Page 1 of 4
#1
Some of you may have heard that i started looking at modes today, and persoanlly they seem abit easy from my point of view... am i doing something wrong?? this is what i think of modes.... Please argue.

1. Modes are just scales (FULL FKIN STOP)

2. Modes sound either happier or sadder than nomal major and minor scales

3. Modes all have a simple pattern, if u memorise those patterns, u will always know where to find a particular mode.

4. A mode is jsut another scale with 1 note flattened or 1 note sharped (or maybe 2 i havent quite memoriesed it yet, im just getting used to the sounds and patterns for now, the more useful stuff in real life situations.)

Thats all i can really see about a "MODE" (omg da names so fancy)

When my teachers talk about modes, they make it sounds so complicated like once i asked my teacher. U know that song for the love of god by steve vai or tha song jibboom, what scale is it in teacher??? and he just says, O, he doesnt use scales, he uses modes, but thats abit more advanced, we will get into that later....

Can anyone tell me if im missing something here? Or are modes just called "advanced" because guitarists dont usually do theory (AFAIK).

Thanks alot!Sorry if my typings abit gey, i try to type very fast cos i <3 theory and wud rather spend most of my time doing theory k thx

<3
#4
Quote by dmirtygorachyov

4. A mode is jsut another scale with 1 note flattened or 1 note sharped (or maybe 2 i havent quite memoriesed it yet

No. It's the degrees which are raised or lowered, resulting in an accidental or natural. Please be careful with this.

Do you understand intervals?
#5
and yes modes are more complicated than 'ordinary' scales. When you make a normal chord progression, it ends up usually being either major or minor, hence you use your major or minor scale which corresponds to the progression.

Modes don't fit (or at least very very rarely fit) into a regular chord progression, modes have to be used in specific contexts (ie over vamps and progressions specifically designed for them).

You cannot gain a good knowledge of modes by memorising their patterns, basically all you are doing from a harmonic context is learning the major scale all over the neck. Modes are reliant on the harmony under them (some people argue that harmony is not necessary, and I would agree to some extent but it is very useful). Learn the interval formulas for the modes related to the major scale and you will have at least made a start.

Not as simple as play this pattern here, you will go nowhere thinking that. You're teacher is right listen to him and read the various posts and the modes sticky.
#6
Quote by mdc
No. It's the degrees which are raised or lowered, resulting in an accidental or natural. Please be careful with this.

Do you understand intervals?


It depends on waht you mean by understand intervals, Im not all perfect at spotting a minor 2nd or a major 3rd all the time, but i know waht iminor third is and how many semitones/tones it is.
#7
Quote by dmirtygorachyov
It depends on waht you mean by understand intervals, Im not all perfect at spotting a minor 2nd or a major 3rd all the time, but i know waht iminor third is and how many semitones/tones it is.

Ok. You're not ready for modes. Sorry to you, and Arch....and bgc....beat ya to it.

...but here's a simple interval test.

What is the interval between E# and F#?
Last edited by mdc at Jan 22, 2009,
#8
Quote by Helpy Helperton
and yes modes are more complicated than 'ordinary' scales. When you make a normal chord progression, it ends up usually being either major or minor, hence you use your major or minor scale which corresponds to the progression.

Modes don't fit (or at least very very rarely fit) into a regular chord progression, modes have to be used in specific contexts (ie over vamps and progressions specifically designed for them).

You cannot gain a good knowledge of modes by memorising their patterns, basically all you are doing from a harmonic context is learning the major scale all over the neck. Modes are reliant on the harmony under them (some people argue that harmony is not necessary, and I would agree to some extent but it is very useful). Learn the interval formulas for the modes related to the major scale and you will have at least made a start.

Not as simple as play this pattern here, you will go nowhere thinking that. You're teacher is right listen to him and read the various posts and the modes sticky.


and yes modes are more complicated than 'ordinary' scales. When you make a normal chord progression, it ends up usually being either major or minor, hence you use your major or minor scale which corresponds to the progression. <<---- What makes a chord progression "normal"? Probably a twelve bar blues is as normal as normal gets, but i can see why it wouldnt work TECHNICALLY, but what are you referring to as non normal chord progressions? susdimdom+5 sharpen dat bitch kinda chords as advanced ones? because if thats the case it looks like im going pretty good..

And just for something new for me to learn (LEARN SOMETHING NEW EVEYRDAY)!!! whats a vamp?

O AND FYI WHERE I GET MY STUFF FROM IS CUTTING EdGE TECHNIQUES BY GUTHRIE GOVAN!!! (HE MAKES IT sEEM SO SIMPLE WHEN IT REALLY JUST IS!)
#9
Quote by mdc
Ok. You're not ready for modes. Sorry to you, and Arch....and bgc....beat ya to it.

