Questions about scales and modes?

[Jazz+]

There is no whole tone scale or diminished scale in the modes of melodic minor. They are both separate.

[timwat]

Tim Aren't modal tunes designed for playing jazz.. at least much of the time?

Shorter, ECM, Metheny?

IF one is truly playing modal jazz, eg an ECM concert, I will admit, yes, you need to spend more time on modes. But I would still restrict myself TO THAT TUNE(S).

It is more important for OP to learn the major minor system which has produced enormous amount of music, long before modes became an obsessive topic.

 

I'm not sure I understand each of your questions clearly and that may be my fault...but here goes:

 

1) What I understand as "modal tunes" (like So What, Little Sunflower, Footprints), well yes, they're designed for playing jazz...but so is My Romance to the extent I can apply jazz theory to it to depart from 100% diatonicism. But I'm not sure what else you're asking here? BTW, Metheny's writing doesn't strike me as modal most of the time. There are some in his catalog, but tunes like First Circle, April Joy, Sometimes I See, James, Something to Remind You are all "changes" tunes to me.

 

2) Maybe I never got into modes as an obsessive topic. It was just an important tool in all jazz playing to get down, to become a natural part of vocabulary...like learning to select the correct verb tense in English.

 

I suspect we may actually be saying similar things, but our usage of terms is slightly different...

 

[Jazzwee]

There is no whole tone scale or diminished scale in the modes of melodic minor. They are both separate.

 

Exactly! Proves my point that I don't know which mode is which until I look it up. (though I was talking about HW Diminished, not diminished).

 

Now you Jazz+ are an Encyclopedia of modes. I know you know them inside/out with numeric references

 

 

[16251]

How about songs like: In Your Own Sweet Way or Bolivia? Two for the price of one.

[jerrythek]

A lot of great discussion here. For the OP, at the start this can seem like a daunting task. You can't simply "do it all" at once, you have to slowly and methodically digest it. You'll see the progress after months, not hours.

 

One thing that I did was to substitute modes for my usual scale practice for technique/warming up. Sometimes I would pick a root tone and practice a variety of modes all on that. Other times I would pick a mode and go through the circle of fifths. 2 octaves eight notes, 3 octaves triplets, 4 octaves sixteenth notes. This way I was warming up my chops while absorbing the sound of, and fingering for the modes. Major scales (ionian mode) are pretty boring to throw into music, but a short "other" modal run sounds better.

 

Then move into applying them to changes/tunes. It takes time, set smaller. specific goals and work them.

 

Jerry

 

 

[GovernorSilver]

BTW, Metheny's writing doesn't strike me as modal most of the time. There are some in his catalog, but tunes like First Circle, April Joy, Sometimes I See, James, Something to Remind You are all "changes" tunes to me.

 

I agree. I've seen the "modal" tag stuck on Metheny by a few, but I think that's just part of lumping him with the generation of jazz musicians who grew up in the rock and roll era. I could see how some tunes of his could be called modal, like "Phase Dance". OTOH, "Lakes" has the Giant Steps changes embedded within, "Every Summer Night" modulates through just about all 12 keys, "Round Trip/Broadway Blues" is a twisted blues medley (not modal), etc. He learned jazz the old-fashioned way, via "bandstand apprenticeship" with the elders of the Kansas City jazz scene.

[I-missRichardTee]

BTW I am not a fan of Metheny. But if Metheny is not modal ( mostly not modal- I do not care if he is considered modal or not.. I just misspoke about his compositions-you say he is not, I accept it -) ), how can you say There will never be another you has modal application? Not being snide, or a jerk, just a straight question, where I am hoping I can learn something about terminology.

 

TIm this is enjoyable for me, as well as promising to be educational as well. I learned before you did.. the old fashioned way and some teachers and books, but the theories you learned I likely missed ( escaped ha ha ) .

 

Tim, My Romance in Bb... are you referring to the Dm section? So I suppose that would be D dorian or even more fun D Phy? How do you make My ROmance feel more modal?

[Jazzwee]

That's not what he meant Tee.

 

On My Romance, he's simply saying that rather than using some diatonic mode on F7 (for example Mixolydian), you use some other scale like HW Diminished. Which is a "mode" -- BUT NOT MODAL.

 

Again more terminology issues.

