#1
So I've been playing guitar for several years and I'm fairly proficient I guess, my style of playing is almost entirely improvisational with a lot of influence from Hendrix, SRV and Frusciante, but when improvising I stick almost entirely to the pentatonic scale, because that way I canjust know what notes I have to play around with, then just go crazy within that parameter. But with learning modes, everyone I've asked has always said you use a mode for a different chord, like mixolydian mode over a dominant 7th or something like that, only thing is when I'm jamming with people I don't really know what chords are being played, and I try to mentally detach myself from whats going on, so I'm jsut playing, not consciously thinking about everything I do.
So my question is, how can modes be helpful/useful for improvising when you're not playing over a simple backing track that you've already sat down and figured out the chord progression, and which scales will go with which chords, etc.?
#3
Guitar players are literally the only musicians that care about modes.
Check out my band Disturbed
#4
Here is a very good thread covering this:
https://www.ultimate-guitar.com/forum/showthread.php?t=16999

But in terms of improvisation, it is still possible if you look at the very basic modal chord progressions as they are simply based on the major chord progression, ie Maj Min Min Maj Maj Min Dim...

I'm not an expert on all modes, but the reason why Mixolydian works with dominant 7 chords is because both the mixolydian mode and dominant 7th chords contain the minor 7th.
Gear:
Epiphone Les Paul Standard
Godin Velocity
Peavey Vypyr 15 Watt
AMT WH1 Japanese Girl Wah
Marshall BB-2 Boost/OD
Joyo JF-07 Classic Flanger
Joyo JF-37 Analog Chorus
Last edited by BlueIceBox at Nov 30, 2014,
#5
Quote by StewieSwan
Guitar players are literally the only musicians that care about modes.

This actually isn't technically true, but I know exactly what you mean, and I find it really funny/strange.
Quote by dancingsmurfs
So I've been playing guitar for several years and I'm fairly proficient I guess, my style of playing is almost entirely improvisational with a lot of influence from Hendrix, SRV and Frusciante, but when improvising I stick almost entirely to the pentatonic scale, because that way I canjust know what notes I have to play around with, then just go crazy within that parameter. But with learning modes, everyone I've asked has always said you use a mode for a different chord, like mixolydian mode over a dominant 7th or something like that, only thing is when I'm jamming with people I don't really know what chords are being played, and I try to mentally detach myself from whats going on, so I'm jsut playing, not consciously thinking about everything I do.
So my question is, how can modes be helpful/useful for improvising when you're not playing over a simple backing track that you've already sat down and figured out the chord progression, and which scales will go with which chords, etc.?


The truth is, modes, used that way, are only really a tool for improvisation that you would need for specific circumstances. For a lot of music it is kind of superfluous or redundant.

My recommendation to you, is that since in all likelihood, you won't really care all that much about modes, start with key scale. It's easy, it's just 2 notes added to your pentatonic. You probably play pentatonic major and minor sometimes too, but don't really notice. I would start with making sense of all of that, first.

But, if you really want to know about improvising with them in that way, then follow the free coursera jazz improv course, which is taught by a berklee jazz improv teacher, I forget his name now. He uses that approach, and plays the xylophone.

I find a lot of people think modes are a source of creativity, or will make their improv more fresh. I personally don't like that approach at all, and find there is infinite freshness and great phrasing that can be done without them.

To me, it's kind of like adding new letters to the alphabet. That's not how you achieve saying cooler things, really. But if you want to speak some languages, you will need new letters.

If you like fusion style jazz stuff, then you want to learn that. But learn the key scale first anyway.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Nov 30, 2014,
#6
Quote by dancingsmurfs

So my question is, how can modes be helpful/useful for improvising when you're not playing over a simple backing track that you've already sat down and figured out the chord progression, and which scales will go with which chords, etc.?


Short answer: yes.

