#1
I want to learn how to apply them. Just learning the positions on the fretboard would be different to what I want. I wanna be able at it like umm Joe Satriani(as an example). By that what I mean is all my songs being different.
I don't think this is really a rational question.
#2
Well, frankly, you probably don't need to think about anything but major/natural minor for the time being.

When you can create meaningful music with those basic tools then you should start thinking about different scales.
#3
Quote by chronowarp
Well, frankly, you probably don't need to think about anything but major/natural minor for the time being.

When you can create meaningful music with those basic tools then you should start thinking about different scales.

Okay but if I were playing in G maj, which has the same notes as Em, and if I'd like it to sound major instead of minor I'd have to put emphasis on some notes right, so it would sound different.
#4
Quote by poisonousmetal
Okay but if I were playing in G maj, which has the same notes as Em, and if I'd like it to sound major instead of minor I'd have to put emphasis on some notes right, so it would sound different.

That's not how it works. The harmony dictates what sounds like the tonal center, not your melodic choices. If You have a major chord progression: |G-Am-C-D|, it's in G major. If you try to play Em, which is relative to G, it's just going to sound like G major.

You can't superimpose a tonality on top of an existing, extremely clear one like that.

When people aren't getting the results they want on guitar they tend to get this weird fascination with modes. The truth is, most of what you've probably read about modes is false, and more importantly, you need to go back and discover why you aren't getting the results you want when you're soloing. It probably is related to technique, your ability to build motifs, your phrasing...all these things are significantly more important than note choice.

I guarantee you almost everything all of your guitar heroes have played is in a major/minor key and not modal. So what's the missing link?
#5
Quote by chronowarp
That's not how it works. The harmony dictates what sounds like the tonal center, not your melodic choices.


+1
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
#6
Quote by chronowarp
That's not how it works. The harmony dictates what sounds like the tonal center, not your melodic choices. If You have a major chord progression: |G-Am-C-D|, it's in G major. If you try to play Em, which is relative to G, it's just going to sound like G major.

You can't superimpose a tonality on top of an existing, extremely clear one like that.

When people aren't getting the results they want on guitar they tend to get this weird fascination with modes. The truth is, most of what you've probably read about modes is false, and more importantly, you need to go back and discover why you aren't getting the results you want when you're soloing. It probably is related to technique, your ability to build motifs, your phrasing.

I was just asking 'cuz I'm changing my direction, I've always played Metal, but got interested in melodies and stuff like that so since all was minor, I wanted to experiment.Also, Joe uses Pitch Axis in which you shift through modes,like in Not of this earth
#7
That's one ...single example of Joe Satriani using "modes", but that's not central or even integral to his sound as a guitar player. Satraini's sound comes from his solid blues-based phrasing integrated with more shred-metal related guitar techniques and strong sense of melody.

Modes are the least important thing in that sound, if they're even a part of it. In tonal music there are two keys: major and minor. Very little, if anything, that comes out in modern music is purely modal. If there is any modal implication it's typically more easily explained as just being modal mixture within the key.

Stick with major, minor, and minor pent and see how you can make your playing more interesting while working with that base. You shouldn't need to really think modes or alterations within the key until you're dealing with chromatic harmony...or actually have the foundation to start moving in that direction.
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 18, 2012,
#8
Quote by chronowarp
That's one ...single example of Joe Satriani using "modes", but that's not central or even integral to his sound as a guitar player. Satraini's sound comes from his solid blues-based phrasing integrated with more shred-metal related guitar techniques and strong sense of melody.

Always With Me, Always With, You Satch Boogie and a couple more. It's really integral, 'cuz if you listen a lot to him you find it a lot(or get the feel alot). I'm not saying I would be using it always, but really frequently. That's why I wanted to know. I can apply it in a Metal context easily, but with melodies and stuff I tought it became a whole new sht
#10
Quote by chronowarp
Always with me, always with you is ...a major ballad with a direction modulation to the parallel minor key.

So, yeah Pitch Axis, it shifts from Major to Minor to Major while still retaining the axis which in the case would be B.
#11
Quote by poisonousmetal
So, yeah Pitch Axis, it shifts from Major to Minor to Major while still retaining the axis which in the case would be B.

No, no, that's nothing to do with modes at all. Modulation is the transition from one tonal center to another; usually by means of very deliberate and obvious cadences where the new key is established.

"Pitch axis theory" is having a drone (a single note that continuously rings) and having the ability to play another scale that has that root...because it will "work" the only influence is the tonic ( the drone) there's no indication of major/minor or any other information about the melodic framework, so you could conceivably play any scale that is simply built off of that same tonic note. ...but this really isn't interesting, and I think it's marketed more as something to practice...to get a sound into your ear rather than something to base a composition off of. Harmony creates movements...static harmony can get boring.

