#1
Sorry if this has been posted a million times before. Can someone PLEASE tell me spellings for the following scales:

Major Pentatonic

Harmonic Minor

Melodic Minor

I know the Minor Pentatonic is 1, 3, 4, 5, 7, but can someone just confirm it for me?
#4
Important to note:
Melodic minor is
1-2-b3-4-5-6-7 ascending
8-b7-b6-5-4-b3-2 descending (natural minor on the way down)
Quote by Banjocal
sht up u flthy librl foogit stfu u soo mad n butthurdt ur ass is an analpocolypse cuz ur so gay "my ass hrts so mcuh" - u. your rectally vexed n anlly angushed lolo go bck 2 asslnd lolol
#5
Quote by King Of Suede
Important to note:
Melodic minor is
1-2-b3-4-5-6-7 ascending
8-b7-b6-5-4-b3-2 descending (natural minor on the way down)


i assume this is because of the mathmatical spacing of the notes?

EDIT: no nope it's not it has to do with classical theory which in this day most people play the melodic minor the same ascending or descending TBH.
song stuck in my head today


Last edited by lbc_sublime at Mar 9, 2012,
#6
^^In a jazz sense, yes play it the same up and down with the raised 6 and 7. In a classical sense, it's good to know that descending it's different.

When improvising, you would use it in a jazz sense.
If composing a melody, you'd probably want to follow it in the classical sense.
Ya dig?
Quote by Banjocal
sht up u flthy librl foogit stfu u soo mad n butthurdt ur ass is an analpocolypse cuz ur so gay "my ass hrts so mcuh" - u. your rectally vexed n anlly angushed lolo go bck 2 asslnd lolol
#9
Quote by Sean0913
That's because they couldn't sing it, so they changed the rules

Best,

Sean


You can't expect people who wear wigs and don't wash themselves daily to be anything but lazy asses
#11
Quote by griffRG7321
Just to be a pain in the arse, here's some baroque vocal music not raising the 6th.



Why would they raise the sixth in that piece?
I'm a musician/composer before I'm a guitar player.

foREVer


R.I.P Jimmy "The Reverend Tholomew Plague" Sullivan.
#12
Yeah it's a descending line. Looks like it's following he rules nicely!
Quote by Banjocal
sht up u flthy librl foogit stfu u soo mad n butthurdt ur ass is an analpocolypse cuz ur so gay "my ass hrts so mcuh" - u. your rectally vexed n anlly angushed lolo go bck 2 asslnd lolol
#13
The D# - C is an augmented 2nd. If he was following the 'rules' he would have used a D natural.

My point is they aren't rules. They are just conventions. Conventions that weren't always followed. The ascending version of melodic minor was sometimes used when descending.

Likewise, the 6th wasn't always raised in conjunction with the raised 7th. The augmented 2nd interval was singable, it was just harder to sing than when the 6th was raised. The raised 6th just made the melodic line smoother, a quality which wasn't always called for.
Last edited by griffRG7321 at Mar 10, 2012,
#14
Likewise,
Mel & Harmonic minor in a classical or non-jazz context aren't even truly legitimate scales...they're just descriptions of melodic tendencies in a minor key.
#15
^^

Just start from one chord, and have a next one, or start a melody and figure out where the next strong beat is or where/how you want the melody to go.

Then decide what alterations you put in the melody (in between), or what substitutions and alterations you add to the harmony.

It's most logical, since someone who hears your music (on the first listen especially) will hear it note by note, and not anticipate anything, unless you make the melody's direction very "obvious".


On dominant - tonic, or pre-dominant - dominant - tonic movements, anticipation is strong for the listener, and thus you can add alterations easier, without taking away from the strong harmonic movement.

It's one of the obvious reasons jazz players tend to go outside the diatonic scale on (2) - 5 - 1 movements and "break rules". You can even neglect the pre dominant to a degree and aim for the dominant - tonic movement alone and the listener would perceive it as "good".

On static movements the alterations have more weight, and takes a more focused listening, and dynamics and rhythmic anticipation become your friend to incorporate even the most "wrong" note.

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 Mar 11, 2012,
#16
Quote by griffRG7321
The D# - C is an augmented 2nd. If he was following the 'rules' he would have used a D natural.

My point is they aren't rules. They are just conventions. Conventions that weren't always followed. The ascending version of melodic minor was sometimes used when descending.

Likewise, the 6th wasn't always raised in conjunction with the raised 7th. The augmented 2nd interval was singable, it was just harder to sing than when the 6th was raised. The raised 6th just made the melodic line smoother, a quality which wasn't always called for.

d'oh The 6th is fine. The 7th wasn't lowered.
Of course augmented 2nd is singable, just not nice to look at. I mean If someone asks to sing a C to D#, your brain goes "blahhhhhhhhh" but C to Eb, well thats easy. "Lullaby and goodnight.."
Quote by Banjocal
sht up u flthy librl foogit stfu u soo mad n butthurdt ur ass is an analpocolypse cuz ur so gay "my ass hrts so mcuh" - u. your rectally vexed n anlly angushed lolo go bck 2 asslnd lolol
#17
There aren't rules to music, just rules to what fits what style. So raising the 6th and 7th when ascending and lowering them when descending aren't the rules of the melodic minor scale, its just the way they did it in those times and if you're writing in that style you should keep it in mind. I prefer to not even think of it in terms of a scale. When you take a scale as a chunk of random notes and use that to write or analyze music you don't get anywhere. I prefer to think of it in more specific contexts: If I'm playing in a minor key and I'm writing a part that ascends up to the tonic/octave I'm aware that it may sound more consonant to use the major 6 and 7 than if I use the minor 6 and 7, but I don't think at all about "melodic minor vs. natural minor" I just know I'm in a minor key and I may be using some accidentals.

