writing out scales in whole and half steps

[owens hound]

Hello fellow LDLD's

I've been working on scales and a bit of theory lately and have a question about writing out scales in whole and half steps in the hopes of playing them and learning the fretboard better.

when I write out a scale, for example:

Major Scale in G

(G-A-B-C-D-E-F#-G)

G-W-W-H-W-W-W-H

The G being the starting note before the first whole and half steps. Am I writing this out correctly? Is this a good way to learn where the whole and half steps in scales?

Any tips, comments and suggestions are welcome.

Thanks,

Jason

[jmrunning3]

You are correct (I'm learning all this too)!

 

Here\'s a link to some theory that I used to get started on the basics of scale and chord construction.

[owens hound]

Thanks for the link Joe. I'll do some reading there and see if I get any better at theory.

 

I'm slowly trying to learn standard notation rather then tab. I'm realizing that although I can play songs faster with tab, I'm missing out on a lot by only knowing how to read tab.

I've been musically illiterate for long enough!

 

 

Jason

[PhilMan99]

If you're doing that, you might care to look into "tetra-chords" (do a web-search). Essentially, tetra-chords are 1/2 scales. If you look closely, the major scale consists of two tetra-chords of W-W-H separated by a W.

 

Major is different, though.

[Dave Brown]

I've always thought there was dubious value in this exercise.

 

Every scale contains one of every note. So to make, say, and Eb scale, you'd have to write:

 

E F G A B C D E

 

Then add the flats like:

 

Eb, whole step is F, whole step is G, half step is Ab and so on.

 

But if you really learn that all letters have a whole step between them except the pairs B-C and E-F, the exercise is more or less redundant.

 

Also, if you learn the circle of fifths and learn to apply a key signature to the notes, you'll know that is much easier.

 

And on the bass, unless you play all open string scales or one string scales (the F scale only on the e string, for example) the fingering is the same.

 

If you do this exercise on the piano, it's more useful.

 

The best way to learn to read? Use a book like the Simandl method that forces you to sequentially move up the neck.

 

Good Luck

[owens hound]

Thanks for the suggestions Phil and Dave.

 

I've heard of the circle of fifths, read about it a bit and still don't really get it. I'll do some more reading and see if it makes more sense.

I'll also check out the Simandi Method as well.

 

I had hoped that learning the different scales in wholes and half's would be a good place to start.

 

If a scale/mode and 2 frets between steps, for example in the Pentatonic Minor, how would it be written correctly?

Pentatonic Minor in G

(G-A#-C-D-F-G)

G-WH-W-W-WH-W

 

Thanks,

Jason

[jmrunning3]

Here is a link I started recently delving deeper into theory. The information the users here impart is incredibly helpful!

 

Also, here is a link to a representation of the Circle of Fifths you might find helpful.

 

I'd also like to suggest getting a tutor.

[owens hound]

Great suggestions, I'll check the links out, and a tutor is a very good idea.

Thanks!!

[Dan South]

I'd like to expand on Dave Brown's circle of fifths method.

 

First, Dave is correct that a scale is based on a series of non-repeating letters in alphabetical order from root note up to the octave.

 

Using Dave's example:

 

E F G A B C D E

 

We can use this for the key of Eb of the key of E. Let's use the circle of fifths to find out how many sharps or flats we'll need in either case.

 

First, note something that we all find so obvious that it seems hardly worth mentioning. Sharps move notes UPWARD, and flats move notes DOWNWARD. Just remember: shaps=UP, flats=DOWN.

 

Okay, let's start with the key of C which has NO sharps or flats. Every time we move UP a fifth, we add a sharp (or lose a flat). Every time we more DOWN a fifth we add a flat (or lose a sharp). Remember again: sharps, UP; flats, DOWN.

 

Okay, so let's move downward first and see how long it takes to reach either an E or and Eb.