...but here's a simple interval test.

What is the interval between E# and F#?


*jumps into deep end*

Semitone?
#10
Quote by webbtje
*jumps into deep end*

Semitone?

Lol! Yes, you didn't drown. I'd preferred "minor second" or "b2", and by TS, but yes. Bravo!
#11
Quote by mdc
Ok. You're not ready for modes. Sorry to you, and Arch....and bgc....beat ya to it.

...but here's a simple interval test.

What is the interval between E# and F#?


I think its a minor 2nd : S. But i dont think its that obvious right? CMON! its MODES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE! btw if im wrong, plz give me a good link or explanation so can learn form my wrongings <--- Mad word!
#12
Quote by mdc
Lol! Yes, you didn't drown. I'd preferred "minor second" or "b2", and by TS, but yes. Bravo!


OMGI GOT IT RIGHT LOLOLOLOL, i was just about to say that if i got it wrong i wud have slit my brain wif my axe, cos my efforts in theory wud have been a waste, i didnt refresh my forum page so I DIDNT See UR ANSWER!!!! OMG IMSO EXITED! AM I READY FOR MODES YET PLZ PLZ PLZ? even if imnot im doing it anyway! modes dont scareme
#13
Quote by dmirtygorachyov
CMON! its MODES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE!

Yes we are, and understanding intervals is vital....understanding intervals of the Major Scale is vital.

Btw, I'm glad you've discovered Guthrie, what a player.
#14
anyway, back to the important part, what helpy herperton is just saying is that its really just more complex because for it to technically "worK" melodically to complement its harmony, is that the chords used are much more complex? Therefore leading to these modal scales to be more complex ??? Is that really all?
#15
I should have explained what I meant by normal sorry.

What I referred to as a 'normal' progression I meant as a progression which resolves to a major or minor scale for example take the chords Cmaj Fmaj Gmaj. These chords resolve to the Cmajor scale (ie nothing modal, nothing unusual just straight major scale).

You asked what would be a 'non normal' progression, not great terminology by either but what the hey. I would define this as a set of chords taken from different keys so the tonality becomes ambiguous (can someone clear this up further?), or making a vamp of a few chords to use a mode.

I'm not sure of the exact definition of a vamp, but it refers to taking 1 or more chords (not usually more than 2 or 3) and playing them in a way which emphasises the tonality of the scale to be used. I don't really like that explanation, I know what it is but i'm having a hard time putting it into words.
#16
Quote by mdc
Yes we are, and understanding intervals is vital....understanding intervals of the Major Scale is vital.

Btw, I'm glad you've discovered Guthrie, what a player.


So i was right, right? thats just about everything about intervals? perfect 5ths yada yda? kno ur sounds identify them by ear yada yda? so i was right? guitar theory isnt quarterly has hard as it sounds or as anyone makes them sound? let alone look?

ps. guthries an amazing writer, ive listen to a few of his stuff on youtube, so far im not liking it, but ive only heard once, same case for sonata arctica, heard once,not like their some, hear twice,second thoughts, hear 5times, the band that buttrapes all with huge objects e.g. Bottles
#17
Check 2nd link in my sig for info.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
#18
Quote by Helpy Helperton
I should have explained what I meant by normal sorry.

What I referred to as a 'normal' progression I meant as a progression which resolves to a major or minor scale for example take the chords Cmaj Fmaj Gmaj. These chords resolve to the Cmajor scale (ie nothing modal, nothing unusual just straight major scale).

You asked what would be a 'non normal' progression, not great terminology by either but what the hey. I would define this as a set of chords taken from different keys so the tonality becomes ambiguous (can someone clear this up further?), or making a vamp of a few chords to use a mode.

I'm not sure of the exact definition of a vamp, but it refers to taking 1 or more chords (not usually more than 2 or 3) and playing them in a way which emphasises the tonality of the scale to be used. I don't really like that explanation, I know what it is but i'm having a hard time putting it into words.


So basically, what u mean by not normal progressions, are the modes OWN progressions.... It makes sense if im right, but if imright, it still doesnt make sens how its so difficult, it sounds more to the case that modes are just "different", not more complex technically.

I did a quick look up on what vamps are (wikipedia + google = gods baby juggernaught) it sounds like its just a fancy word for a repetitive progression? Not changable? It would make sense again if im right because they used that word for jazz and blues and such, and the musos decide to make another fancy word but for classical music.... the "Ostinato". Vamp =fancy word for repetitive prog for jazz n blues, Ostinato = same thing for classical....

Please, may we argue this matter

<3
#20
I'm not sure why this forum so often regards modes as advanced. I've no idea how Steve Vai uses modes, frankly because I've never been interested in his music, so maybe there's an uber complex methodology involved. How modes are used in folk music, and hence, a lot of rock music, is very simple however.
#21
Quote by xxdarrenxx
Check 2nd link in my sig for info.