 

I think we are all consistent here in thinking that "Modal" implies no functional progression (ii-V), or in my mind, not wanting to resolve.

 

 

[I-missRichardTee]

Jazzwee OH! Mode, as in aaaa mode! Not in anyway like Modal/ Dorian from Ancient Greece!

 

BTW What am I missing re diminished scale. I learned it on my own. I was always mindful of whether it was Half step first or Whole step first. but that part of my nomenclature is fractured!

[timwat]

Yes, Jazzwee is picking up what I'm laying down LOL

 

"Mode" and "Modal" refer to two different things.

 

I'm not saying My Romance (or There will Never Be...) is "modal" as a composition. I'm saying when a jazzer approaches the tune, he / she is going to be approaching the tune as a set of opportunities to use different modes over the changes than those immediately implied by typical diatonic GASB harmony.

 

Same w/ Metheny. I love his writing, and I have his big blue songbook. Very few of the tunes he's written are "modal" in nature (although there are a few...). But I use mode/scale/chord relationships to understand what notes I want to play over, say, a the D7b9sus4 in the eighth bar of "Sometimes I See" (as well as context of functional harmony, in that particular example...)

 

Jazzwee is correct, it's a terminology issue. I'm using the two terms consistent with how I learned them, and how the guys I play with and hang with use them.

 

But I didn't take your comments as snide or being a jerk, not at all.

 

Tim

[16251]

"What we've got here is failure to communicate"

[I-missRichardTee]

[video:youtube]

Yeah.. he said it

[Theo Verelst]

Figuring out which scales work where, with which emphasis, where the scale begings and ends, which notes end up on up and down-beat, and, my favorite, how the scales sequence in some logical ways connected with the chord changes, is much of what modern Jazz is about, but it's hard. Learning 12x7 scales, adn some standard changes won't even let you play a blues, but there's rarely a need to memorize them all if that doesn't come logical. Maybe it's fun to practice scales, for me it isn't: learning to understand Jazz phrases (not as technical as a sax player, please), a number of important harmonic constructions, and melodies and rhythms like from realbook songs is probably more important.

 

T.

[Jazzwee]

Jazzwee OH! Mode, as in aaaa mode! Not in anyway like Modal/ Dorian from Ancient Greece!

 

BTW What am I missing re diminished scale. I learned it on my own. I was always mindful of whether it was Half step first or Whole step first. but that part of my nomenclature is fractured!

 

LOL. Don't look at me as the nomenclature police.

 

Like I said earlier, I tend to look at everything as alterations and don't even really try to think of scales and such. I understand the importance but I have a roundabout way of implementing it.

 

My simplified approach (when playing) is to only think only of the chord outline (1-3-5-7) and visualize the extensions (9-11-13 which obviously form the major scale). Then I visualize the alterations (b9, #9, #11, #5) if they apply.

 

I'm aware of this all the time and I think it helps when playing "Intervallically" because I see the triads faster (more modern style).

 

One thing to be said though about practicing listening to some of the more advanced modes like Diminished-WT, etc. is that you begin to realize that it is very hard to HEAR these sounds naturally. So I think part of the practice of modes is not just fingering and memorizing shapes but hearing an alternate vocabulary that doesn't come so naturally to most.

 

As with most Classical music, there will be a tendency to go diatonic.

 

 

 

 

[bluzeyone]

Some great discussion. In general the process is:

1) Learn all your scales, all your modes, all your ii-V-I's and other progressions in 12 keys, major and minor.

2) Then forget all that, close your eyes, and play.

 

One of the best piano lessons I ever had was when my teacher had me play over a progression - I did some blazing minor-pentatonic/altered - demonic thing. Then she stopped me and asked me to sing back what I had played. I couldn't, of course - it was just some musical vomit.

Then she asked me to sing a little line over a progression - something simple. Then she had me play the same line... and the light went on.

 

 

Now that was a GREAT teacher and one of best said statements I ever heard! Well said indeed! +1000

[TrapperJack]

Slowly, slowly: in time we will all understand.

 

Pick and choose, as you like, from this advice. What works for you works best. But I think you will need nearly all of of these touchstones, if you are beginning to improvise.

 

Major scales first, and then Dorian and Mixolydian modes (using same fingering as the major scale on the same root as the mode), and ascending melodic minors, and blues scales. This work will not take long, (six weeks), and then play all of them every day (10 minutes).

