Modes (again)

Why not learn from experience rather than from trying to decipher the wealth of contradictory info that this thread will inevitably produce?

The bottom line is that it's up to you. Just be aware of the different effects produced by both. You could play it safe with A Aeolian which has no notes foreign to the key of C major or you could live dangerously with C Aeolian which has three foreign notes. (Eb Ab & Bb). Or mix them for the best of both worlds.

If your progression is in C major, C major isn't the Aeolian mode. You're right that A Aeolian is C major, but they way you wrote that crossed a few wires. C Ionian/ CMajor is more like it. Modes are a matter of mixing tensions (ie outside notes) in relation to the major scale. So over your C major progression, you could play it safe with C major, maybe flat a third (E to Eb) for a blues sound, flat a seventh (B > Bb) for a mixolydian (also bluesy) sound, # a fourth (F#) for a lydian sound. But you never leave C as the tonal center, even thought #4 alters the scale. Shonuff'

For now, just stick with C major and figure out how do use target chord tones to solo. So if your progression goes from C > Am, land on the A on the first beat of Am, and it will sound good. Next try landing on C, which is the b3 of A (Am = A C E, right). Same with E. Now that you've hit your chord tones, pick other notes. Try Bb over A. Sound bad? It's a dissonant tone, since it is only a semitone away from A. Experiment and develop an ear over time

All your diatonic chords (chords in the key of C major) are made up of notes from the C major scale. Playing around with those notes like I described above is what the modes are all about. You can actually have modes as keys (ie key of A mixolydian), but thats a whole other disaster that I am not very well versed in at this point.

Ask Tom, Noteboat, he's the theory jedi master 'round these parts who actually knows what he's talking about. :D

Hope this helped,
Matt

ya its not a matter of which one is the right one to play. Its a matter of which one makes sound you wanted to make at that point in time. Ear training becomes more important when your trying to decide when to play what, you just have to know the way each scale will sound over a particular progression and the only way to know that is to experiment and remember the way things sound. Try using the c minor scale over a c major progression. It kinda has a bluesy sound. The c major scale will sound really nice because all the notes will match.

If you haven't learned about harmony yet, then that is the next step. No point in learning 10 scales if you don't know how to use them.

K I understand how modes are constructed related to their major key, but riddle me this. I have a chord progression in C, and C major's the Aeolian mode (starting on the 6th degree of the C major scale) is in the key of A. Now if i want to fiddle around and solo over the chord progression(still in C), but in a minor scale, would I use the A aeolian or the C aeolian mode? Tx :D

C Major's Aeolian mode is not in the key of A, it is in the key of C

C Aeolian is in the key of Eb

To answer the actual question, you would use A Aeolian, being the standard scale of A natural minor.

Best,

A :-)

Actually, Alan, I think he just inserted an extra 'the' that threw you off. If you take it out, he had it right:

"C major's Aeolian mode (starting on the 6th degree of the C major scale) is in the key of A"

That's accurate. "Key" can mean either key signature (your intrepretation) or key note (scotte's). To be safe, we usually talk about keys with both a key note and a key qualifier: the key of A Aeolian.

The key signature for C Aeolian is Eb, but it's accurate to describe the key just as he did - C Aeolian. Calling it Eb major confuses the keynote.

Ya it will definetly confuse people if you always refer to the key signature, especially when you get into modes other then major and minor scales. The other day I was showin my band a new song in Dm dorian and I wasn't sure if my sax player remembered everything about modes (hes a jazz player who normally doesn't know what key hes in anyways haha) So first I tried to tell him to use the notes of C major but it just sounded terrible, then I was like dude just play a messed up D minor and it was awsome.

You have to distinguish between the key signature and the tonal center. Above the Key signature would say C major (no sharps or flats) but the tonal center is D minor, and if your careful to not let your progression ever resolve to C (except maybe as an ending) then you really cannot be thinking C major while soloing over it even though every note would be "right."

In a C major song you probably wouldn't notice if the lead player was thinking about the A minor scale or the C major scale. What you want to do is try using all of the other modes (or any scale for that matter) with C as a tonal center and try to recognize the "sound" of each. If you sharp the 4th of you C major scale you get a lydian scale. This #4 gives the scale a spacey sound to it, and if you remember it then youll hear the rhythm suggesting lydian and be able to know to sharp your 4th.

Learn the intervals! NOT only the shapes! "boxes" are very helpful but they will get you nowhere with modes if you don't know your intervals. Anyone who says "all the modes are the same whats the point" thats someone who only knows the boxes.

