy Jean, So What, Impressions) improvise playing a D dorian scale (starting from D, not C, so that you can hear your tonal center) and hit the B a bunch to get that 6th in your head.
And as mentioned above, the character of the mode IS important, and there is a BIG difference between C Ionian and D dorian when it comes to that...


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Either my english sucks more than I think or you guys misunderstand me.
I never said that E dorian and D major would have the same tonal feeling, mood and so on.
Quite the opposite I asked if the difference between those two scales would be the arrangement of the tonica and thereout the whole chord progression, which I never doubted would end up with a different tonal character.

I just wanted to know if there is more than that or if that is the only difference.

What I also was saying, and maybe you just need to think of it less in "named scales" is that I could take D major
D-E-F#-G-A-B-C# and just shift it for one key to get E-F#-G-A-B-C# which would then be the E dorian mode. But I could also shift it for two keys and get F#G-A-B-C#-D and so on. That was simply what I meant when I said I could do that "in D major". Shift it, getting a different tonal character while keeping the characteristic keys and therefore the intervals (F# and C#). All those new systems would get their names, or one could just say it's a variation of the on D major (or E dorian) based note properties.

I hope this is more clear now, I didn't mean to anger anyone.


----------



## Rob (May 6, 2017)

must be my limited english, but I confess I don't get the sense of it... so I'll leave the thread, but no hard feelings at all...


----------



## Rodney Money (May 6, 2017)

A major difference is the emphasis on dominant to tonic.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Yes I got that! I think I confused with my statement that I "_could do everything in D Major what I can do in E dorian_" because that sounds like I'm not aware of the differences when E becomes the tonic instead of D.

What I really wanted to express is the following:

I-IV-V-I in E dorian would be Em-A-Bm-Em, but in D major it simply would be expressed as II-V-VI-I movement.

It's the same, just in a different order. That was what I meant when I said it can be done in Dmaj.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> Either my english sucks more than I think or you guys misunderstand me.
> I never said that E dorian and D major would have the same tonal feeling, mood and so on.
> Quite the opposite I asked if the difference between those two scales would be the arrangement of the tonica and thereout the whole chord progression, which I never doubted would end up with a different tonal character.
> 
> ...



I see what you are asking so let me sum it up.

The tonic note is different and that matters once you firmly establish it to your listeners.

Then, you get entirely different relations to the root note with all the notes of the mode compared to the major scale.

For example, if you take your D major and E dorian, in E dorian going from the root note E, to G, you get a minor third interval - this interval relation does not exist for the root note in D major - you would have to use F, and that is not a note existing in D major.

This then results in different Diatonic chords of given degrees - the tonic chord, for example, is Minor in E dorian as opposed to the Major tonic chord of D major. A more extreme example would be C# locrian, which has a diminished tonic chord, yet has the same tones as D major.

The tonic note is very important to our ears, so the important thing about modes is well establishing it for your listeners - by using it as a bass drone, by repetion etc. , but the way I propose in my video enables you to learn how to recognize the sound of it and thus being able to compose modally without having to consciously think about these things.

Once established, all the above becomes relevant.

This in turn gives each mode a completely different sound and feel - and in the end, that is all that makes a difference to your listeners.


----------



## bbunker (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> Yes I got that! I think I confused with my statement that I "_could do everything in D Major what I can do in E dorian_" because that sounds like I'm not aware of the differences when E becomes the tonic instead of D.
> 
> What I really wanted to express is, I could take the note properties of D major (which is F# and C#) and still say, I will resolve to E and play it in a way that resolving to E sounds well.
> 
> ...



Em-A-Bm-Em is complicated, because it probably won't sound very Dorian. It'll sound like a ii-V in D, with a deceptive cadence, going back to begin a ii-V again, rather than tonicizing E. Modes in general don't work like transposed Major Keys.

The quick and dirty way to cement E dorian is to go Em-D-Em. Think of any jig in 'E minor' and you're actually probably thinking of E dorian.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> Either my english sucks more than I think or you guys misunderstand me.
> I never said that E dorian and D major would have the same tonal feeling, mood and so on.
> Quite the opposite I asked if the difference between those two scales would be the arrangement of the tonica and thereout the whole chord progression, which I never doubted would end up with a different tonal character.
> 
> ...