A situation that often occurs is improvising over a tune that's "minor" (don't want to get into theory or modes discussion here). Say, E minor. So, you may play E m pentatonic, and occasionally play C or C#, and both kind of sound right some of the time, depending on what the rest of the band are playing. (e.g. if they're playing Em, D, C ... the note C is in the progression. But if they're playing Em, A, then C# is, and if the whole thing sounds like the music is focused around E, in this case E Dorian is a very cool sound to use, and trying to use the note C won't cut it too well (depending how you emphasise it).

This is not a jazz thing particularly ... lots of rock uses this also.

cheers, Jerry
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 1, 2014,
#7
Any genre will use the odd chord which won't be diatonic to the key. Usually it is only one note which is slid over one semitone, like the example of C-C#.

I'm not gonna get into my whole theory of music, but essentially, to me, I don't find it worth it to take that approach because of how it sounds, and when it is really pertinent. One needs to know the sound of things to know what anything is in music. It is hard to explain that in text. The key scale, imo is the most important thing, no matter what. So, learn that first. Once you understand what this whole modes improv thing is, you will be able to decide if that's for you.

I know what music is, and I know what modes improv is, and I know that it's not for me. I don't know OP. If OP is like me, stay away from all that. But even if you're not, learn the basics first. build a good foundation. All the modes are the same pattern as the key scale.
#9
Quote by fingrpikingood
Any genre will use the odd chord which won't be diatonic to the key. Usually it is only one note which is slid over one semitone, like the example of C-C#.

...

I know what music is, and I know what modes improv is, and I know that it's not for me. I don't know OP. If OP is like me, stay away from all that. But even if you're not, learn the basics first. build a good foundation. All the modes are the same pattern as the key scale.


Each to their own. You're missing the point, big time, in the example above ... but fair enough if you stay away from progressions that aren't derived from major scale or the trinity of minor scales. There's a whole new world of sound that can be explored (and I'm not talking about modal grooves on just one chord).

If you don't use modes, how can you comment on their musicality? I don't get that.

There's no denying however that there is loads of great music written using major and minor, and that having a strong understanding of these is essential.

cheers, Jerry
#10
Quote by jerrykramskoy
Each to their own. You're missing the point, big time, in the example above ... but fair enough if you stay away from progressions that aren't derived from major scale or the trinity of minor scales. There's a whole new world of sound that can be explored (and I'm not talking about modal grooves on just one chord).

If you don't use modes, how can you comment on their musicality? I don't get that.

There's no denying however that there is loads of great music written using major and minor, and that having a strong understanding of these is essential.

cheers, Jerry


I don't not use modes. major and minor are both modes. I don't approach improvisation as selecting a mode based on what chord I want to play over. I'll play in dorian, or in mixolydian, or whatever, no problem. I just don't approach each chord and make a decision of what mode I'm playing based on that. That is the discussion here. That's what OP asked. He was referring specifically to it as a tool of improv, not a key framework.

I can make comments like these, because before I formulated an opinion, I explored the thing, so that I knew what I was talking about when I made the decision not to pursue it.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 1, 2014,
#11
Quote by dancingsmurfs
So I've been playing guitar for several years and I'm fairly proficient I guess, my style of playing is almost entirely improvisational with a lot of influence from Hendrix, SRV and Frusciante, but when improvising I stick almost entirely to the pentatonic scale, because that way I canjust know what notes I have to play around with, then just go crazy within that parameter. But with learning modes, everyone I've asked has always said you use a mode for a different chord, like mixolydian mode over a dominant 7th or something like that, only thing is when I'm jamming with people I don't really know what chords are being played, and I try to mentally detach myself from whats going on, so I'm jsut playing, not consciously thinking about everything I do.
So my question is, how can modes be helpful/useful for improvising when you're not playing over a simple backing track that you've already sat down and figured out the chord progression, and which scales will go with which chords, etc.?


The thing about chord-scale theory, which is the highfalutin' name for what you're talking about, is that it's really only useful if you're playing over slow changes.