Good lord i love the internet, and especially guitar noise. Do you realise how long it wouldve taken to get a decent answer without u guys. So thanks :D two words that made things become clear in my mind (from matt): "tonal center"

Yeah noteboat, i did put that "the" in by mistake :oops:

so what your saying is if im doing a little solo in the key of C, using the C ionian mode, and i sharp a fourth to get the lydian mode, then even though my scale has had an interval changed, im still in the key of c?

This thread has been more 'orderly' and informative than most threads regarding modes, in that the different ways of looking at modes can be seen to co-exist in harmony (for want of a better word).

My view is that C lydian (CDEF#GAB) is definitely in the key of C because I think in terms of tonal centres. That set of notes relates to C (in a uniquely lydian way) as the tonal centre or key note - and that, for me, is what defines the key (and what makes all modes different.)

Then there's Alan who (if I understand correctly) thinks in terms of key signatures and, for him, C lydian is in the key of G because the notes conform exactly to the key of G major. It's just the G major scale but starting at a different place.

Then there's NoteBoat, (the peacemaker) who reminds us that both interpretations are valid - and peace and tranquility once again return to the valley - I mean forum. :D

Sure... establishing a tonal center isn't something that happens with a note or two. There's no definate time period that's required to establish a center, but one of two things has to happen:

- there has to be a harmonic cadence (like E7-A) that tells our ears things are wrapping up and now we're hearing the tonic

- if there is no cadence, there needs to be enough of a melodic theme to establish a center.

On another board I mentioned I'd never heard Locrian used successfully in an improvisational setting. A guy challenged that, saying Beethoven's 'Ode' theme was Locrian. A typical 'rock' view, and a good illustration... regardless of the fact that any piece that took years to compose isn't 'improvisational' :)

The 'Ode' theme begins on F#, moves to G, then A, etc. A half step followed by a whole step, just like the beginning of the Locrian.

Two problems with that approach: the first is analytical - there aren't enough notes to establish a specific mode; the Phrygian mode starts out the same way - and with only five notes used in the entire theme, you can't tell the difference.

The second one is the big one: a starting note doesn't determine a mode. Neither does an ending note, the note used most frequently, or the note with the longest duration. The thing that determines mode is the shape of the melody - if the melody implies a resolution, the object of the resolution is the keynote. In the case of Beethoven, it's D (the piece is in D major), even though D is the least used note in the entire theme! The theme has a subject, then a variation that ends on the tonal center. Then there's a counter-theme, and then a repeat of the variation ending on the center. The piece as a whole leads to D.

Looking at a single part of it, like the first quarter of the theme (starts on F#, ends on E, contains 5 F#s, 3 Es, 2 each A, G, D, with E as the longest note) doesn't establish a tonal center... the line sounds 'unfinished' if played all by itself. Add the second line - the one resolving to D - and it sounds complete, even without the counter-theme. It's that sense of completion that establishes the tonal center.

Rock guitarists who go through a number of modes in the same key signature make the mistake of thinking a riff, phrase, or some other short sequence establishes a tonal center. Centers are impossible to describe with precision, but if a section doesn't sound like it could stand alone as a miniature, it doesn't create a center.

It would be possible to solo in C Ionian, A Aeolian, and D Dorian. It wouldn't be likely, though. Since the modes are closely related, you'd need to use long segments that are dramatically different from each other, but complete in themselves. In addition, you'd need to use - and avoid - specific notes in each of the three themes to differentiate them as modes (i.e., you'd need to have both B and C natural apear in the Dorian section, with no C#s or Bbs- otherwise it could be the harmonic or melodic minor)

Adding to the confusion is that there is no rule that the notes one uses must be diatonic to either the key or the mode.

There are 12 notes out there, and a composser or improvisor is free to use them all.

I've often said that I think modes are basically a stepping stone to chromaticism. One use of modes is to increase melodic interest by using notes outside of the harmonic structure. And I strongly suspect that is the biggest use of them in rock settings. Particularly given the tendancy in rock influenced genres of using only fifths to shape the hamorny.

The point here is that because of the fact that you can use chromaticism, even though a guitarist might be soloing using the "C Mixolydian" shape and think he's playing in Mixolydian (or any other mode), unless he establishes a tonal center clearly in the use of his phrasing of theme, then analytically anything that doesn't conform to the key signature or the harmonic I can be viewed as an accidental.

So why do so many rock guitarists think of modes in this way? And why do other instrumentalists NOT?
Is it because of fingering? Like Kingpatzer says - they go to what's been labeled a 'mixolydian shape' on the fretboard and so they think they're playing in the mixolydian mode regardless of the underlying harmony/tonality. That would explain why other instrumentalists don't have these conversations - they don't have 'shapes' with such misleading names.