Yup, I'm back...
#18
Quote by TMVATDI
There aren't rules to music, just rules to what fits what style. So raising the 6th and 7th when ascending and lowering them when descending aren't the rules of the melodic minor scale, its just the way they did it in those times and if you're writing in that style you should keep it in mind. I prefer to not even think of it in terms of a scale. When you take a scale as a chunk of random notes and use that to write or analyze music you don't get anywhere. I prefer to think of it in more specific contexts: If I'm playing in a minor key and I'm writing a part that ascends up to the tonic/octave I'm aware that it may sound more consonant to use the major 6 and 7 than if I use the minor 6 and 7, but I don't think at all about "melodic minor vs. natural minor" I just know I'm in a minor key and I may be using some accidentals.

Yup, I'm back...


Anfangen ist leicht, Beharren eine Kunst.
#20
I get what you're saying but yes, you need to look at things as scales.
And OK, we'll change the word to GUIDELINES. Is that ok with you?

To the scales. So when you analyze a piece and you see a 4 part texture that spells DFAD to GBDF to CEGC, you don't go "Well thats a ii-V7-I in C"?
You go around and say well, it's a Dm and then a G7 and then a C as if they were seperate entities with no relation to one another.
Scales aren't a "random chunk of notes" I can't very well take the notes C Dbb Eb Fbb G Ab Bx C and call is a scale. They are GUIDELINES to a certain tonic and color.
So when you take your minor key. You know that you have a b3,b6,b7 though you're pretty free do use whatever the hell notes you want (a random selection, per ce) so long as you make them fit with the piece you are writing.

Dig?
Quote by Banjocal
sht up u flthy librl foogit stfu u soo mad n butthurdt ur ass is an analpocolypse cuz ur so gay "my ass hrts so mcuh" - u. your rectally vexed n anlly angushed lolo go bck 2 asslnd lolol
Last edited by King Of Suede at Mar 13, 2012,
#21
Quote by King Of Suede
I get what you're saying but yes, you need to look at things as scales.
And OK, we'll change the word to GUIDELINES. Is that ok with you?

To the scales. So when you analyze a piece and you see a 4 part texture that spells DFAD to GBDF to CEGC, you don't go "Well thats a ii-V7-I in C"?
You go around and say well, it's a Dm and then a G7 and then a C as if they were seperate entities with no relation to one another.
Scales aren't a "random chunk of notes" I can't very well take the notes C Dbb Eb Fbb G Ab Bx C and call is a scale. They are GUIDELINES to a certain tonic and color.
So when you take your minor key. You know that you have a b3,b6,b7 though you're pretty free do use whatever the hell notes you want (a random selection, per ce) so long as you make them fit with the piece you are writing.

Dig?

I just want to mention a coulpe things:
1) I read an interview with Steve Vai that actually said that sometimes he likes to just grab several random notes and use them as a scale to come up with new licks.

2) scales are a rather random chunk of notes unless you are talking about a specific type of scale. there is nothing that says scales must fallow x formula, that being said there are things that say a major/minor/harmonic minor/ etc. scale is found with this formula.

3) I also just wanted to point out that Eb and Fbb are enharmonically the same and there fore would not need to be listed twice also if you were to use those notes I would change the C to B# and the Bx to C# cuz it really doesn't make sense to end on a note that would be higher than the octave....

4) finally I think his point that you are trying to argue against is to not try to analyze things as scales and to analyze it as a key, so you don't get thrown off by things like ascending with a melodic minor and decending s a natural minor, in terms of scale this doesn't really mater the fact that you are in a minor key is what matters.
Quote by Dirk Gently
Some pieces are only meant to be played by people with six fingers on their fretting hand. Sorry.
#22
Quote by King Of Suede
I get what you're saying but yes, you need to look at things as scales.
And OK, we'll change the word to GUIDELINES. Is that ok with you?

To the scales. So when you analyze a piece and you see a 4 part texture that spells DFAD to GBDF to CEGC, you don't go "Well thats a ii-V7-I in C"?
You go around and say well, it's a Dm and then a G7 and then a C as if they were seperate entities with no relation to one another.
Scales aren't a "random chunk of notes" I can't very well take the notes C Dbb Eb Fbb G Ab Bx C and call is a scale. They are GUIDELINES to a certain tonic and color.
So when you take your minor key. You know that you have a b3,b6,b7 though you're pretty free do use whatever the hell notes you want (a random selection, per ce) so long as you make them fit with the piece you are writing.

Dig?

I didn't say they were random chunks of notes, I said that it's unbeneficial to think of them that way. I do think of things in relation to the key, obviously, when writing or analyzing songs, but I find that I very rarely run into a song in which I need to think about any scale other than major or natural minor. I find that analyzing a song as using melodic or harmonic minor will ultimately limit my grasp of the melody and harmony itself and why it sounds the way it does. Only time I go scale-crazy is if I'm improvising over a particularly interesting song (typically jazz or something psychedelic)