Simply shifting it will not get you the modal feel. You need to anchor the mode by emphasizing its root, playing characteristic chord progressions from that mode and possibly stressing its characteristic tone (the 6th in dorian)
But even though shifting through modes is totally legit, especially in re-harmonization, one of the reasons modes are played is to establish a certain mood and feeling, so shifting from dorian to Phrygian to mixolydian quickly wouldn't be very effective since you need to establish the mode by emphasizing the root/tonal center in order for it to be felt.
By going through modes quickly, you revert to washing out the modes and being in the diatonic major key you started with.
There is a reason things are the way they are.
Exploring and searching for new ideas is great.
But first, you must understand and own the material you want to move away from.
In this case, I think that you may want to practice your modes first before re-inventing the wheel...


----------



## d.healey (May 6, 2017)

From wiki


> "It can also be thought of as a scale with a minor third and seventh, a major second and sixth, and a perfect fourth and fifth.
> It may be considered an "excerpt" of a major scale played from the pitch a whole tone above the major scale's tonic (in the key of C major it is D, E, F, G, A, B, C, D), i.e., a major scale played from its second scale degree up to its second degree again. The resulting scale is, however, _minor_ in quality, because, as the "D" becomes the new tonal centre, the F a minor third above the D becomes the new mediant, or third degree. When a triad is built upon the tonic, it is a minor triad."



I've just realised I wrote two pieces last year entirely in this E dorian - I thought I was writing in D but starting and finishing on E - who knew!


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

AdamAlake said:


> For example, if you take your D major and E dorian, in E dorian going from the root note E, to G, you get a minor third interval - this interval relation does not exist for the root note in D major - you would have to use F, and that is not a note existing in D major.



I would go from E to G aswell, the cadence would have a different name in D major, instead of I-III it would be an II-IV movement. That was my point. Of course writing in E dorian would be easier for this case because it fits into our understanding of scale degrees. It was just a theoretical statement to emphasize the relationship between the systems if we let go of rules that are only making it easier to know what is where. Any cadence you can build in E dorian can be executed in D major (and vice versa) with different cadence names. If that would make sense is another question.



bbunker said:


> Em-A-Bm-Em is complicated, because it probably won't sound very Dorian.



It must, it shares the exact same keys and chord progression.



Patrick de Caumette said:


> But even though shifting through modes is totally legit, especially in re-harmonization, one of the reasons modes are played is to establish a certain mood and feeling, so shifting from dorian to Phrygian to mixolydian quickly wouldn't be very effective since you need to establish the mode by emphasizing the root/tonal center in order for it to be felt.



Yeah that was not my thought, I get you. I wanted to say that everything written in E dorian can be expressed in D maj, it though would have a different cadence. I just wanted to say, theoretical, that D maj would be capable of expressing both, the sound of itself and the sound of E dorian, if we let go of a fixed scale degree order.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> I wanted to say that everything written in E dorian can be expressed in D maj, it though would have a different cadence. I just wanted to say, theoretical, that D maj would be capable of expressing both, the sound of itself and the sound of E dorian, if we let go of a fixed scale degree order.


There is a difference between D major scale and D Ionian.
Yes all modes derived from the D major diatonic scale contain that scale
If you drop root and characteristic tones emphasis and modal cadences, there are no modes any longer, so you then cannot express E dorian by using the D major scale.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> Any cadence you can build in E dorian can be executed in D major (and vice versa) with different cadence names. If that would make sense is another question.



Absolutely not, because a cadence implies a degree of resolution and that movement would have no resolution with an established D tonic.




Voider said:


> It must, it shares the exact same keys and chord progression.



It must not and it does not, because I-IV-V-I cadences do not work the same way in other modes as they do in Ionian.




Voider said:


> Yeah that was not my thought, I get you. I wanted to say that everything written in E dorian can be expressed in D maj, it though would have a different cadence. I just wanted to say, theoretical, that D maj would be capable of expressing both, the sound of itself and the sound of E dorian, if we let go of a fixed scale degree order.



No, it could not be expressed, because cadences occur with reason and in context. If you put a cadence in another modal context, they no longer express what they used to.


----------



## bbunker (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> It must, it shares the exact same keys and chord progression.