Noteboat's (reported) example of Beethoven's 'Ode to Joy' being in the locrian mode is a classic example. Sure it looks kind of locrian - but it doesn't sound in the least bit locrian (thankfully). Therefore it's NOT locrian.

Same goes for a guitarist quickly changing shapes over a C major section. Someone watching his fingers might see them changing to recognisable scale shapes and conclude he's moving from C ionian to D dorian to A aeolian all in the same lead run. But someone listening will say the whole thing was in C major (C ionian).
To my mind, the listener is describing the actual music, whereas the watcher is simply describing fretboard patterns.

So why do so many rock guitarists think of modes in this way? And why do other instrumentalists NOT?
I think there are several reasons. In random order:

* Guitarists, in the aggregate, are very poorly trained as musicians. If you compare how a guitarist learns to how most other instrumentalists learn, you'll see big differences. It is rare to find a guitarist who reads music with any fluency and for other instruments the opposite is true. It is rare to find a guitarist who can tell you all the notes of all the scales or recite the circle of 5ths, and it's the exact opposite for horn, string, woodwind and piano players. That lack of solid grounding in the basics of music leads to a lot of wierd things, one symptom of which is seen in the focus on and confusion related to modes.

* Guitarists, again in the aggregate, relate musical ideas to patterns rather than theory. This is in large part a symptome of the first point, but is also part of the fact that the guitar is an instrument where patterns are very easily applied due to the design of the isntrument. Horn players, for example, typically take 3-4 years to learn all their scales, as each scale has different fingerings. There is no pattern to apply, so the horn player has to fully learn each scale. Guitar players typically take 3-4 months to learn all the fingering patterns they need for scales, and can then play them all pretty easily. Thus when a guitarist learns a pattern as a Mixolydian pattern or an Ionian pattern, he thinks (understandably) that using that pattern is playing in that mode. It's the same confussion that surrounds suspended chords . . . and it all comes down to not having spent any real foundational time looking at written music.

* Modes are sexy. Speaking about modes and modal playing makes one sound educated. I think that some guitarists try to make up for their lack of formal musical training with a lot of informal learning. Using modal terminology allows them to sound more educated than they are. Since at least 2/3rds of the audience have no idea about modes anyway, it's a safe topic to speak about.

* If it's on the 'net it must be true. As most guitarists are finding informal means to a musical education, a lot of them are turning to internet resources which vary wildly in quality. Related to the last point, since modes make the speaker sound more educated, it's an easy way to lure people who aren't knowledgable to spend money on your product which will teach them all the secrets of being a world class guitarist in 30 days or less.

* Lastly, I blame Berklee. Seriously. Modes are, in most uses, unnecessary baggage to simple ideas. Far more people would "get" this bit of musical theory if they ditched modes and talked about major and minor scales and chromaticism. Towards the mid-to-late 60's music schools with strong jazz curricula (like Berklee) went way over-board teaching about mode changes with "key of the moment" chord changes in their jazz classes. Rock guys coming out of Berklee then decided that every chord change was a "key of the moment" and starting trying to "change modes" in mid-song. Some of those guys became very famous guitarists, and while a few of them really knew what they were talking about, most of their followers don't . . .

I think King's dead on. And while I was driving home from teaching tonight, I realized yet another downside of approaching modes as fingering patterns...

My last student tonight was working on improvisation in minor keys. He's only comfortable with one fingering of the harmonic minor scale (although he knows others, but tends to fall back into just one). After a few choruses and some comments, I asked him to change keys to match the chord change.

Because he relies on one pattern, that meant he shifted from 3rd positon over a Cm7 to 10th position over Fm7. After he'd finished the chorus, I told him that I liked his ideas, but he would have been better served without the perfect fourth jump in his solo - it made it 'choppy'. I then played over the same change with the basic ideas he'd used, but stayed in one position and stepped from one phrase to the next to demonstrate.

While driving home it hit me - playing 'modes' by relying on fingering patterns means you're allowing the root of the chord to dictate the range you'll play in!

If you view 'Mixolydian mode' as a fingering pattern starting from G (3rd/15th position), you're limiting yourself to a specific range when playing over a G7 chord - and ignoring half the available notes.

Relying on patterns as some sort of key to building a solo is incredibly restricting. There's nothing magic about playing in that range over G7 - especially since you almost certainly wouldn't be using G as the tonal center anyway. And there's certainly something wasted if you're chasing an ascending idea, and find that the proper 'mode' fingering won't let you get there!