What happens in "Always With me, Always with you" is modulation, well - hmm, ya it's a modulation. You're in Key X...this key is defined by the harmonic and melodic content. You enter Key Y through use a harmonic/melodic device to bridge into the new key or tonal center.

B: I IV V
is the basic framework of the song

When he modulates to the parallel minor, he simply uses a common chord modulation or you could even call it a direction modulation, because of the way it happens, to get to B Minor. Afterall, same tonic - different quality - V still wants to resolve to a B of some sort.

So it resolves to Bm, and you get a short sequence:
Bm: i-iv-V...occassionally a VI

Until the F# bridges back into the key of B MAJOR. This has nothing to do with "modes" or "pitch axis theory" it's just a very deliberate and simple modulation to the parallel minor.
#12
Be aware that most of the times guitarists like Joe Satriani use modal terms like lydian and phrygian only to describe modal sounds but they use them as scales in a tonal setting. Basically, lydian is just the acfion of raising the 4th of a major scale and it doesn't make a piece modal at all it just adds color. Modes will not get you the sound you are after.
#13
So if I shifted from Mixolydian to Lydian I wouldn't be using Pitch Axis? Let me see if I get it.
If I changed the chords(or modulated them), I'ts not Pitch Axis, it's modulating. If I changed from Major to Phrygian(which would be extremely drastic)in a I-IV-V to Idim-iv-V and a bass had the tonal center for me to shift, it's Pitch Axis?
Last edited by poisonousmetal at Mar 18, 2012,
#16
Perhaps you should familiarise yourself with major and minor scales a bit more TS, Joe Satriani uses the blues, major and minor scales a whole heap. He doesn't even deviate from them that often.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#17
Here is a pitch axis example taken directly from wikipedia.

| A5#11 | A7sus4 | Fmaj7/A | A7sus4 |
|A-lydian|A-mixolydian|A-aeolian|A-mixolydian

IMO judging from your other posts, you should not mess with Pitch Axis because it is simply not that useful. Chrono already mentionned it but it makes for a very static harmony and would only be useful for short passages.
Last edited by SuperWeirdoUG at Mar 18, 2012,
#18
Think of it like this...the pitch axis thing...is really only applicable if you're playing over a drone - a single note with no framing or context to dictate what the other notes should be.

How do you know which scales work over a set of chords? It's usually the scale that contains the same notes as the chord, right? If you play a note that's not in the chord(s) then it sounds "off", still with me?

So, if there's a single droning note - let's say E. What does that E imply? Major, minor...lydian? It implies absolutely nothing at all it's just an E. But that means if you play any scale that starts with an E...E lydian, E mixolydian, E phrygian, E mixolydian, E altered, E wholetone....doesn't matter. It's fair play because you aren't being tied into anything by the harmony. You have nothing to clash against - so long as it's resolving to E.

But when chords get involved it's a whole different game. Functional harmony is like a nagging wife. "Honey, we're going from Em to B7 now, so you really should stop playing with that D natural". The harmony starts to dictate your note choices, and if you don't listen to the harmony you risk sounding like you have no idea what you're doing, and like you're playing "wrong" notes.

I think what's confusing you...is you seem to think that Satriani is applying this pitch axis thing all the time in his music...he's not. Most music doesn't operate in that way. If there are chords...then there is a strongly implied tonal center (hopefully), and therein you are bound to certain rules...note choices. If you depart to a new key (modulation) then your options change [this means the harmony moves in a direction that clearly implies a new tonal center]...but there are still rules.
Last edited by chronowarp at Mar 18, 2012,
#19
I'm consent of his usage not being that frequent, but the thing it's really interesting. If I had no chords, I'd be free of chains. But since a lot is based in chords, I would be tied to the 5 or 6 notes being used, which would allow me to choose that extra note If I wanted it to be diatonic. But If I were playing licks or something say
Aeolian
e:
B:
G:-----------------7
D:----------7-8-9---9-8-7-7/9
A:---7-8-9
E:0
If I land on that 5th It wouldn't sound good to go with a flat 5th so I would go anywhere except Locrian.
Phrygian
e:
B:
G:------------9-10-9-----9-9/10\9
D:--9-10-12----------12
A:
E:0

Which sends me free 'cause I've landed in E and then I can do whatever it pleases me again. That what you mean by rules? That I'd hsve to apply a mode which contains that note? There it is right
#20
I don't know is so appealing about being "free". Your solos and melodic lines should agree with the music. That means being cognisant of the harmony at all times, and if you're going to use chromatic notes then you have to learn how and where to place them and resolve them.

If you're playing over something in Em with a chord progression like: Em-Am-F#m7b5-B7...E minor is the scale choices that makes sense...obviously raise the third over the B7...but do you understand how there is nothing for you to superimpose there? You can't just play a b9 and be like "WOW IM SO PHYRYGIAN" the chord progression isn't phrygian, it's Em...you're bound to that.