This makes sense if you think about it. If you're relying on the scale to communicate the chord, that's only going to happen if you play certain telling scale degrees. e.g., you can't tell that I'm playing Mixolydian unless I play the root and the third and the 7th. So generally it's used in jazz, when a single chord is held for a longer amount of time, to give the soloist a longer time to improvise and develop melodic ideas.

With jazz musicians, remember that there's a large collection of standards that they all know. So there isn't the "oh, wait, what are the changes again?" where you have to figure them out the first time through.

That being said, I'd encourage you to not just sort of idly play over a random backing track. Give yourself some chord changes, and know what they are, and practice working with them. One of the main reasons to move from pentatonic playing to diatonic playing is to begin playing with an increased awareness of chord tones, and you'll probably find that adds a nice layer to your playing.
#12
^ Though with chord scale theory you can use more exotic scales over chords. For example certain scales like altered scale, whole tone scale, lydian dominant, diminished scale, etc will only work over certain chords well (most of the time the dominant chord).

I agree that CST doesn't make sense if you play over a simple progression like C-Am-Dm7-G7 and think "C major-A minor-D dorian-G mixolydian". That makes no sense because it just makes the progression look more complicated than it really is. And all those different scales are actually exactly the same notes. And they will all sound like you are playing the notes of C major scale.

But if you have lots of modulations/tonicizations in a song (for example "Shadow of Your Smile" - it's full of ii-V in different keys), you kind of have to use different scales over different parts of the progression. Of course it would make sense to look for bigger entities than just single chords. For example find the ii-V-I progressions and play the key scale of the ii-V-I. But sometimes you want to use some more "exotic" scales (especially over the V chord).

And of course CST also makes sense in really slow chord progressions like in Good Bye Pork Pie Hat. The tempo is slow and the chords don't change that often. Every chord feels like a new key. That's when you pretty much have to treat every chord separately.

But yeah, using CST doesn't mean you are playing "modally" or modal music. The point of CST is that it tells the notes that will work over the chord. Of course it doesn't mean you couldn't make chords outside of that scale work. But they will be the most consonant sounding notes over the chord. But IMO CST only works well if you understand the chord functions you are playing over. Just because it's a m7 chord doesn't mean dorian will always work. For example if you are playing over a iiim7 chord, the dorian scale built on the root of that chord could sound a bit strange over it.


To know what to play over "random" chords, you need to use your ears. Learn the sounds of different chords and you'll learn to recognize them by ear. And even if you can't figure out the chord name, you could just play over it, considering that your ear-fretboard connection is really good. (I mean, if you hear something in your head, you can instantly play it.) But yeah, good improvisation requires a good ear.
Quote by AlanHB
Just remember that there are no boring scales, just boring players.

Gear

Bach Stradivarius 37G
Charvel So Cal
Fender Dimension Bass
Hartke HyDrive 210c
Ibanez BL70
Laney VC30
Tokai TB48
Yamaha FG720S-12
Yamaha P115
#13
Quote by fingrpikingood
I don't not use modes. major and minor are both modes. I don't approach improvisation as selecting a mode based on what chord I want to play over. I'll play in dorian, or in mixolydian, or whatever, no problem. I just don't approach each chord and make a decision of what mode I'm playing based on that. That is the discussion here. That's what OP asked. He was referring specifically to it as a tool of improv, not a key framework.

I can make comments like these, because before I formulated an opinion, I explored the thing, so that I knew what I was talking about when I made the decision not to pursue it.


2nd paragraph first ... fair enough! I didn't know that.

1st paragraph ... not many people would look at each chord and think "what mode", without looking at the bigger context. I agree with you here.

I don't get you comment about distinguishing between improvisation and key framework? If a chord progression backs up the tonal centre, and the scale is say mixolydian or dorian used to derive the progression from and to establish the tonal centre, then improvisation using that scale across said progression works just fine (as it does if there's virtually no progression). Do you mean something different?

I'm not sure the OP really meant singling out a specific chord. I didn't read it like that. He seemed to questioning that idea in his last paragraph after what he'd heard from his friends, and asking a more general question about using modes with chords? Hence my response.

But yes, advice like play a given mode when a given chord type comes up is not really the best, without a lot of explaining when that's ever appropriate.

cheers, Jerry
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 1, 2014,
#14
Quote by jerrykramskoy
2nd paragraph first ... fair enough! I didn't know that.

1st paragraph ... not many people would look at each chord and think "what mode", without looking at the bigger context. I agree with you here.

I don't get you comment about distinguishing between improvisation and key framework? If a chord progression backs up the tonal centre, and the scale is say mixolydian or dorian used to derive the progression from and to establish the tonal centre, then improvisation using that scale across said progression works just fine (as it does if there's virtually no progression). Do you mean something different?

I'm not sure the OP really meant singling out a specific chord. I didn't read it like that. He seemed to questioning that idea in his last paragraph after what he'd heard from his friends, and asking a more general question about using modes with chords? Hence my response.

But yes, advice like play a given mode when a given chord type comes up is not really the best, without a lot of explaining when that's ever appropriate.

cheers, Jerry


There are types of music which link chords logically in relation to themselves. Theoretically musicians will talk about a tonal center, but imo, sonically, it is lost. This is most common in some types of jazz, and typically fusion. For this style of music, in order to improvise, one needs to shift from one mode to another. The musician will consider the chord they are playing over and the melody indicated, and identify which mode is appropriate. The root of the chord will be the tonic of the mode.

In some types of music, this is a necessary technique, because of how frequently it shifts. The way I personally look at music, I consider this shifting key chord by chord, but musicians of this genre and academia, would not consider it that way.

I don't like music that is that way, I don't find it creates a framework tonality for me, like someone switching the channel after half a sentence all the time.

So, I don't take that approach.

A song can dip a bit outside of its diatonic framework for one chord, and I'm ok with that. A song can switch key for a few chords, and I'm ok with that.

The tonality of a sequence can be any mode, I'm ok with that.

These require a number of chords to establish this new tonality I find.

So, you have "the pattern" which is every mode. You can play that through a number of chords, with the odd exception of one note here or there, then the pattern might move for a number of other chords. Music needs to be this way for me. So, I do not look at every chord, being a mode, but every section. I actually don't bother with what mode it is really either to be honest, I just need to know where the pattern is, and my whims do the rest.

Going chord by chord, for this, would make sense, because you get stuff like "C-E-G" and look at it as CIonian - Ephrygian - GLydian, which is overcomplicated and redundant, because you could just look at it all as C major scale. All those notes are the same, they are all relative modes. Since all the music I like and want to play is largely diatonic, this approach makes no sense for me to use.

Some music will switch every chord to chords that require non relative scales, and it cycles, meaning it's not like it would go A aeolian E Ionian and back to a relative again, C Ionian. It will switch to another pattern, which requires a pattern that is not a relative of either of the first two. I don't like that. But if you liked that, and wanted to play that music, then you'd have to look at improvisation more like every chord is it's own contained thing. I find music like that loses all the beauty of coherent phrasing that takes you on a journey through the chords. It sounds odd and kind of mechanical or artificial to me, which I think some other people would consider instead to be mature and sophisticated sounding.

OP's friend told him that strategy, to look at each chord and the modal options available for it, and select one based on taste and/or melody. This how what's his names teaches the free berklee coursera course.
Quote by dancingsmurfs
But with learning modes, everyone I've asked has always said you use a mode for a different chord, like mixolydian mode over a dominant 7th or something like that,



For me, if there isn't a common pattern throughout a established section, I don't care for it. Not because it is more difficult, I just won't like the sound of it. I don't really care what mode it is, as long as it sticks to it enough, and doesn't go all over the place.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 1, 2014,
#15
Quote by fingrpikingood
There are types of music which link chords logically in relation to themselves. Theoretically musicians will talk about a tonal center, but imo, sonically, it is lost. This is most common in some types of jazz, and typically fusion. For this style of music, in order to improvise, one needs to shift from one mode to another. The musician will consider the chord they are playing over and the melody indicated, and identify which mode is appropriate. The root of the chord will be the tonic of the mode.

In some types of music, this is a necessary technique, because of how frequently it shifts. The way I personally look at music, I consider this shifting key chord by chord, but musicians of this genre and academia, would not consider it that way.

I don't like music that is that way, I don't find it creates a framework tonality for me, like someone switching the channel after half a sentence all the time.

So, I don't take that approach.

A song can dip a bit outside of its diatonic framework for one chord, and I'm ok with that. A song can switch key for a few chords, and I'm ok with that.

The tonality of a sequence can be any mode, I'm ok with that.

These require a number of chords to establish this new tonality I find.

So, you have "the pattern" which is every mode. You can play that through a number of chords, with the odd exception of one note here or there, then the pattern might move for a number of other chords. Music needs to be this way for me. So, I do not look at every chord, being a mode, but every section. I actually don't bother with what mode it is really either to be honest, I just need to know where the pattern is, and my whims do the rest.

Going chord by chord, for this, would make sense, because you get stuff like "C-E-G" and look at it as CIonian - Ephrygian - GLydian, which is overcomplicated and redundant, because you could just look at it all as C major scale. All those notes are the same, they are all relative modes. Since all the music I like and want to play is largely diatonic, this approach makes no sense for me to use.

Some music will switch every chord to chords that require non relative scales, and it cycles, meaning it's not like it would go A aeolian E Ionian and back to a relative again, C Ionian. It will switch to another pattern, which requires a pattern that is not a relative of either of the first two. I don't like that. But if you liked that, and wanted to play that music, then you'd have to look at improvisation more like every chord is it's own contained thing. I find music like that loses all the beauty of coherent phrasing that takes you on a journey through the chords. It sounds odd and kind of mechanical or artificial to me, which I think some other people would consider instead to be mature and sophisticated sounding.

OP's friend told him that strategy, to look at each chord and the modal options available for it, and select one based on taste and/or melody. This how what's his names teaches the free berklee coursera course.


For me, if there isn't a common pattern throughout a established section, I don't care for it. Not because it is more difficult, I just won't like the sound of it. I don't really care what mode it is, as long as it sticks to it enough, and doesn't go all over the place.



We're in agreement, pretty much! From your description is sounds like you'd approach a tune same as me, with the same view of the big picture, rather than chord by chord. For me, as I play jazz as well as metal, I will chase the chord sometimes (especially dominants), but mostly adhere to the scale for the predominant key, unless I'm deliberately going for outside playing.

The OP's friend has given poor/confusing advice, maybe based on lack of understanding of modes.

cheers, Jerry
#16
Quote by dancingsmurfs
So I've been playing guitar for several years and I'm fairly proficient I guess, my style of playing is almost entirely improvisational with a lot of influence from Hendrix, SRV and Frusciante, but when improvising I stick almost entirely to the pentatonic scale, because that way I canjust know what notes I have to play around with, then just go crazy within that parameter. But with learning modes, everyone I've asked has always said you use a mode for a different chord, like mixolydian mode over a dominant 7th or something like that, only thing is when I'm jamming with people I don't really know what chords are being played, and I try to mentally detach myself from whats going on, so I'm jsut playing, not consciously thinking about everything I do.
So my question is, how can modes be helpful/useful for improvising when you're not playing over a simple backing track that you've already sat down and figured out the chord progression, and which scales will go with which chords, etc.?


1) When jamming with people you should know exactly what chords are being played at all times - that's what makes a great soloist. I'd start working on that first - i.e. chord names, major scale chord naming etc. The beauty of knowing the modes very well is that you can almost instantly find the key and progression of a riff with just a few notes - it really helps when improvising and jamming with other people.

