ionian chord, dorian chord,myxolydian chord,etc..what?

No such thing as 'Ionian chord' - but there's an Ionian mode (and Dorian, Phrygian, etc.)

Modes are just scales. In fact, 'mode' is an older name for 'scale'.

The thing about modes that some folks think is mystical is that they're all based on the same set of intervals in a different order:

C-D-E-F-G-A-B-C = C Ionian (major scale)
D-E-F-G-A-B-C-D = D Dorian
E-F-G-A-B-C-D-E = E Phrygian
F-G-A-B-C-D-E-F = F Lydian
G-A-B-C-D-E-F-G = G Mixolydian
A-B-C-D-E-F-G-A = A Aeolian
B-C-D-E-F-G-A-B = B Locrian

While there is no such thing as an Ionian Chord . .. some "jazz theory" books have taken to speaking about chords as belonging to modes.

Because jazz players have become so fixated on modal playing, there is a school of thought that chords, being "frozen arpeggios" from the scale are rightly referred to by the scale most closely associated with the chord.

So, in a major key, the harmonized scale would be:

I - Maj7 - Ionian
ii - m7 - Dorian
iii - b9 - Phrygian
IV - Maj7#4 (or b5) - Lydian
V - Dom 7 - Mixolydian
vi - minor b6 - Aeolian
vii - dim - Locrian

In Mark Levine's Jazz Theory , the author isn't satisfied with that level of confussion, he takes the silliness to a new level by talking about modal chords of minor scales . . . So we learn that "some people" (by which I assume the author means himself) call a 7#11 chord a "Lydian Dominant Chord"

My advice, ignore it all.

Learn classical harmonic theory, and forget that Berkeley exists :)

Jazzers do talk about the 'Lydian Dominant', and that makes sense because it's a dominant chord with a raised fourth - a handy shortcut for explaining the #11.

But that's got less to do with modes than with labels; jazzers already know a Lydian is a major scale with a raised fourth, and a dominant is a chord with a flatted seventh. And in the context of labels, the Lydian Dominant is the only example that makes sense!

Treating modes as 'frozen arpeggios' doesn't work - because they're not actually being treated as arpeggios. If you consider the vi a minor(b6) chord, it brings up the question: why would this particular mode harmonize to a sixth? If you play a sixth chord on ii or iii, you will also get a m(b6) arpgeggio - so there's nothing 'modal' about the chord itself. If you treat each chord as a 7th, the vi harmonizes to m7 - the same way the ii and iii do.

The modal distinctions of chords is therefore entirely arbitrary. In any mode, a standard harmonization (four notes, five notes, whatever) leads to identical chords as the other modes - it must, because the related modes start with identical notes.

What these labels try to do is identify the notes that differ from the maj13 arpeggio, but they do a really poor job of it (except in the case of Lydian). A 'Dorian' chord would have a b3 and a b11 (which is the same tone as the 3rd) - but if you have the third in a chord, the b3 would be considered #9... but you can't identify it as #9, because an 11th arpeggio already includes a natural 9!

You'll go nuts trying to identify the unique 'chord' that would come from the root of each mode; you either end up with a spelling that doesn't make sense (9 vs #9 vs b3 vs 4 vs b11...) or you'll get a chord that's exactly duplicated if you apply the same rules to some other mode.

So I'm with King. Study classical harmony, and if you want to use modes, learn them as scales. You'll then know just as much about the harmony of modes as anybody else - and you'll be far less confused.

My eyes just glazed over trying to comprehend what was just said in the last several posts. Let me go back to my Complete Idiot's guide to Music Theory.

I guess I should get Tom's (Noteboat) book also to see if I can use the two in tandem to learn something. By the way, someone is trying to sell Tom's book on Amazon for $63 as of this posting, when you can get the same thing for $22 straight from Amazon. :shock: