#1
Hey there, Ive been learning some new scales to expand my knowledge and i still have no idea what the positions mean e.g. g minor blues scale in the 5th position, what is an easy way to remember them or any other tips regarding positions,

Thanks.
Gear:
Epiphone SG g400 Custom
Fender SuperChamp XD
Pod xt
Danelectro EQ
Boss BD-2

Wishlist
Epiphone Les Paul standard Translucent Blue
#2
I think 'positions' refers to the degrees of the scale...I may be wrong.

EDIT: So if D is the 5th degree of the G blues minor, the position may start from there?
Quote by silent caution
When i was younger i used to pee in peoples shoes and blame their dog
Last edited by Chylyn at Jun 3, 2010,
#3
Position refers to where your fingers are on the fretboard, usually in relation to the dot markers.
#4
The postion normally means the place on the guitar neck that you play the scale. Like fifth position means that you put your first finger on the fifth fret and play the scale using that as the root note.
first headbang stack.


#5
Quote by RANDUMB!
The postion normally means the place on the guitar neck that you play the scale. Like fifth position means that you put your first finger on the fifth fret and play the scale using that as the root note.



Surely if im playing for example a G minor pentatonic on the fifth fret it'd just become an A Minor Pentatonic.
Gear:
Epiphone SG g400 Custom
Fender SuperChamp XD
Pod xt
Danelectro EQ
Boss BD-2

Wishlist
Epiphone Les Paul standard Translucent Blue
#6
Quote by SpiderDans
Surely if im playing for example a G minor pentatonic on the fifth fret it'd just become an A Minor Pentatonic.


...if you're playing G minor pentatonic, how could you be playing an A minor pentatonic?

positions refer to the particular patterns with which scales can be played on guitar.

http://www.theorylessons.com/pent002positions.php

learn patterns and positions - but i advise you for your own benefit not to become complacent and use them as an excuse to not learn theory. you can do fine without theory, but your potential will be impacted if you don't genuinely understand what you're playing.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#7
Thank You very much AeolianWolf, i kinda understand them a bit better now,
Gear:
Epiphone SG g400 Custom
Fender SuperChamp XD
Pod xt
Danelectro EQ
Boss BD-2

Wishlist
Epiphone Les Paul standard Translucent Blue
#8
i learned the mode shapes for every mode in melodic minor, natty minor and harmonic minor..

i use shawn lane shapes for pentatonic stuff

modes are IMO, best way to learn scales because it gives you a much better understanding of the scales abilities and faults
My Gear:
JacksonStars KE TN-02
Jackson DK2M
Jackson WRXT
Jackson KSXT
Jackson DXMG
Jackson 7 String soloist

Ovation Celeberity
#9
Quote by seymour_jackson
i learned the mode shapes for every mode in melodic minor, natty minor and harmonic minor..

i use shawn lane shapes for pentatonic stuff

modes are IMO, best way to learn scales because it gives you a much better understanding of the scales abilities and faults

no, they aren't...they aren't even modes, that's just bollocks spouted by the likes of the guitar grimoire. Actual modes have nothing to do with learning the major or minor scale, they're a completely separate branch of musical thinking.

"learning" that way is the best way to confuse yourself and completely misunderstand modes.
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 Jun 4, 2010,
#10
Quote by steven seagull
no, they aren't...they aren't even modes, that's just bollocks spouted by the likes of the guitar grimoire. Actual modes have nothing to do with learning the major or minor scale, they're a completely separate branch of musical thinking.

"learning" that way is the best way to confuse yourself and completely misunderstand modes.
This.
Only play what you hear. If you don’t hear anything, don’t play anything.
-Chick Corea
#12
No, ignore anything that's blatantly wrong and downright confusing.

You've said many a time that you only introduce modes once your students have a comprehensive understanding of basic theory - based on that I fail to see why you're not agreeing with me.
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 Jun 5, 2010,
#13
Quote by steven seagull
No, ignore anything that's blatantly wrong and downright confusing.