2) One of the important parts of being a good soloist is properly playing and outlining the chord changes - this means transitions and hitting intervals that jive with each new chord. You don't have to be a robot about it, but your solos will be much more interesting if they actually follow the music rather than if it's just noodling in minor pentatonic irrespective of the chord changes. SRV is a great example of a player that can stay within the confines of the blues scale over an entire progression while still outlining the changes through great phrasing and note choices - he's the exception rather than the rule. It doesn't hurt to know what intervals will work over each chord and which are specific to each chord in your progression.
#17
Quote by jerrykramskoy
We're in agreement, pretty much! From your description is sounds like you'd approach a tune same as me, with the same view of the big picture, rather than chord by chord. For me, as I play jazz as well as metal, I will chase the chord sometimes (especially dominants), but mostly adhere to the scale for the predominant key, unless I'm deliberately going for outside playing.

The OP's friend has given poor/confusing advice, maybe based on lack of understanding of modes.

cheers, Jerry


It's not technically "poor" advice though really. For some genres, they would teach that way. Like I said, if you take the coursera berklee course, what's his name teaches that method. If I played that style of music, I would learn this method as well.
#18
Quote by reverb66
1) When jamming with people you should know exactly what chords are being played at all times - that's what makes a great soloist. I'd start working on that first - i.e. chord names, major scale chord naming etc. The beauty of knowing the modes very well is that you can almost instantly find the key and progression of a riff with just a few notes - it really helps when improvising and jamming with other people.
This is not strictly necessary all of the time. You could play me any piece of music basically, as long as it's not "strange", I could solo along to it just fine, even if it is the first time I hear it, and it will not at all necessarily enter my mind what chords we are playing, although it might.

If I play on my own though, and I have to hold up the chord sequence and also solo over it, then it helps me immensely to have a chord outline.

I'm sure I do things like outlining the chord that is playing etcetera, but I would never really think of it that way. Only what I hear, and what I want to hear. Unless I'm playing on my own again, in which case i purposefully play the chord in question, since I'm kind of doing two jobs at that point, and feel the need to establish the reference.

For me, the main reference is the key, and the chord playing is a sound of that key I already have that I want to complement with other parts of it. It might be the same ones to strengthen it, or different ones.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 2, 2014,
#19
Quote by fingrpikingood
It's not technically "poor" advice though really. For some genres, they would teach that way. Like I said, if you take the coursera berklee course, what's his name teaches that method. If I played that style of music, I would learn this method as well.


It's poor advice for a newbie. Period.

Also, with modal jazz, the main idea is not to follow every chord (depending where the music is on the spectrum of progression versus one/two chords( ... that defeats the whole point of modal playing.
#20
Quote by jerrykramskoy
It's poor advice for a newbie. Period.

Also, with modal jazz, the main idea is not to follow every chord (depending where the music is on the spectrum of progression versus one/two chords( ... that defeats the whole point of modal playing.


Explaining what people do when they improvise is separate from telling people what to practice.

Go tell that to Gary Burton who is teaching jazz improvisation over at berklee college then I guess.
#21
Do you disagree that there is a spectrum of progressions, used for (sections of) songs that are based on modes, from those whose chords back up the tonal chord (e.g F/G, Em7, Fmaj7, F/G, Am7, G/A repeated: a progession in G Mixolydian), to simple grooves based on one or two chords (e.g. Am7, Am6: a groove in A Dorian)?

If you do disagree, you're not listening to enough modal music.

Do you think that modal playing means one must change to a different scale on every chord, even when those chords are derived from same mode off same tonal centre?

G Mixolydian, or E m pentatonic, or G Lydian b7 would work fine over the above G Mix progression.

The change with chord would happen if you had something like Miles Davis "So What", which moves between E Dorian and F Dorian (that's key changes). Berklee teaches that sort of approach. They also teach using imaginary dominants etc to add interest. (Add B JM7 over E Dorian at suitable strong points of the music). They teach chasing the chords for Be-bop.

Have you studied material from Berklee? What in particular?
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 2, 2014,
#22
Gary Burton Berklee College of Music Jazz Improvisation coursera course

Course author Gary Burton codifies a sought-after approach to improvisation that has been at the core of Berklee College of Music's curriculum for decades. Students who complete this course will know what to practice and how to practice the various aspects of improvising, in addition to understanding how the improviser spontaneously communicates to the listeners through their musical creations.