In your first post, you asked what was different if they shared the same notes (probably a better word-choice than keys) and chords. As long as you assume that modes MUST be the same as a tonal key because they share the same notes, then you will not be able to grasp the difference between the two of them.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

AdamAlake said:


> Absolutely not, because a cadence implies a degree of resolution and that movement would have no resolution with an established D tonic.



So you're saying II-V-VI-II in D Maj won't sound the same as I-IV-V-I in E dorian?



AdamAlake said:


> It must not and it does not, because I-IV-V-I cadences do not work the same way in other modes as they do in Ionian.



That's why I wrote II-V-VI-II in D maj to fit into the exact same progression what I-IV-V-I would be in E dorian.



bbunker said:


> As long as you assume that modes MUST be the same as a tonal key because they share the same notes, then you will not be able to grasp the difference between the two of them.



This is still a misinterpretation of my statement.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> So you're saying II-V-VI-II in D Maj won't sound the same as I-IV-V-I in E dorian?



Without even listening to them you can tell they obviously sound different when one ends on the tonic and the other does not.



Voider said:


> That's why I wrote II-V-VI-II in D maj to fit into the exact same progression what I-IV-V-I would be in E dorian.



Yes, and my point is that I-IV-V-I does not make much sense in Dorian, because different cadences are natural to each mode due to different intervals.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 6, 2017)

Frankly, I think that you are bent on being right and you are not listening...


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

AdamAlake said:


> Without even listening to them you can tell they obviously sound different when one ends on the tonic and the other does not.



Obviously yes because I in E dorian and II in D maj are both the note E, therefore it will sound the same, regardless of whether you refer to it as tonic in E dorian or supertonic in D major because the sound doesn't know about the labels we give to it.



Patrick de Caumette said:


> Frankly, I think that you are bent on being right and you are not listening...



I am listening and what I wrote doesn't disagree with what you wrote?
I'm just talking about the possibility not if that makes sense, and I already emphasized that.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

AdamAlake said:


> Yes, and my point is that I-IV-V-I does not make much sense in Dorian, because different cadences are natural to each mode due to different intervals.



This is another argument and I get you on that, but I couldn't read that from your earlier statements.
Though it's very subjective which cadences in which scale sounds well to one.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

AdamAlake said:


> Without even listening to them you can tell they obviously sound different when one ends on the tonic and the other does not.





Voider said:


> Obviously yes because I in E dorian and II in D maj are both the note E, therefore it will sound the same, regardless of whether you refer to it as tonic in E dorian or supertonic in D major because the sound doesn't know about the labels we give to it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




They are referred to by certain names due to them having certain purpose and sound in the context of their respective scale. They do not "just" have a different name, they have a different name because they are audibly and compositionally different.

It is as if you suddenly moved into your favourite store. Yes, it is still a store of the same name, but it is also your home now and driving to work from there is a different journey and when you leave, it is the place you come back to.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

AdamAlake said:


> They do not "just" have a different name, they have a different name because they are audibly and compositionally different.



Yes but aren't cadences also something that differs from personal taste? You say an I-IV-V-I movement doesn't make sense to you in E dorian and someone else (not me) may say that it sounds wonderful to him/her. And even if not this cadence, any cadence you think is perfect for E dorian can be transfered to D maj, they will just have different numbers but sound the same if you put them into the exact same context.

So regardless of personal taste about what sounds good and any actual utility in the light of the question if it makes sense, it would be possible to express the same movements between different scales that share the same keys. That's all I said and this is not disagreeing with anything you guys said, so I don't understand the debate tbh.


----------



## Dave Connor (May 6, 2017)

It seems the original question is more of a practical consideration rather than theoretical. Obviously the OP understands the theoretical idea of the true tonic etc. So for practical reasons, I would say there's no harm in chord progressions being thought of in the key of D major with a deliberate understanding that your functioning in a mode derived from that key.


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> Yes but aren't cadences also something that differs from personal taste? You say an I-IV-V-I movement doesn't make sense to you in E dorian and someone else (not me) may say that it sounds wonderful to him/her. And even if not this cadence, any cadence you think is perfect for E dorian can be transfered to D maj, they will just have different numbers but sound the same if you put them into the exact same context.
> 
> So regardless of personal taste about what sounds good and any actual utility in the light of the question if it makes sense, it would be possible to express the same movements between different scales that share the same keys. That's all I said and this is not disagreeing with anything you guys said, so I don't understand the debate tbh.