Ehh, I learned the fretboard that way too as well, it's just logical. I don't know what's the big fuzz.
#14
There's no such thing as "mode shapes" is there? They're only going to be modes when played in isolation or in the correct context...anything inbetween and any chance of modality goes out of the window.

There's nothing to be gained from "learning" something you're only going to have to un-learn further down the line because it was fundamentally wrong.
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
#15
Quote by steven seagull
There's no such thing as "mode shapes" is there?


Sure there is. There is a shape to represent any scale on the guitar.

Quote by steven seagull

They're only going to be modes when played in isolation or in the correct context...anything inbetween and any chance of modality goes out of the window.


The idea that "context matters" is not strictly limited to modes....... it goes for everything, the Major scale included.
Quote by steven seagull

There's nothing to be gained from "learning" something you're only going to have to un-learn further down the line because it was fundamentally wrong.


this is a good point.

Scale shapes aren't something you'll ever have to "unlearn" though.

Its true that some people may learn it pre-maturely and not gain much from it. (and possibly forget it anyway). it's a bummer but it usually = learning experience.
When they get back to it, the earlier experience often serves as a 1st time exposure.....which can be helpful..... certainly doesn't hurt.


Quote by steven seagull
. Actual modes have nothing to do with learning the major or minor scale, they're a completely separate branch of musical thinking.


Well, they actually have ALOT to do with the Major and minor scales. They are very much intertwined, both theoretically & historically.


All that said, I agree with you for disagreeing with...

Quote by seymour_jackson
i learned the mode shapes for every mode in melodic minor, natty minor and harmonic minor..

i use shawn lane shapes for pentatonic stuff

modes are IMO, best way to learn scales because it gives you a much better understanding of the scales abilities and faults


Modes aren't a "way to learn scales". Modes ARE scales.

Personally I think people often get into them prematurely, drawn in by the fancy names which give a false feeling of being "advanced".

I do generally agree with Seagull regarding the benefits of understanding tonal harmony before getting into modes. (not stated in this thread, but I believe I know where hes coming from).


Quote by gquady09
Position refers to where your fingers are on the fretboard, usually in relation to the dot markers.


+1

yes position = where on the fretboard.

12 fret = 12th position
5th fret = 5th pos.....

I've seen a few things online that confuse "position" with "pattern".
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 5, 2010,
#16
Quote by GuitarMunky
Modes aren't a "way to learn scales". Modes ARE scales.


modes per se aren't really scales, but once you define a starting pitch (i.e. 'D dorian' instead of 'dorian'), you have a scale, so for the sake of correctness i really can't argue any further than that.

to be perfectly honest, i see absolutely nothing wrong with learning the modes as patterns on the fretboard - but it has to be done carefully, because it's very easy to slip up and think that, regardless of context, if you play a lick or melody or something in the phrygian shape than it is in phrygian. that's where problems arise.

Quote by GuitarMunky
Personally I think people often get into them prematurely, drawn in by the fancy names which give a false feeling of being "advanced".


precisely. and as you said, context is everything:

Quote by GuitarMunky
The idea that "context matters" is not strictly limited to modes....... it goes for everything, the Major scale included.


as munky said, there's a shape for everything on the guitar, but context (similar to chordal nomenclature) determines the function. shapes can be very beneficial, but they need to be learned carefully and correctly.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#17
Quote by AeolianWolf
modes per se aren't really scales.


Sure, they are.
shred is gaudy music
#18
Quote by GuitarMunky
Sure, they are.


like i said, i wouldn't consider 'dorian' a scale. but 'D dorian' certainly is.

the way i've come to understand it, the fundamental difference between modes and scales is that modes are patterns of intervals, and scales are patterns of defined notes.

of course, this way of thinking makes "the major scale" and "the minor scale" misnomers, since they're technically modes - until they become the E major scale and the E minor scale.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#19
Quote by AeolianWolf
like i said, i wouldn't consider 'dorian' a scale. but 'D dorian' certainly is..


Well if D dorian is a mode, and D dorian is a scale...... then a mode is scale. You pretty much just said it yourself.


Quote by AeolianWolf


the way i've come to understand it, the fundamental difference between modes and scales is that modes are patterns of intervals, and scales are patterns of defined notes.


Well they are both patterns of intervals
and when you define the tonic.... they both are patterns of defined notes. This is equally true of scale and modes.

D minor scale - D E F G A Bb C D

D dorian modal scale = D E F G A B C D

Quote by AeolianWolf


of course, this way of thinking makes "the major scale" and "the minor scale" misnomers, since they're technically modes - until they become the E major scale and the E minor scale.


Well they aren't misnomers, they are what the modes have evolved into, based on compositional practices.


but the difference between the scales themselves in terms of functionality/how we use them........ none.

The true difference is this 1 simple thing...............

There are modes of a scales..... but there are not modes of modes.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 5, 2010,
#20
The way I've always thought of it, is that if you know any scale pattern, you know a pattern for all of the modes as well. Assuming we're in a major scale, the note after the root would be the root for Dorian, and you could move the Dorian root anywhere for whatever key you want to be in and that will always be Dorian. I'm sure someone is just going to tear that apart, but that's how I've been taught and that's how it's made sense to me, and I've never really had any major confusion with modes.
#21
Quote by GuitarMunky
Sure, they are.
Well, based on historical context, scales and modes are just different terms for the same thing. In the modal days (what I like to call ancient/medieval/renaissance music), a mode was a set of notes that you could use to compose a piece of music. The major scale fits this description. The harmonic minor scale fits this description. The difference then is tonal harmony and other elements of western tonality had not been developed, so everything was in a "modal" context.

The way I distinguish modes from scales is that modal music is written in modes, utilizing only the given mode, whereas tonal music is written in keys and utilizes the use of scales, and alterations upon these scales.

Of course you can always define the word "mode" with the idea of a scale that contains the same notes as a "parent" scale, but with a different tonic. The quarrel I have with this definition as the primary function of the word is it considers the natural minor scale a mode. Sure it's a mode of the major scale, but I wouldn't call it a "mode" in the historical context, unless of course you're talking about the aeolian mode, which is completely feasible if you're in a modal context.

I guess I may be too wrapped up in the "historical" context though. It just seems much more logical to me to distinguish modes from scales in the modal vs. tonal context.

Quote by aCloudConnected
The way I've always thought of it, is that if you know any scale pattern, you know a pattern for all of the modes as well. Assuming we're in a major scale, the note after the root would be the root for Dorian, and you could move the Dorian root anywhere for whatever key you want to be in and that will always be Dorian. I'm sure someone is just going to tear that apart, but that's how I've been taught and that's how it's made sense to me, and I've never really had any major confusion with modes.
I'm not going to "tear it apart," but I will kindly tell you that modes are not just shapes of a scale. They're completely different entities that function completely differently to their parent scale.

As a matter of fact (this goes more back to my discussion from earlier in my post), the aeolian mode was simply "the aeolian mode" long before it was the "sixth mode of the major scale." If my history is correct, the aeolian mode existed long before the major scale (at least a few centuries), and even before the dorian mode.

Of course I may just be thinking of the European use of modes. As far as I know, the Greek development of modes could have been way different.
Only play what you hear. If you don’t hear anything, don’t play anything.
-Chick Corea
Last edited by food1010 at Jun 5, 2010,
#22
Quote by food1010
Well, based on historical context, scales and modes are just different terms for the same thing. In the modal days (what I like to call ancient/medieval/renaissance music), a mode was a set of notes that you could use to compose a piece of music. The major scale fits this description. The harmonic minor scale fits this description. The difference then is tonal harmony and other elements of western tonality had not been developed, so everything was in a "modal" context.

The way I distinguish modes from scales is that modal music is written in modes, utilizing only the given mode, whereas tonal music is written in keys and utilizes the use of scales, and alterations upon these scales.

Of course you can always define the word "mode" with the idea of a scale that contains the same notes as a "parent" scale, but with a different tonic. The quarrel I have with this definition as the primary function of the word is it considers the natural minor scale a mode. Sure it's a mode of the major scale, but I wouldn't call it a "mode" in the historical context, unless of course you're talking about the aeolian mode, which is completely feasible if you're in a modal context.