 

Be able to run the changes of any song you want to learn to improvise over.

 

Learn to hit target tones in the next chord as you play the progression. (Control how you move along the progression.)

 

Include plenty of rests in your scale and chord running. (Play with rests and rhythm, as well as sustained, even (and swung) quavers.)

 

Build short, two bar phrases, and learn to move them along the progression -- notes for these phrases come from the relevant major scale or mode, which also captures the chord tones. Learn to build melodies on the fly.

 

Spend at least four weeks on a tune selected from one of the introductory fake books, like The AB Real Book (Associated Board of the Royal Schools of Music, 2003), or The Easy Fake Book (Hal Leonard, isbn 0-634-00905-2), and there are others prepared especially for beginning improvisers.

 

Develop left hand independence by playing bass lines / grooves, rather than chord voicings, while you learn the chord progressions, modulate the tune to other keys, etc.

 

Try to meet with another musician and play with that person (improvising over specific, pre-agreed tunes) for about four hours per week. Comp for each other, swap fours, record everything and talk about it, (you think about it later as you relisten), share and build together. (This can be done over the internet.)

 

Begin slowly, (60 bpm), with a drum machine or metronome, and tap your foot while you play.

 

Don't believe everything you read (or hear) about improvising, but read it anyway.

 

You may never progress to the stage where you can close your eyes and forget all your homework. Some do, many don't.

 

Work with a teacher.

[Theo Verelst]

At some point the interesting questions become: is the scale/mode things in this so-and-so song interesting enough, or balanced enough, personal/general enough, or even: how many uncommon lines and chord progressions can you span until you've reached the "freedom" of covering a larger area of Jazz progression than any music-technological approach can try to take away in one or more life-times.

 

T.V.

[I-missRichardTee]

Jazzwee OH! Mode, as in aaaa mode! Not in anyway like Modal/ Dorian from Ancient Greece!

 

BTW What am I missing re diminished scale. I learned it on my own. I was always mindful of whether it was Half step first or Whole step first. but that part of my nomenclature is fractured!

 

LOL. Don't look at me as the nomenclature police.

 

Like I said earlier, I tend to look at everything as alterations and don't even really try to think of scales and such. I understand the importance but I have a roundabout way of implementing it.

 

My simplified approach (when playing) is to only think only of the chord outline (1-3-5-7) and visualize the extensions (9-11-13 which obviously form the major scale). Then I visualize the alterations (b9, #9, #11, #5) if they apply.

 

I'm aware of this all the time and I think it helps when playing "Intervallically" because I see the triads faster (more modern style).

 

One thing to be said though about practicing listening to some of the more advanced modes like Diminished-WT, etc. is that you begin to realize that it is very hard to HEAR these sounds naturally. So I think part of the practice of modes is not just fingering and memorizing shapes but hearing an alternate vocabulary that doesn't come so naturally to most.

 

As with most Classical music, there will be a tendency to go diatonic.

JAZZWEE

You have managed to describe what Tee does pretty accurately.. thank you.

From decades of looking at chords, chord progressions, one developments an instinct about which notes are keys.

If I were playing more complex music then I would have to be more thoughtful about it.But who among us plays that level of complexity?

The problem with our little theory chats ( which I certainly enjoy ) is they can be divorced from the practical element... who PLAYS Wayne Shorter's most complex tunes- not I?

This kind of music unless played 1 by Masters of it, 2 for a special in-crowd of aficionados, is rarely seen, and is NOT generally appreciated by most audiences. Maybe one tune per set of that type.

 

Regarding singing a line. I received a serious surprise, wake up call about a week ago. I was called for a gig I almost had no business accepting ( I don't recall reading a notes only, no chord symbols Show, with folks who could! ).. I had to "cut a show.. at sight". no rehearsal! With this one codecil. the show had some spots I could never have sight read- technically above me. ( the Show was a sold out little production by youngsters ( 9- 16 ) of "Oliver". About 50 pages of following a conductor . The orchestra were adult orchestral musicians- I was out of my element- I had one day to study 6 of the 50 pages.. the pages with the hard parts! Talk about scared, just Saturday matinee and evening,, and vaya con dios till next time!