Like I said in a number of my posts in this thread, this is the method he teaches. The comments OP heard are completely consistent with the method he teaches. It is sensible for some styles of music. I'm sure it is often the case in a lot of what Miles Davis plays.

I don't use this method, I don't like this method, and I don't think I need this method. But that doesn't mean it is bad or wrong. There are different approaches to music which are suitable for different kinds of music and getting different results, and different people are different and can prefer different methods.

It's a free course. You can take it, and you'll see exactly what I mean.
Last edited by fingrpikingood at Dec 2, 2014,
#23
Thanks for the link. Be interesting to see how/if it differs from what's taught here in UK ...

Surprised at Berklee offering a free course! Did you enjoy this course? Found it useful? I guess it's a tempter to get folk to sign up for the expensive stuff?
#24
Quote by jerrykramskoy
Thanks for the link. Be interesting to see how/if it differs from what's taught here in UK ...

Surprised at Berklee offering a free course! Did you enjoy this course? Found it useful? I guess it's a tempter to get folk to sign up for the expensive stuff?

I think it must be subsidized by coursera somehow. It might be a teaser for more courses as well, but it wasn't really pushed or noticeably marketed that way. You can pay to have a diploma if you want, but again, not pushed.

It is graded on peer review so, you watch a lesson, have a project to apply what they teach, post it on soundcloud, other people listen, review based on specified criteria involving the lesson material, and they provide comments.

It's actually pretty cool the way it works, it has its own forum for discussion also.

But, like I said, it's not incredibly my style of music, and I can't adopt that method, so in the end, content-wise, it's really not for me. If it was someone else teaching a system that was more up my alley, I would appreciated it more I think. But it is still cool for me to see how other people approach music. It helped me understand some things, so it was a positive endeavour for me, even though I didn't end up using any of the techniques he taught.

You can do it at your own pace, or even just watch the lectures and not participate, if I'm not mistaken.
#25
You just need to look at the progression and analyze it a bit.

If you see or hear for example Fmin - Bb, with some knowledge of chord progressions, you can immediately recognize that's a v - I which is a mixolydian progression. Or that's more like F dorian, I guess, but anyway.

You can use modes just like you'd use normal major and minor. Sometimes the progression calls for a mode other than major (Ionian) or minor (Aeolian)
Last edited by Elintasokas at Dec 3, 2014,
#26
Quote by fingrpikingood
I think it must be subsidized by coursera somehow. It might be a teaser for more courses as well, but it wasn't really pushed or noticeably marketed that way. You can pay to have a diploma if you want, but again, not pushed.

It is graded on peer review so, you watch a lesson, have a project to apply what they teach, post it on soundcloud, other people listen, review based on specified criteria involving the lesson material, and they provide comments.

It's actually pretty cool the way it works, it has its own forum for discussion also.

But, like I said, it's not incredibly my style of music, and I can't adopt that method, so in the end, content-wise, it's really not for me. If it was someone else teaching a system that was more up my alley, I would appreciated it more I think. But it is still cool for me to see how other people approach music. It helped me understand some things, so it was a positive endeavour for me, even though I didn't end up using any of the techniques he taught.

You can do it at your own pace, or even just watch the lectures and not participate, if I'm not mistaken.


Thanks for that. I may well take a look ... never know, there may be stuff I haven't come across, and I'll always up for learning new stuff (where relevant). But I've been playing jazz for many years (as well as other styles)

cheers, Jerry
Last edited by jerrykramskoy at Dec 4, 2014,
#27
Quote by fingrpikingood
It is graded on peer review so, you watch a lesson, have a project to apply what they teach, post it on soundcloud, other people listen, review based on specified criteria involving the lesson material, and they provide comments.

It's actually pretty cool the way it works, it has its own forum for discussion also.
hmmm..... *strokes beard thoughtfully*
Si