I guess I may be too wrapped up in the "historical" context though. It just seems much more logical to me to distinguish modes from scales in the modal vs. tonal context.


Well, what you're talking about is a difference in compositional practices. Yes, they have evolved. and alot of music draws from both harmonic wells.... and intertwines them.

That said. A mode IS a scale.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 5, 2010,
#23
Quote by food1010


I'm not going to "tear it apart," but I will kindly tell you that modes are not just shapes of a scale. They're completely different entities that function completely differently to their parent scale.

As a matter of fact (this goes more back to my discussion from earlier in my post), the aeolian mode was simply "the aeolian mode" long before it was the "sixth mode of the major scale." If my history is correct, the aeolian mode existed long before the major scale (at least a few centuries), and even before the dorian mode.

Of course I may just be thinking of the European use of modes. As far as I know, the Greek development of modes could have been way different.


Oh, I know the modes aren't just shapes of scales. I know that in today's context, the Dorian mode is built off of the second degree of the major scale, so instead of the scale being I-ii-iii-IV-V-vi-vii*, it would be i-ii-III-IV-v-vi*-VII. I was just saying that you can make any shape for a mode out of any scale pattern.

If I'm understanding correctly, you're saying in historical context, what I just said above wasn't true. The aeolian mode was it's own entity used for composing music, and not something built off of a parent scale. Right?
#24
Quote by aCloudConnected
Oh, I know the modes aren't just shapes of scales. I know that in today's context, the Dorian mode is built off of the second degree of the major scale, so instead of the scale being I-ii-iii-IV-V-vi-vii*, it would be i-ii-III-IV-v-vi*-VII. I was just saying that you can make any shape for a mode out of any scale pattern.

If I'm understanding correctly, you're saying in historical context, what I just said above wasn't true. The aeolian mode was it's own entity used for composing music, and not something built off of a parent scale. Right?



You seem to understand it well enough, and the relationships you pointed out (parent scale to mode).... are true. People will pick on you about shapes here, but really being able to visualize that relationship serves to reinforce your understanding. (as you probably know).
shred is gaudy music
#25
Quote by GuitarMunky
You seem to understand it well enough, and the relationships you pointed out (parent scale to mode).... are true. People will pick on you about shapes here, but really being able to visualize that relationship serves to reinforce your understanding. (as you probably know).


I'm really for learning scales by shapes and patterns, because I think that in time, you actually realize what you're memorizing and learning, and how everything connects, how the patterns flow into each other, how chords will fit right into the patterns, etc. I think it's a lot better than trying to memorize the intervals of a scale and trying to make it all make sense. You'll realize the intervals on your own in all the patterns and shapes.

It's like at school, we've got two math teachers; one required her students to memorize everything on the unit circle and the other (my teacher) gave everyone a handout the had everything on the unit circle on it, and let us use that handout for tests and quizzes and everything. After a while of working with the unit circle and familiarizing myself with it, I realized I had already memorized it without forcing myself to.
Last edited by aCloudConnected at Jun 5, 2010,
#26
Quote by aCloudConnected
I'm really for learning scales by shapes and patterns, because I think that in time, you actually realize what you're memorizing and learning, and how everything connects, how the patterns flow into each other, how chords will fit right into the patterns, etc. I think it's a lot better than trying to memorize the intervals of a scale and trying to make it all make sense. You'll realize the intervals on your own in all the patterns and shapes.

It's like at school, we've got two math teachers; one required her students to memorize everything on the unit circle and the other (my teacher) gave everyone a handout the had everything on the unit circle on it, and let us use that handout for tests and quizzes and everything. After a while of working with the unit circle and familiarizing myself with it, I realized I had already memorized it without forcing myself to.



Well, I think it's all good. If you're getting something out of the shapes & are able to connect them to music..... thats awesome IMO.

Knowing the theory side of it is great to.

The way I see learning guitar/music.....

There is alot to dig into. If you find a piece that interests you.... dig in.


That could mean learning your favorite song, studying theory, composing..... whatever.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 5, 2010,
#27
A 'mode' is a mood. simple. You can treat it as a scale on its own and create chords from it. or simply state a melody using the mode..

ex. Mixolydian, treated as tonic, contains a minor V dominant

Thinking with modes as tonics changes the quality of chords through the Harmonic progression but not the order

Quote by steven seagull
no, they aren't...they aren't even modes, that's just bollocks spouted by the likes of the guitar grimoire. Actual modes have nothing to do with learning the major or minor scale, they're a completely separate branch of musical thinking.

"learning" that way is the best way to confuse yourself and completely misunderstand modes.


i drew out every shape myself with no assistance with another book. as well as some pentatonic shapes of them. all in a graph paper book. colored with the circle of 5th color wheel so i know exactly where everything is... title- 'Pink Book'

Confusing is thinking that a mode is a separate branch of thinking. Music requires thinking as a whole

You cant listen to something and be like " Oh i KNOW thats Phyrigan" cause i could say "Nah bro thats a major scale" cause thats what it is, a Mood of the major scale

a Mode Shape IMO is just a box form of the mode.
My Gear:
JacksonStars KE TN-02
Jackson DK2M
Jackson WRXT
Jackson KSXT
Jackson DXMG
Jackson 7 String soloist

Ovation Celeberity
Last edited by seymour_jackson at Jun 5, 2010,
#28
They aren't moods of the major scale, that implies modes will always be an option when using the major scale and that simply isn't the case.
Quote by seymour_jackson

You cant listen to something and be like " Oh i KNOW thats Phyrigan" cause i could say "Nah bro thats a major scale" cause thats what it is, a Mood of the major scale

a Mode Shape IMO is just a box form of the mode.

That's just it, you can very easily listen to something and tell if it's a mode because modes are about nothing but sound. In the Phrygian mode, for example, that minor 2nd sticks out like a sore thumb. However, it's only going to be a minor second in the right context -if you simply look for your "phrygian shape" and start playing from the 3rd degree of the major scale absolutely nothing changes. You're still just playing the major scale.

Sticking mode names on shapes just confuses people - after all the shape of a mode is no different to the shape of it's relative minor or major scale. Learning a mode shape as the guitar grimoire teaches it simply teaches you how to run through the notes of a mode in one position of the fretboard - it doesn't get you any closer to understanding how they work or when they can be used which is all that really matters when it comes to modes. That's why there's so much confusion with people wondering if they can "Play E phrygian over a C minor progression to spice up a solo". Mode names are pointless unless they're being used in the context of modal theory, which is best ignored until someone already has a decent grasp of the major scale and diationic harmony. From that point it's relatively easy to learn how modes differ from the major scale and in what context those modes can be used.

ex. Mixolydian, treated as tonic, contains a minor V dominant

Thinking with modes as tonics changes the quality of chords through the Harmonic progression but not the order

When playing over a backing you can't simply "decide" to change the tonic, that's not possible. The only way the tonic chages is if the backing changes.
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 Jun 6, 2010,
#29
While you guys are having the modes argument, perhaps one of you can enlighten me about something;

Now I see that most of the misconceptions about modes on UG relate to some idea that a person using C major (for example) over a backing in C major for some reason believes that the scale changes names depending on what chord is then played underneath. They say they are now playing in a related mode which contains the notes of C major. Of course this is untrue, playing a scale containing the notes of the C major scale over a backing in the key of C major will not change the name or nature of the scale. It will still be the C major scale.

What I'm wondering is where did this pattern of thinking come from? It seems much simpler to call it C major, and nothing more. Who's spreading this idea that it then becomes modes? Where did it come from? The reason I ask this is because I haven't encountered this problem in the real world, just on UG.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#30
It's because modes sound cool, all those mysterious names make guitarists feel like wizards learning spells at Hogwarts

They overload themselves with information and want to learn modes ASAP because of the mystique that inexplicably surrounds. They learn all the names, they look up shapes and come to the conclusion that modes are "starting the major scale on a different note". They then want to know when they can be used and eventually stumble on the chords derived from the major scale.

They now have mode names, the sequence they follow in the major scale and some chords that follow the same pattern. Bingo, they put 2 and 2 together and get

((24/6)*(15/3)) * 0.2

In other words they still get "4", they've just made it so needlessly complicated that they can't see what it really is anymore...but it's more complicated so it must be better, right?

And they do all this reading on the internet, watching youtube videos or looking for shapes on their guitar fretboard, but never once to they actually listen to what they themselves are doing...
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 Jun 6, 2010,
#31
Quote by AlanHB
While you guys are having the modes argument, perhaps one of you can enlighten me about something;

Now I see that most of the misconceptions about modes on UG relate to some idea that a person using C major (for example) over a backing in C major for some reason believes that the scale changes names depending on what chord is then played underneath. They say they are now playing in a related mode which contains the notes of C major. Of course this is untrue, playing a scale containing the notes of the C major scale over a backing in the key of C major will not change the name or nature of the scale. It will still be the C major scale.

What I'm wondering is where did this pattern of thinking come from? It seems much simpler to call it C major, and nothing more. Who's spreading this idea that it then becomes modes? Where did it come from? The reason I ask this is because I haven't encountered this problem in the real world, just on UG.


Fancy words are very marketable to those seeking the chalice of guitar glory. The shred gods of the 1980's spread the seed that the only thing more impressive than playing fast, is playing scales with fancy names (very very fast of-course). That seed has grown.

There are so many lessons out there, some by our favorite shredders, selling the modes for profit.

IMO thats at least part of why you see so much misunderstanding..... and why you see it here specifically more than anywhere else.


This reminds me of my 1st encounter with modes......

I actually remember my friend coming over after reading some Satriani article in a Guitar mag, and he started playing these modes for me. I remember the names were so impressive, and he really made me feel like I had to learn them. So I did, but i didn't understand them, neither did he.

I think the idea that some people see modes as something they "have to learn".... is another related factor. They end up learning it for the wrong reasons and before they have the proper background to understand them.


The "Satriani uses them so I must learn them to be taken seriously" syndrome.

The "people will think Im advanced if I know modes" syndrome

ect.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 6, 2010,
#32
Quote by GuitarMunky
Fancy words are very marketable to those seeking the chalice of guitar glory. The shred gods of the 1980's spread the seed that the only thing more impressive than playing fast, is playing scales with fancy names (very very fast of-course). That seed has grown.

There are so many lessons out there, some by our favorite shredders, selling the modes for profit.

IMO thats at least part of why you see so much misunderstanding..... and why you see it here specifically more than anywhere else.


This reminds me of my 1st encounter with modes......

I actually remember my friend coming over after reading some Satriani article in a Guitar mag, and he started playing these modes for me. I remember the names were so impressive, and he really made me feel like I had to learn them. So I did, but i didn't understand them, neither did he.

I think the idea that some people see modes as something they "have to learn".... is another related factor. They end up learning it for the wrong reasons and before they have the proper background to understand them.


The "Satriani uses them so I must learn them to be taken seriously" syndrome.

The "people will think Im advanced if I know modes" syndrome

ect.
Great post.

I think the same applies for scales as well. People have the misconception that learning the most scales and the most interesting scales makes you a better/more knowledgeable player. While this is partly true, a mastery of simply the major scale will set you miles ahead of a weak understanding of many scales, basic and exotic.
Only play what you hear. If you don’t hear anything, don’t play anything.
-Chick Corea
#33
I see. But the vast majority of players use the major, minor and pentatonic scales 99% of the time. Couldn't one just listen and find that out?
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#34
Quote by AlanHB
I see. But the vast majority of players use the major, minor and pentatonic scales 99% of the time. Couldn't one just listen and find that out?

That's just it though, they DON'T actually listen

They just watch/read internet lessons, look at fretboard diagrams and look at where their fingers are going - thereby completely missing the whole point of picking up the guitar in the first place which is to make a plank of wood and some wires produce the sounds you want.
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
#35
Quote by steven seagull
That's just it though, they DON'T actually listen

They just watch/read internet lessons, look at fretboard diagrams and look at where their fingers are going - thereby completely missing the whole point of picking up the guitar in the first place which is to make a plank of wood and some wires produce the sounds you want.