Here is the point- those bass parts I HAD to go over - one of them KICKED MY ASS. Not just fingering, which I was not accustomed to, but amazingly I could NOT SING THE darn line. If you had bet me, I would have taken the bet that I certainly could play ANY line slowly on bass and merely sing it in unison. Guess what, no go.

Perhaps my considerable apprehension- fear..

Maybe the fear inhibited my ear. After I write this I am going to try to sing the, for me, atonal lines. It was an exact sequence, played up a whole step, and then one more whole step. I could not hear that last note. The line for me was for all intents atonal... so you don't need a musical context. Luckily it was played by some of the band in unison.

 

It was C down to A to Ab down to E down to Eb- five damn notes, and that last Eb kept evading me! Then the whole five eighth note phrase was transposed up a second, then up another second.

So Singing lines turns out to be a basic ability and a basic practice!

Edit I just sung them, but I played them about 2 octaves higher which is easier.. playing them in low octave is harder to hear the harmony contained in it!

[nadroj]

These threads always make for a great read. Regarding the singing, I made a thread about 2 months back and received the same advice. Helped a lot. Someone said "When soloing, listen for the notes you need to hear and play them." Though I still have a tendency just to widdle:

 

I performed Evans' "Peace Piece" last year for my solo exam pretty much note for note, dynamics and all. I played it with all the feeling I could muster, even during some of the tricky several octave long sixteenth runs. Lecturer enjoyed it and I got a merit - but no distinction because there wasn't enough of *this* *lecturer imitates running up and down a keyboard at 700mph*. Because speed apparently equals difficulty. I've a 45 minute jazz recital in 5 weeks and as a result of those remarks, regardless of how much of the gold dust advice I get from here or my teacher, a large part of me always says "you're not playing fast enough, just widdle - throw in an altered scale there then come down chromatically and stick a knife through the top of the keybed or she won't be pleased." Every time I come to do a solo. Even if that lecturer isn't there.

 

Anyways, regarding the subject at hand, scales are important to an extent. Years ago I couldn't play jazz. I've since learned most of my modes/altered/diminished scales and now I can play something that almost resembles jazz. So they do help. Though you never really get good at jazz; you just sound a little less crappy every time.

[Jazzwee]

ON SINGING...

 

All I have to do is play Chick Corea transcriptions and some of that is not "singable" (is that a word?) to my pay grade. But as you know those sounds are cool because they are unexpected (tension) and so we have the desire to emulate even though those sounds are not in our nature.

 

For this reason, I'm not 100% guided by what I can sing. Some vocabulary is more geometrically shaped and not necessarily easily sung either (Herbie certainly uses a lot of these structures).

 

Anyway we all have different predispositions. I'm personally bored if I don't find sufficient tension in music so I tend to gravitate to the more modern styles which in particular are more out, and more unexpected. This is a process since I can't emulate it (mostly since I can't hear it yet).

 

Thus, I like playing Wayne Shorter tunes and try to improve in those areas more. In our little theory debates, we're just coming from slightly different focuses.

 

HOWEVER, after hearing your excellent version of Pensativa, now it comes out that your predispositions in music choice and actual style are no different than what I want to do.

 

So strangely, we appear to be mostly arguing about nothing. LOL.

 

And yes, though I wish to play Con Alma, Giant Steps, Inner Urge, Very Early etc. all night, clearly you are right. One per set. The rest I have to play at home for moi.

 

Based on your agreement with my "simplified approach", it also subtly confirms that your primary intent when you solo is to outline the harmony, which is certainly what I was taught as the initial and most important starting point.

 

 

 

 

[Jazzwee]

These threads always make for a great read. Regarding the singing, I made a thread about 2 months back and received the same advice. Helped a lot. Someone said "When soloing, listen for the notes you need to hear and play them." Though I still have a tendency just to widdle:

 

I performed Evans' "Peace Piece" last year for my solo exam pretty much note for note, dynamics and all. I played it with all the feeling I could muster, even during some of the tricky several octave long sixteenth runs. Lecturer enjoyed it and I got a merit - but no distinction because there wasn't enough of *this* *lecturer imitates running up and down a keyboard at 700mph*. Because speed apparently equals difficulty. I've a 45 minute jazz recital in 5 weeks and as a result of those remarks, regardless of how much of the gold dust advice I get from here or my teacher, a large part of me always says "you're not playing fast enough, just widdle - throw in an altered scale there then come down chromatically and stick a knife through the top of the keybed or she won't be pleased." Every time I come to do a solo. Even if that lecturer isn't there.