Subjective on a cultural level. Anyone grewing up in the western musical tradition comes with certain expectations towards cadential resolutions.

Compare:

https://clyp.it/55spbhjo

https://clyp.it/e5dt0n1r


----------



## Rodney Money (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> Yes I got that! I think I confused with my statement that I "_could do everything in D Major what I can do in E dorian_" because that sounds like I'm not aware of the differences when E becomes the tonic instead of D.
> 
> What I really wanted to express is the following:
> 
> ...


In order to cause less confusing, let's first talk about the use of Roman numerals for chord recognition. If it's minor it is lowercase, and if it's major it's uppercase. So the chords for your e Dorian example would be: i-IV-v-i, and the chord progression in D Major would be: ii-V-vi-ii. 

You do have the same chords in your example, but I would challenge you to think horizontally instead of vertically. Don't worry about chords right now, instead think about how to make a melody sound e Dorian instead of D Major. Then you can add your chords later. Start your melodic line with either an E, G, or B, focus your line around tonic E, and avoid emphasis on melodic contours that go A to D or E to D.


----------



## NoamL (May 6, 2017)

Wow some of the answers here are a little vague... 

@Voider the answer is easy.

*Modes are alterations of scales.*

*D Major *is a *major *scale based* on D*. Nothing hard to understand there...

*E Dorian *is a *natural minor *scale based* on E,* except it has just *one alteration:* it has a* raised 6th *(*C# *instead of* C*).

*That's all you need to know!*

If you want your piece to sound Dorian then your melody should include, and maybe even emphasize, that C#. And likewise your music should include chords that use this natural sixth such as IV (because in minor it would be iv).

Every mode has *one changed note *and as a result several *changed chords*. Using the changed note and changed chords is what makes a piece "sound like" that mode. If you don't emphasize them enough, then it will mostly sound like the "unchanged" scale, that is, the basic vanilla minor or major scale which you are altering.

Lydian is *major* with *#4*
Mixolydian is *major* with *b7*
Dorian is *natural minor* with *♮6* as we covered
Phrygian is *natural minor* with *b2*
Locrian is the weirdest mode, it is like *natural minor* with *b2 and b5*.

There are a few easy or classic "quick and dirty" ways to tell a listener they're in a mode.

Lydian: I - II - I

Mixolydian: I - v - I

Dorian: i - IV - i

Phrygian: i - bII - i

These are far from the only possibilities. But you can see that with just two chords we can establish a mode. First the tonic, major or minor to let the audience know where home base is. Then a single chord that takes us out of vanilla major/minor and into the mode.

A good example of a piece in Dorian is the theme for Rohan from Howard Shore's score to *Lord Of The Rings.


*
This is an elaborated version of the i - IV - i progression I mentioned above.

Try playing this theme with an F natural instead of F#, and you will understand how the "flavor" of Dorian is its own unique, interesting thing


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

@AdamAlake sure, that was just an example. I did not write "not me" for no reason 



Rodney Money said:


> i-IV-v-i, and the chord progression in D Major would be: ii-V-vi-I.



The latter would become ii-V-vi-ii, otherwise it wouldn't work the way it was intended. I didn't say D major should lead back to its own tonic, but to the supertonic. Otherwise it wouldn't express the same progression from E dorian.


----------



## NoamL (May 6, 2017)

And here is a piece I wrote ages ago that has some Mixolydian flavor in it (other stuff too). See if you can figure out on your own what makes it feel Mixolydian.


----------



## Rodney Money (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> @AdamAlake sure, that was just an example. I did not write "not me" for no reason
> 
> 
> 
> The latter would become ii-V-vi-ii, otherwise it wouldn't work the way it was intended. I didn't say D major should lead back to its own tonic, but to the supertonic. Otherwise it wouldn't express the same progression from E dorian.


Oh yes, thanks for noticing the typo, trying to feed a toddler, a dog, and a bird while trying to help you out, but notice the other things I wrote also.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

NoamL said:


> Dorian: i - IV - i
> 
> Phrygian: i - bII - i
> 
> These are far from the only possibilities. But you can see that with just two chords we can establish a mode. First the tonic, major or minor to let the audience know where home base is. Then a single chord that takes us out of vanilla major/minor and into the mode.