If you had a progression like: Em-G-F-Em-A-B7, then obviously over the F you could play the b9 of the scale - to match the chord, but you still wouldn't be "YO PHRYGIAN MODE", because you're contained within a larger construct - the key. That's how you need to start thinking of modes. They're incidental alterations within a key, not comparable to or as common/strong as a key.

You don't need to "go" anywhere by "changing to 'x' mode". That's not how music works. You just need to concentrate over playing lines that make sense over the harmony. Modes aren't going to help you do this.
#21
What I tabbed, or thought had no chords, just the E creating a harmony with those notes. I know that I can stay, but there's a tension with that note.
I think I'm retarded
#22
If you learn more about music theory and functional harmony, you will feel much better as a musician and you will not feel chained. IMO, all these scales have hindered you and you should put them all on standby except for minor and major.
#23
With I could reflect a mood easily, for example if after landing on the B I went to the Mixolydian mode, it wouldn't sound like the Phrygian, so
e:
B:--------10p9p7\5/7\5
G:----7-9
D:--9
A:
E:0

Which sends me on another direction
#24
Quote by SuperWeirdoUG
If you learn more about music theory and functional harmony, you will feel much better as a musician and you will not feel chained. IMO, all these scales have hindered you and you should put them all on standby except for minor and major.

I don't mean chained, just that well it, sends you in a direction. Mixolydian isn't the same as Phrygian Dominant so you don't get the same. But I think I'll do that.
#26
Quote by chronowarp
You need to start learning about harmony...and just drop thinking about scales for a while.

I've been in that 3 months or so. So, most I go is double-stops and separate guitar harmonies, but as I said before, in a Metal context.
#27
Quote by poisonousmetal
I've been in that 3 months or so. So, most I go is double-stops and separate guitar harmonies, but as I said before, in a Metal context.


Even in metal, there should always be a chord progression and you should practice playing over different chord progressions.
#28
Quote by poisonousmetal
I've been in that 3 months or so. So, most I go is double-stops and separate guitar harmonies, but as I said before, in a Metal context.


Metal is not separate from the rest of music, theory is theory. It cares not for the presence of distortion.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#29
Quote by poisonousmetal
If I had no chords, I'd be free of chains.


And gigs.
But boys will be boys and girls have those eyes
that'll cut you to ribbons, sometimes
and all you can do is just wait by the moon
and bleed if it's what she says you ought to do
#30
Quote by Hydra150
And gigs.


Haha. Realistically speaking, if you're talking about determining the functional harmony by virtue of playing different scales with the lack of other instruments, the average person is simply observing some random guy wanking around on his guitar randomly for no particular reason.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#31
Quote by AlanHB
Metal is not separate from the rest of music, theory is theory. It cares not for the presence of distortion.
Well, distortion doesn't like thirds.
#33
OK then. Perhaps, "metal brings its own thirds". Although, "melodic, and "metal" can at times seem mutually exclusive.....
#35
Quote by AlanHB
Metal is not separate from the rest of music, theory is theory. It cares not for the presence of distortion.

I was refering on the application. I wouldn't use a b2 in a short ballad the same way I'd use it in a balls-to-the-wall Thrash song
#36
^^^ You can if you wish though, and theory will just call it a b2 either way.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#37
Quote by poisonousmetal
So if I shifted from Mixolydian to Lydian I wouldn't be using Pitch Axis? Let me see if I get it.
If I changed the chords(or modulated them), I'ts not Pitch Axis, it's modulating. If I changed from Major to Phrygian(which would be extremely drastic)in a I-IV-V to Idim-iv-V and a bass had the tonal center for me to shift, it's Pitch Axis?

Listen to the tapping section from Satch Boogie, that's a textbook implementation of pitch axis.

The rest of the song is fairly conventional from a harmony point of view, but Satch makes frequent use of little modal sections in his songs. One thing you should notice is that the section feels and sounds very different from the rest of the song, like a little excursion down a side street before returning to the main road. He's changing chords, but they're all built off the same tonic, that's your "axis". As soon as you start putting together typical diatonic chord progressions it becomes extremely difficult, if not impossible, to make modes "stick"...the pull of the major or minor tonic is just too strong.
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
#38
Quote by AlanHB
^^^ You can if you wish though, and theory will just call it a b2 either way.

Exactly, Theory stays the same but the application changes
#39
Quote by steven seagull
Listen to the tapping section from Satch Boogie, that's a textbook implementation of pitch axis.

The rest of the song is fairly conventional from a harmony point of view, but Satch makes frequent use of little modal sections in his songs. One thing you should notice is that the section feels and sounds very different from the rest of the song, like a little excursion down a side street before returning to the main road. He's changing chords, but they're all built off the same tonic, that's your "axis". As soon as you start putting together typical diatonic chord progressions it becomes extremely difficult, if not impossible, to make modes "stick"...the pull of the major or minor tonic is just too strong.

I was trying to see if I wasn't confusing the concepts