+1,000, quite frankly.
Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#36
Quote by steven seagull
That's just it though, they DON'T actually listen

They just watch/read internet lessons, look at fretboard diagrams and look at where their fingers are going - thereby completely missing the whole point of picking up the guitar in the first place which is to make a plank of wood and some wires produce the sounds you want.


Actually alot of people DO listen. It's not fair or accurate to lump all people together like that.

People make all kinds of mistakes. It's part of life. Not something that can be cured by a cynical attitude.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 7, 2010,
#37
We hear music in intervals. We hear the interval that occurs between the note we're hearing and the note we just heard, and above all we hear the interval between the note we're hearing and the note we've perceived as the tonic. The idea of a tonic is really quite strange. All of our attempts to eliminate tonics have been unsuccessful. At best we've just made them very numerous. Why do we hear tonics? Note sure if anyone will ever know that. One could say it's our brain trying to find order, but I doubt one could ever put that on a higher status than a philosophy.

There's one things that a lot of people learning theory on this forum miss. They see the flashy names and are trapped by the appeal of theory and forget that what matters is how things sound.

If you aren't changing the tonic, and we hear music in intervals in relation to the tonic, then how is anything different? That is the downfall of a lot of modal thinking; using them doesn't actually make your compositions better. So you think of all these shapes as modes.. where did that get you again? You can convince yourself that you're playing Dorian all day long but if it doesn't sound any different then what was the point?

That's not to say that modes are useless. It's handy to identify a nat3 and a b6 as Dorian in certain cases, but not all the time. Sometimes it's better left to the net of borrowed chords and treated accordingly.

By all means if that melody you just wrote for your new metal song resolves to E and has and F and a G# then call it E Phrygian Dominant. We all know what Phrygian Dominant looks and sounds like so that's a very useful term. But if the harmony behind it isn't strictly Phrygian Dominant, just bag it and call it E minor because it will get you further later.
i don't know why i feel so dry
#38
Quote by GuitarMunky
Actually alot of people DO listen. It's not fair or accurate to lump all people together like that.

People make all kinds of mistakes. It's part of life. Not something that can be cured by a cynical attitude.

Yes, and a lot of people DON'T listen, obviously a lot do but we weren't talking about them...a lot of people don't read properly either it would appear.

I was responding to AlanHB's question asking why can't people simply listen to find out things. The fact is they don't, because if they did we wouldn't see half the questions we see in these forums and there would be far less misunderstanding and confusion in the world of guitar in general. I wasn't being cynical, merely stating an observation based on what I've read on the forumes over the past few years.

I never lumped all people together, you've just thrown that in there to try and start an argument which you seem to do fairly regularly.
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 Jun 7, 2010,
#39
Quote by steven seagull
Yes, and a lot of people DON'T listen, obviously a lot do but we weren't talking about them...a lot of people don't read properly either it would appear.

I was responding to AlanHB's question asking why can't people simply listen to find out things. The fact is they don't, because if they did we wouldn't see half the questions we see in these forums and there would be far less misunderstanding and confusion in the world of guitar in general. I wasn't being cynical, merely stating an observation based on what I've read on the forumes over the past few years.

I never lumped all people together, you've just thrown that in there to try and start an argument which you seem to do fairly regularly.


when you say "why can't people do this or ...that"..... thats lumping. and Im reading now that its in response to Alans "vast majority"....... still a big lump wouldn't you say?


You think Im trying to argue with you, but honestly I'm trying to help. Being cynical about other peoples actions is as detrimental to your own psyche as it is the people that would read and latch onto that cynicism.

I think you're better off looking at peoples accomplishments, and appreciating them, rather than knocking them down.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jun 7, 2010,
#40
There is a certain benefit in learning shapes of scales & modes. If you do it correctly you should be learning notes all over the fretboard. If you're just looking at diagrams and playing them based on finger position I'm not really sure you've learned much.

Unfortunately I'm learning this the hard way.....yikes.