First thank you for your detailed reply! So is starting, playing around and resolving to the root note/chord the only thing one can do to emphasize what of the two key-sharing scales a piece is in, or are there other ways to do so as well?



Rodney Money said:


> but notice the other things I wrote also.



I do, no worries. From everyone replying here. That I focus on some statements doesn't mean I don't take the other things to heart or would ignore them. I'm glad for any input  And I didn't know it was a typo, I thought you were referring to something else, sorry if it sounded like I don't care for your post and just wanted to highlight the typo - it isn't like that!


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 6, 2017)

Man.

There are only seven Greek modes. They're the scales the I chord, ii chord, iii chord, etc. are derived from - and the other way around: if you're playing over an e min7 chord in the key of D, you play e dorian (at the simplest level).

Obviously you need to get the sound of each mode in your ear, and thinking of E dorian and D major as the same thing is missing that point. And as Patrick says, there's a difference between thinking modally and [whatever the word is for standard tonality].

However, you can also make anything complicated if you overthink it. Next thing you know, going "boom pah pah" with a C chord on the piano is difficult.

Learning the modes shouldn't take more than 53.532971 seconds, at least for that session! Play the freaking white notes from C to C. That's C Ionian. Now start on the second note of the C scale - play the white notes from D to D. That's D dorian. Now play E - E. That's E phrygian.

And so on. This becomes water under the bridge in no time at all.

Now, the harmony that NaomL and I think others have mentioned is more involved, but let's not make this into a mountain.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Learning the modes shouldn't take more than 53.532971 seconds, at least for that session! Play the freaking white notes from C to C.



That's a bit running off the topic and not really helping with my last question. I know how to find the modes and that was no issue from the beginning. As I said previously, my digression to the comparison between D maj and E dorian never disagreed with anything said by an user in this thread, it was a misunderstanding in what I wanted to express, I also misunderstood the opposite. But that's now past and solved. My final question was if there is any other method to emphasize a scales character than building it around the tonic, when it comes to those scales that share the same keys.

Edit:
@AdamAlake I've now watched your video full time and it really contained helpful information. Sorry for my response in post #4, I earlier had not so much time and just scrolled through it, I judged too quickly.


----------



## Gerhard Westphalen (May 6, 2017)

I always suggest to people that they forget about the association with the related major scale to the mode. Want to know the notes in the E dorian scale? Well it's E major with a b3 and a b7. Nothing to do with D. They just happen to share the same pitch set. Same as C major and A minor. People don't tend to have this sort of confusion with major and related minor scales as should be the case with any other scale (i.e. mode). You can use the associations when trying to figure out the notes of the scale but not really when using it "functionally." The usable progressions will be different but if you work at it the same way that you do with a major scale, you'll find something that works which will root the listener in that scale.


----------



## NoamL (May 6, 2017)

Nick Batzdorf said:


> Play the freaking white notes from C to C. That's C Ionian. Now start on the second note of the C scale - play the white notes from D to D. That's D dorian. Now play E - E. That's E phrygian.
> 
> And so on. This becomes water under the bridge in no time at all.



Yes, this seems to be the *standard* way of teaching it. Let's call it the "key center" method instead of my "scalar quality" method.

I'm a bit of an evangelist for the scalar quality method, and critical of the key center method.

My problem with the key center method is it creates the confusion that seems to be at the heart of this thread, namely the idea that E Phrygian is somehow more closely related to the key of C Major than that of E Minor.

Using this method the student learns *"C Ionian, D Dorian, E Phrygian, F Lydian"* and* "D Ionian, E Dorian, F# Phrygian" *etc.

They can rattle off long _*lists*_ of modes...

But the relation between *E Dorian* and* E Phrygian* is not made apparent. 

This becomes important when the weird modes get involved. If someone asks me to play E Mixo b6 or or E Lydian Dominant, I know how because I can instantly picture those modes as "E Major b6 b7" or "E Major #4 b7."

Let's use the standard method to figure out Lydian Dominant.

It's a bit complicated:

1. First you have to think of E Lydian as the 4th mode of something, and realize it's B
2. Write out the B major scale
3. Then go back and think of the b7 of E (which is D)
4. and now play a B major scale but remember to keep the D natural.

Alternatively, if you want to remember even more long lists of modes, you can remember that Lydian Dominant is the 4th mode of the _melodic minor _scale, and play B minor ascending melodic minor (remembering not to alter it on descents).

And none of this helps you to remember _*which*_ notes are the most important.

Using my method, I know I am playing E major with #4 and b7, and I know that to emphasize the unique quality of that mode I have to harp on those 2 altered scale degrees a good bit. Simple as that.


----------



## Rob (May 6, 2017)

@NoamL - this is what I teach as well... or ask the student to play a Cma7 chord with the left hand while playing the C major scale with the right, then C7 chord - mixolydian scale, Cmin7 chord - dorian etc. this way they don't keep referring to a parent scale.
Anyway, not to make things more complicated than they already are, but there is a great number of modal approaches, ranging from pure tonal to pure modal... I'm attaching a drawing to show the way I think of it


----------



## AdamAlake (May 6, 2017)

Voider said:


> That's a bit running off the topic and not really helping with my last question. I know how to find the modes and that was no issue from the beginning. As I said previously, my digression to the comparison between D maj and E dorian never disagreed with anything said by an user in this thread, it was a misunderstanding in what I wanted to express, I also misunderstood the opposite. But that's now past and solved. My final question was if there is any other method to emphasize a scales character than building it around the tonic, when it comes to those scales that share the same keys.
> 
> Edit:
> @AdamAlake I've now watched your video full time and it really contained helpful information. Sorry for my response in post #4, I earlier had not so much time and just scrolled through it, I judged too quickly.



Thank you, I am glad it is of help to some.


----------



## Voider (May 6, 2017)

Okay so I now had time to finally read the whole thread from the beginning again!
First of all, thanks to everyone, really super helpful. I've checked the videos and re-read every posting.
I have to apologize for being a bit arduous. I understand now what you wanted to tell me and my replies were pointless in context to the topic. Sorry again for that! And @NoamL I finally played the short notesheet and definitely heard the difference, thanks for that too!

Now I would like to sum up what I've learned from this thread.
If you still see anything that is wrong or anything that can be added, please tell!


(1) For any relative key scales with the same key signature the way to establish its character is to emphasize the tonic for the listener to understand that it is the base and core element of the piece


(2) For any key scales that are very similiar to another one but have one different prominent note, this note must be emphasized in the composition to achieve that scales spirit

(1) For instance E dorian and D major share the same key signatures. To differ between them the only way is to base the composition on the tonic. Once established one is allowed to "travel" more, but with a good balance for the timing to return to the base for the listener not to forget where we come from.

(2) For instance, as previously stated by NoamL, E dorian is basically E minor with the difference of the raised 6th, the c#. So to strenghten the dorian character, it is necessary to incorporate this altered note stronger into the composition for it to be able to add its tonal character to stand out from E minor, while of course still keeping track of the tonic because otherwise there is still _danger_ that it turns into D major.

I've learned so much today! Thank you guys 

A last question about this topic: Is it correct to say that any mode build from any key has only two neighbours to be aware of? The relative Major key that shares the same key signature and the natural minor key that has one altered note less. This would then of course apply vice versa from any of those two neighbours. So there are basically always 3 _connected_ scales, in the way that they're so similiar to each other that it is important to know what they have in common to make them stand out from each other, or in other words, to know what to emphasize to arouse their spirit.


----------



## Nick Batzdorf (May 6, 2017)

NoamL, what you're saying is exactly my point, or maybe exactly the opposite.  It's all over as soon as you start talking about "the student." Everything is difficult then.

For heaven's sake. There are many things that take a lot of practice, but this is utterly trivial.

I'd go farther and say that there's something wrong if you're NOT aware of the relationship between the mode you're in and the Ionian with the same notes somewhere near the front of your mind!


----------



## Chandler (May 6, 2017)

Of course D major and E dorian share the same notes, but they don't sound the same. The difference is the thinking behind how to use them and the sound. Thinking of them as shifted notes, although essentially correct, makes it harder to understand why the modes sound different and how to bring out each unique modality. 

I made a video series about this a while ago that is aimed towards guitarists, but maybe it will help.


As Patrick said earlier in this thread every mode has a tonic and characteristic notes. You need to emphasize those if you want it to sound like a mode. If you just use the notes randomly you'll lose the modality. There are many ways to do this such as using drones, duration, the harmonic rhythm, etc.