 

Anyways, regarding the subject at hand, scales are important to an extent. Years ago I couldn't play jazz. I've since learned most of my modes/altered/diminished scales and now I can play something that almost resembles jazz. So they do help. Though you never really get good at jazz; you just sound a little less crappy every time.

 

LOL. Unfortunately even the audience expects this "waggling" (at least that's the term I hear in the US). Since the audience doesn't really have the ears to understand your fast lines, you do some fast moves and they start clapping.

 

Man, it encourages you to do more BS. The problem is, it is BS. Now I have to pander with these fake moves. The fast lines should be as melodic and purposeful as the slow lines.

 

Good thing the average person can't tell.

 

[I-missRichardTee]

Mr Jazzweeeee lol

yes, but i have gone through stages I have never reflected about till... aaa now?

I started fiddling with piano as a kid, mostly by ear. At that age my attraction to chords and rhythm was apparent. I would sit there and bang out rhythms with certain chords my little hands found by trial and error. I started around 5.

I was generally not encouraged by family, but I managed anyway.

So far, chords and rhythmic comping of a sort!

Little by little bass lines came to the fore.

Also the melody was gradually evolving.

Then at 15 the sax came into my life. This is where I was lucky that Coltrane's so called ( Ira Gitler ) "sheets of sound" were popular. So on sax, I mimicked sheets of sound! Mimicked lol

So first rhythms on chords, then sheets of sound. Sheets of sound is mentioned in context of Nadroj who is being pressured to impress with speed!

Just find ways to play fast flurries of notes that are passably sensible!

Much later on I realized that I was competing with a few serious bad ass pianists in town. That is where I picked up a trick of using the shape of a four note chord ( could be any member of a 13th chord, instinct led me ) to play something surprisingly fast. it would not fool a master, but It is sufficiently musical because it is honoring 1 harmony, 2 it is in time!!

Another thing I am doing is learning melodies in the right hand. Little be little I am playing in different keys. Some songs I can easily play in 12 keys, but the melody is another level of difficulty.

Playing melody or "lines" in a groove is a whole other layer of expertise.

I believe Masters are always learning.. as I laid out here - there are a number of little things you learn to understand and do, that improve your professionalism as a pianist.

Another is dynamics, which for me means being sensitive to what's going on. Taking the bull by the horns some times, other times sitting back.

Listening for those tagged endings to songs is another ability

which includes creating endings at the drop of a hat. Whether tried and true ( but overdone perhaps ) Basie ends, or whatever, learning how to end a song, where YOU are the catalyst for ending it. AND OR the singer or drummer or sax is the catalyst.

Playing with a bass player is another skill. They are not always on your note, right. You need to do one of two things , float with what's going on, or lead what is going or a mixture of each!

A lot to learn eh?

[Jazzwee]

Tee,

 

I'm an old guy but still actively learning and fortunately still improving. Unlike your steady and long term approach, I crammed all the information from teachers for a few years and now I realize that I haven't implemented half of what they've said yet. So lots of information in my head and hopefully now starting to transfer over to execution.

 

I'm a bit of a product of those jazz programs you admonish since two of my teachers are heads of jazz departments. So I'm a result of those "modern" approaches to teaching. I understand where you are coming from, but the theoretical approaches in University Jazz programs accelerate the learning of the basics.

 

It doesn't make one a master but at least hopefully that base education frees you up for more lofty goals (like making real music).

 

Perhaps the debate in this thread puts more importance to this topic than it deserves in actual playing. You know of course that there's a lot more, from rhythm to your unique vocabulary, articulation, harmony, melody, etc.

 

So like I said earlier, regardless of what appears to be major differences in approach between your learning process and mine, clearly there isn't much of a difference in reality.

 

 

[I-missRichardTee]

Let's try talking about a tune.. and see what the reality is. I have a hunch it all boils down to very similar things. When we play/ improvise, we semi consciously or consciously think certain things about the tones. If those thoughts could be isolated, and brought out here, the OP would benefit as would I. Teaching, they say helps the teacher too!

Various tunes will bring forth different shades of our theoretical base.