Well, what u typed there is quite the mouthful, but i think from roughly reading it (im notmuch of a reader) is personally editing the chords to jsut make it fit with the particular mode, which all makes sense to me, but it still doesnt quite spell out modes as being hard. I get exactly everything you were saying on the thread, but that really implies on major and minor scales aswell?

Still showing how modes and scales are StILL ThE SAME, just with a few changes in notes or if u want to get really theory-ie, a minor 2nd higher or lower for some of the notes in the scale.

In the major and minor natural scales, all the chords that are , Which some say normal, are the same as those from the modal scales, so really, someone could start learning a mode, and all its chords and signature intervals or notes (im note sure which is the right word because im not a guitar teacher lol) and never seen or heard the saying "Modes are hard, Modes are more advanced, major and minor scales are basic in comparison to modes" they would technically get it as fast as the normal major and minor scales.

Which comes back to my main question. Why do people say that modes are so advancedin comparison to normalscales.

Isit because of the names of the chords? being Esus4maj6th in comparison to a simple Emaj7th or smthing? why! i just dont understand.... and at the sametime i want to because otherwise it isnt fair to the students who are interested in being technically as "good" as their favourite guitarists by saying. Modes are complex, modes are difficult, when they work exactly the same way as major and minor scales.

Please argue, mainly on how they dont work exactly the same as major and minor scales.

Thanks!
#22
Quote by anotherbluesguy
I'm not sure why this forum so often regards modes as advanced. I've no idea how Steve Vai uses modes, frankly because I've never been interested in his music, so maybe there's an uber complex methodology involved. How modes are used in folk music, and hence, a lot of rock music, is very simple however.


EGG-FARGEN-SACTLY

i just dont get it... my teachers do that aswll
#23
O and by the way, its 4.30 am at where im at so im off to bed now, its not over...... one side shall win, while the other, shall fall, BURN AND FALLL,,, MUAHAHAHAIUDJAHGFLJHAFLJA....

good nite ; )

ill reply tmr
#24
Quote by dmirtygorachyov
. Why do people say that modes are so advancedin comparison to normalscales.

Cuz they don't understand the basics....and the sad thing is, is that they don't realise that they don't understand the basics.
#25
I'm not sure why this forum so often regards modes as advanced. I've no idea how Steve Vai uses modes, frankly because I've never been interested in his music, so maybe there's an uber complex methodology involved. How modes are used in folk music, and hence, a lot of rock music, is very simple however.


Folk and rock music are very rarely modal.
Modes aren't complicated. The problem is that people in general are too lazy and pompous to learn the basics.
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.
#26
Quote by mdc
Lol! Yes, you didn't drown. I'd preferred "minor second" or "b2", and by TS, but yes. Bravo!


Says it all about how much theory I know, really
#27
Modes are not complicated, I heard Lydian and Mixolydian before I even played guitar, and when I didn't knew theory, I found myself often emphasizing a mode, without knowing what it theoretically was.

Songs are rarely modal, but modes are often used for riffs and separate sections.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
Last edited by xxdarrenxx at Jan 22, 2009,
#29
Quote by anotherbluesguy
If you'd allow me to test a theory Archeo; would you consider this to be modal?


Show me a score.
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.
#30
Quote by Archeo Avis
Show me a score.


Use ur ears, It's a dylan song, not an guthrie song

and it's in Cm (aeolian/modal)

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
#31
Quote by xxdarrenxx
Use ur ears, It's a dylan song, not an guthrie song

and it's in Cm (aeolian/modal)


I don't care who wrote it, I'm not going to analyze it without a score.
Being in a minor key does not make it modal.
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.
#32
Quote by Archeo Avis
I don't care who wrote it, I'm not going to analyze it without a score.
Being in a minor key does not make it modal.



What I meant was that there are only 3 or 4 chords played through most of the song. You need a score for that?

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
#33
It has two chords, and you're not quite there with Aeolian darren; listen for the inflection on the word "friends" in the first line.

Archeo, I'm wondering how many folk songs you've studied with full scores, in order to be able to say folk music is rarely modal. I mean, given that you couldn't have found this out just by listening to lots of it.
#34
Quote by anotherbluesguy
It has two chords, and you're not quite there with Aeolian darren; listen for the inflection on the word "friends" in the first line.

Archeo, I'm wondering how many folk songs you've studied with full scores, in order to be able to say folk music is rarely modal. I mean, given that you couldn't have found this out just by listening to lots of it.


No, just "listening to it" is going to give you next to no theoretical information about the music. You need to consider the notes that make up the work. The most help you're going to get from "listening to it" is transcribing the song by ear.
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.
#35
Listening gives you every bit of information. Music is sound, not black dots on a sheet of paper.

But anyway... I'm not going to transcribe it for you. I was trying to see if we had a different meaning of modal music. That song I would consider modal. I you do not, then we have a different meaning. Hence the question.
#36
I linked all my notes to sound, which works both ways.

If I hear something I "hear" the theory as well.

I mean It's like a language, if someone talks to you, do you need to have it written in front of you as well to understand the person?

Seriously

And it's just vocal phrasing on that which still implies notes from Aeolian. It's to vague and is not the main focus of the song/harmony. It's just an "outside" kind of note.

What it does here is smart use of aural deception as I call it.

All the notes he sing are fairly common, but due to the phrasing of "Friends" it "grabs" the ear, implying a kind of phrygian inflection, since his vocal there resolve on a G note.

The piece itself is not modal, but this is a good use of how to bring out a relative mode sound.

I'd call that vocal phrasing an "G Phrygian" lick.

The "Re-incarnation of Plato" Award 2009
(most intelligent)
The "Good Samaritan" Award 2009 (most helpful)

[font="Palatino Linotype
Who's Andy Timmons??
Last edited by xxdarrenxx at Jan 22, 2009,
#38
Quote by dmirtygorachyov
Well, what u typed there is quite the mouthful, but i think from roughly reading it (im notmuch of a reader) is personally editing the chords to jsut make it fit with the particular mode, which all makes sense to me, but it still doesnt quite spell out modes as being hard. I get exactly everything you were saying on the thread, but that really implies on major and minor scales aswell?

Still showing how modes and scales are StILL ThE SAME, just with a few changes in notes or if u want to get really theory-ie, a minor 2nd higher or lower for some of the notes in the scale.

In the major and minor natural scales, all the chords that are , Which some say normal, are the same as those from the modal scales, so really, someone could start learning a mode, and all its chords and signature intervals or notes (im note sure which is the right word because im not a guitar teacher lol) and never seen or heard the saying "Modes are hard, Modes are more advanced, major and minor scales are basic in comparison to modes" they would technically get it as fast as the normal major and minor scales.

Which comes back to my main question. Why do people say that modes are so advancedin comparison to normalscales.

Isit because of the names of the chords? being Esus4maj6th in comparison to a simple Emaj7th or smthing? why! i just dont understand.... and at the sametime i want to because otherwise it isnt fair to the students who are interested in being technically as "good" as their favourite guitarists by saying. Modes are complex, modes are difficult, when they work exactly the same way as major and minor scales.

Please argue, mainly on how they dont work exactly the same as major and minor scales.

Thanks!

Modes have absolutely nothing to do with technique because there's nothing "technical" about them. You can use modes in exactly the same way as any other scale, you can play a dozen notes a second or you could play one every 5, they're nothing to do with playing fast or shredding.

Modes are advanced because there's a lot of knowledge you need to digest and comprehend before you're in a position to tackle them. You can't just "decide" to use E phrygian, you have to understand the context it can be used in and to do that you first need to understand the basics of music theory. You get kids asking about modes when they can't even identify the notes on their guitar, let alone the major scale...how in the world are they supposed to understand harmonic context? That's why they get told "You're not ready for modes", because they haven't learned the stuff they need to know to enable them to understand them.

You actually seem to have a pretty good understanding of them, I think that's why you're having trouble seeing why they can be difficult. Modes don't have "special" chords, at the end of the day chords are chords...however you need to use specific chords if you want to keep your tonal centre away from the relative major or minor.

If you've got a bog standard progression like C F G then playing the notes of the C major scale over it ( C D E F G A B) will always be playing in C major regardless of what you do with those notes...there'll be no F Lydian, G mixolydian, E phrygian etc...just C major.

However, take those notes (C D E F G A B) and put them over constant backing of a Dm7 chord. That's going to fix D as the tonal centre and keep you away from the more harmonically stable relative major and minor. In that context the notes are D Dorian, and you've also got the added bonus of the m7 chord mirroring those signature Dorian characteristics of the flattened 3rd and 7th.
Actually called Mark!

Quote by TNfootballfan62
People with a duck for their avatar always give good advice.

...it's a seagull

Quote by Dave_Mc
i wanna see a clip of a recto buying some groceries.


stuffmycatswatchontv.tumblr.com
Last edited by steven seagull at Jan 22, 2009,
#39
I mean It's like a language, if someone talks to you, do you need to have it written in front of you as well to understand the person?


Terrible analogy. Here's a better one...

When analyzing the grammatical structure of a sentence, is it enough merely to hear it, or does one have to identify the function of each word in the sentence? (Hint: Yes)
Someones knowledge of guitar companies spelling determines what amps you can own. Really smart people can own things like Framus because they sound like they might be spelled with a "y" but they aren't.
Page 1 of 4