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 7, 2017)

Voider said:


> Okay so I now had time to finally read the whole thread from the beginning again!
> First of all, thanks to everyone, really super helpful. I've checked the videos and re-read every posting.
> I have to apologize for being a bit arduous. I understand now what you wanted to tell me and my replies were pointless in context to the topic. Sorry again for that! And @NoamL I finally played the short notesheet and definitely heard the difference, thanks for that too!
> 
> ...



Glad to hear you are starting to get it!

But you need to forget about what you have learned in functional diatonic harmony.
Say goodbye to functional harmony for a while.
It will only confuse you more if you don't.
It's not key scales, it is modes.
Forget about the relative minor and major.
Forget that modes use the same notes as a diatonic major scale starting from a different degree.
Start from scratch with each mode.
Learn its scale, characteristic cadences, its characteristic color tone, its character and moods.
Learn to recognize it in a second when hearing a tune based on it.

And when you think you have a solid grasp on it, and want to keep expanding, start learning the modes derived from harmonic minor, melodic minor, and for that matter any other scale that you fancy...
A life time of learning!


----------



## Anthony (May 7, 2017)

Patrick de Caumette said:


> Forget that modes use the same notes as a diatonic major scale starting from a different degree.
> Start from scratch with each mode.



Does one lose something by taking this perspective? For example, does it eliminate some of the motivation for modulation? 

The reason I ask is that I'm left wondering _why_ so many books introduce modes by associating them with their diatonic major scale. Is this just a nod to the Ancient Greeks who discovered them two millennia ago, or is there some deeper organizational principle that provides additional structure to the way music is composed?


----------



## Voider (May 7, 2017)

Anthony said:


> Does one lose something by taking this perspective? For example, does it eliminate some of the motivation for modulation?



I don't think he wanted to express that, but just to start small and first of all get to know the modes vanilla before trying to figure out the whole system and become overwhelmed. Personally, I really enjoy to dive into systems, I like the theoretical part, the connections, not only in music. But after getting an overview, I would follow this advice and then practically just start to get to know each mode, before then take a step back again and see the whole picture. But the first overview is still important for me to understand where I am. I think everyone has his/her own approach that works best


----------



## KEnK (May 7, 2017)

I'm a jazz guitarist and think in modes all the time-
Maybe the op has it now and this is a bit redundant, having been said a few times-
but not exactly like this-
Best way to come to terms w/ the modes is do a comparative study w/ the same root note.
So- E dorian, E phrygian, E lydian, etc.
While you're at it, step into the harmonic minor realm
as well as the "Jazz melodic minor". These are different.

This way you'll get the unique character of each one.

k


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 7, 2017)

Anthony said:


> Does one lose something by taking this perspective? For example, does it eliminate some of the motivation for modulation?
> 
> The reason I ask is that I'm left wondering _why_ so many books introduce modes by associating them with their diatonic major scale. Is this just a nod to the Ancient Greeks who discovered them two millennia ago, or is there some deeper organizational principle that provides additional structure to the way music is composed?



When I was suggesting to forget functional harmony, I didn't mean that there are no relations between chords within modes. Of course there are.
I was just telling Voider to walk away from it for a while, because modal harmony is its own thing, and because he was holding on to his knowledge of diatonic functional harmony and of its rules to understand modes and create new theories based on it.

It would only make sense that one would associate a scale and the modes that are derived from it.
Since the scale is the DNA that is used to create the modes derived from it.
Whether it is diatonic major, or something else.
But the strong pull that is V-I in the original diatonic key can become a liability while in modal harmony and take the listener away from the targeted mode.
For example, if while in D dorian, you were to play D-7 to G7 to C, you would use the functional harmony of C major and destroy your attempt at making us feel D dorian.
On the other hand, playing D-7 to G7 without resolving to C would be fine.
Note that there still is a strong fifth motion between D and G, so some of the rules of functionality still apply...


----------



## Anthony (May 7, 2017)

Patrick de Caumette said:


> It would only make sense that one would associate a scale and the modes that are derived from it.
> Since the scale is the DNA that is used to create the modes derived from it.
> Whether it is diatonic major, or something else.
> But the strong pull that is V-I in the original diatonic key can become a liability while in modal harmony and take the listener away from the targeted mode.
> ...