I submit Killer Joe.. because bridge is so different from A section.

A song I play in my sleep Satin Doll.

Con Alma because it's difficult!

If interested, either select one of these or name a tune?

[Jazzwee]

Personally, I take a different approach with standards vs. modal.

 

While I attempt to outline the harmony clearly with standards, I focus on harmonic motion in the solo on modal. So your tune choices reflect a bias away from modal.

 

Other than that, describe your thought process (on any tune) and I bet there's a lot of similarity.

 

 

[I-missRichardTee]

This came to me, in lieu of a non modal song choice.

I see layers of choices superimposed together.

I see an individual chord ,

I see a chord progression, a progression involves voice leading -

I see the melody-

I see rhythmic ideas based on what is played around me,

I see the Blues sometimes superimposed= generally if song is in C, then a C Blues,

I see Melody other than the tunes melody,

sometimes I see multiple melodies as in 2 part counterpoint but in one voice,

I see the overriding Key of the tune/

and i see sections of a tune, and that temporary key as well.

I see sequential ideas

I see a motif that hopefully might come to me, and just hang on to it as long as i can!

Sometimes the tone of my instrument is its own catalyst.

Sometimes I may try to force an idea that had just passed, to continue into the passing harmonies

 

And here is a new one... sometimes I play compensation style.. I am compensating for what I deem a poor rhythm section.. and my notes for better or worse are merely serving the purpose of moving the tempo or groove along, with less attention on beauty, and more on saving what's left of a half baked groove! Yup, I do this

 

Sometimes I play to send a signal to players.. a musical statement that means " H E R E I S W H E R E we are guys "!

 

I am a bit weak on modal tunes. I see them in terms of their appearance through time. So that means "So What", I hope that is modal ! Impressions?

I am exposing my ignorance of the topic here but, Little SunFlower, is that considered Modal at all? How about Maiden Voyage? Ana Maria has the lovely G phy vamp.. does that constitute a modal tune?

I am not being coy, I really don't know. I was not educated as most here were.

I WAS educated, but not via college system.

[Jazzwee]

I'd just like to add to your list. Some things I'm conscious of...

 

Melodic fragments and developing them (I guess you have it there as Motif)

Common tones over multiple chords and how that could be used melodically.

Target notes and how to approach them (with passing tones)

Stating the harmony clearly on downbeats

Space - which doubles as a time to listen to the rhythm section.

Reacting to some melodic or rhythmic fragment from the rhythm section.

Rhythmic diversity (you were very good at this in Pensativa! Is this from Longo?)

Diatonic Voices - above and below

Chromatic Voices - above and below

Triads above and below

 

 

Now with modal, it's completely different for me. Usually it becomes mostly an interaction between the players. Not uncommon to leave the progression completely and just react to each other. That's why it think it's extra fun because it's unpredictable. It also takes a bit of creativity to create some movement in a single chord vamp.

 

A good chunk of my set list is modal.

 

Typical modal tunes for me are:

So What/Impressions (same thing)

Afro Blue

Footprints

Maiden Voyage

 

It doesn't even matter what the tune is actually since you're staying on a chord or two.

 

[jerrythek]

 

Now with modal, it's completely different for me. Usually it becomes mostly an interaction between the players. Not uncommon to leave the progression completely and just react to each other. That's why it think it's extra fun because it's unpredictable. It also takes a bit of creativity to create some movement in a single chord vamp.

 

Hi Jazzwee!

 

I'd offer that with modal tunes, since harmonic movement isn't helping to create variety, that a few of your earlier stated concepts become even more important. Things like:

 

Melodic fragments and developing them

 

Space - which doubles as a time to listen to the rhythm section.

 

Reacting to some melodic or rhythmic fragment from the rhythm section.

 

Rhythmic diversity

 

And I do agree that group interaction can be heightened when doing a modal tune, since everyone isn't so focused on just making the changes/making the form. :-)

 

Regards,

 

Jerry

 

[Jazzwee]

Can't disagree with you there Jerry! Love modal and the band loves modal. And the audience loves it because we never do it the same way twice.

[Jazzwee]

A little entertainment break with MODAL. Not Mode.

 

Santana, Chick, Herbie, Wayne Shorter, Mclaughlin, etc.

 

[video:youtube]