Thank you for your reply.

I guess what I'm trying to understand is if the relationship between a diatonic major scale and its modes is privileged/closer than between the former and other scales when it comes to modulation. It certainly seems this way given how much time is spent explaining them in some of the music books I have.

I've been aware of their (conceptual) existence for a while but never really felt comfortable using them in practice. Most books just seem to say _what_ they are, but not _how/when_ to use them compared to all the other possible scales that one could use. Cheers...


----------



## Patrick de Caumette (May 7, 2017)

Anthony said:


> Thank you for your reply.
> 
> I guess what I'm trying to understand is if the relationship between a diatonic major scale and its modes is privileged/closer than between the former and other scales when it comes to modulation. It certainly seems this way given how much time is spent explaining them in some of the music books I have.
> 
> I've been aware of their (conceptual) existence for a while but never really felt comfortable using them in practice. Most books just seem to say _what_ they are, but not _how/when_ to use them compared to all the other possible scales that one could use. Cheers...



Modulations are an entirely different topic altogether.
It isn't easier or harder to modulate whether in a diatonic functional harmony or in a modal context.
One interesting aspect of modes and a type of localized/temporary modulation, is that while in a mode, you can borrow chords from a different mode and create a temporary reference to that other mode to create interest. For example, a D dorian chord progression may go from D-7 to E-7, and for a brief moment you could replace the 2nd degree of the dorian mode by the 2nd degree of the Phrygian mode and go D-7 to EbMa7#11 instead. Of course you have to make sure that your melodic material works over the new chords, or adapt your melody if needed.
It is called modal interchange. 
As far as modulations go, if you have the books, just force yourself to apply what is outlined to your writing.
A simple exercise (among many) is to assign the melody note of the key you're in at the point you want to modulate to become the root, 3rd, 5th or 7th of a new key. That melody note could also be an upper structure tension of the new key, but to start, assigning it to become one of the basic chord tones of the new key is straight forward and still gives you options...


----------



## Anthony (May 8, 2017)

Patrick de Caumette said:


> Modulations are an entirely different topic altogether.
> It isn't easier or harder to modulate whether in a diatonic functional harmony or in a modal context.
> One interesting aspect of modes and a type of localized/temporary modulation, is that while in a mode, you can borrow chords from a different mode and create a temporary reference to that other mode to create interest. For example, a D dorian chord progression may go from D-7 to E-7, and for a brief moment you could replace the 2nd degree of the dorian mode by the 2nd degree of the Phrygian mode and go D-7 to EbMa7#11 instead. Of course you have to make sure that your melodic material works over the new chords, or adapt your melody if needed.
> It is called modal interchange.
> ...



I've always written by ear/inspiration, but with the intention of incorporating new ideas. Your suggestion to use modal interchange is a great step in that direction. In fact, you've helped me realize that I've been borrowing chords from parallel keys for years without recognizing it as modulation (as described here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borrowed_chord). Now that I'm explicitly aware of the concept, I can apply it more purposefully.

So thank you for your post, Patrick -- you've opened a new door for me. Cheers...


----------



## ThomasNL (May 8, 2017)

No idea if it has been said already but C major also share the same notes as A minor and they are also really different scales. And like C minor pentatonic is the same as C major Pentatonic. I can keep going with stuff like this but you get the point. Its not really about the notes but its about the sequence and about how you use it and elaborate from it. It was weird for me to get my head around too but after a while you just accept it and you'll know how to use the scales


----------



## Living Fossil (May 8, 2017)

Voider said:


> What I really wanted to express is the following:
> 
> I-IV-V-I in E dorian would be Em-A-Bm-Em, but in D major it simply would be expressed as II-V-VI-I movement.



It depends if you are talking about modality as used in the pre-tonal historical era or if you are refering to "modern" modality. (and then, there are some ethnical approaches which also may differ)

In the historical way dorian was used almost as if it would be minor.
That means, the VI is often replaced by VIb (in E-dorian it would be c instead of c#), and for an authentic cadence the VII was augmented (d# instead of d). 
In the Landini cadence  it would be d# and c#.

Further, in e-dorian a# would be a usual alteration, whereas in D-major Bb flat would be more usual.
(still talking about renaissance music)


----------