 

key of C = no flats

(down a perfect fifth)

key of F = 1 flat

(down a perfect fifth)

key of Bb = 2 flats

(down a perfect fifth)

key of Eb = 3 flats

 

BINGO! We now know that the key of Eb has three flats. But which notes are flat? Well, flats move DOWNWARD in the circle of fifths. Here's the trick. When you move down a perfect fifth to a key that adds a flat (such as C down to F), the flat that's added is the NEXT note on the circle of fifths.

 

key of C = no flats

key of F = 1 flat (Bb, the next note of the circle)

key of Bb = 2 flats, Bb added previously, plus Eb, the next note of the circle)

key of Eb = 3 flats, Bb and Eb from before, plus Ab, the next not of the circle)

etc.

 

So the key of Eb has three flats, and those flats are Bb, Eb, and Ab. Here is your E flat major scale.

 

Eb F G Ab Bb C D Eb

 

Cool!

 

---------------

 

Okay, how about sharps? Sharps are almost the same in reverse. We move UP a perfect fifth to get the next key. The only thing that's different (and tricky) determining which notes should be sharp. These notes move up through the circle of fifths, but you have to remember the F is the first not that becomes sharp. Remeber F as your first sharp, and the rest follow the pattern.

 

key of C (no sharps)

(up a perfect fifth)

key of G (1 sharp: F#)

(up a perfect fifth)

key of D (2 sharps: F# plus C#, a perfect fifth higher than F#)

etc.

 

I'll leave it to anyone who has read this far to continue the pattern and determine how many sharps we need for the key of E.

 

Maybe later we'll talk about how this relates to minor keys. The word "relate" is important (hint! hint!).

 

¡Buenos nachos!

 

[Whacked]

Very cool thread.

great explaination Dan. my books must suck or something 'cause now I understand it much better

[jeremy c]

I actually practice everything (and tell my students to do likewise) in the circle of 4ths, not 5ths.

 

The bass is tuned in 4ths and it is the natural tendency of chords to move in 4ths. I don't why 5ths got to steal all the thunder.

 

So my circle goes:

C F Bb Eb Ab Db Gb B E A D G and back to C.

 

I really don't think anyone is going to memorize key signatures by looking at a circle. You will memorize key signatures if you play a lot of music and pay attention to what you are reading and playing.

 

If you are looking at a flat key signature, the next the last flat (second from the right) is the name of the key. If you are looking at sharps, the key is one note higher than the last sharp.

[D_dup3]

Well, the question of Circle of 4ths or 5ths is of course just one of direction or perspective.

I'd suggest that over time anyone would do well to study as many different ways of looking at theoretical matters as possible...just stick to one at a time so as to lessen getting things too muddled conceptually.

 

As to the original question, my suggestion would be to think of things constantly in terms of the pattern of the basic diatonic major scale. [W-W-H-W-W-W-H] or, in a way that I think is easier to follow [1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8].

The reason is that most of us are exposed to that scale first, at least when we begin to study & while it's not really the basis of things theoretically, it is functionally & practically.

I also, after years of playing & gradually delving deeper into theory, think it helps by reducing the sheer amount of material your brain has to deal with.

 

The names of various scales & their modes & applications, etc., can get to be a series of extra "translations" that one makes. It's good to know that material in order to converse or communicate with others in some situations but when one's actually engaged in playing & responding to what you hear I think it can get a bit extraneous.

Personally I find that the less mental navigation done when playing the faster & better I respond to what's actually happening.

It's basically the same as what you're doing with the whole step/half step analysis but saves the task of remembering things as separate series of formulae.

Once you know the reference scale, both conceptually & as an ingrained mental pitch reference, it seems easier, to me at least, to make the adjustments to any note in the series.

 

I also think i thelps, generally, keep things in order when you want to examine/analyze thnigs theoretically.

For example...

 

[quote:

If a scale/mode and 2 frets between steps, for example in the Pentatonic Minor, how would it be written correctly?

Pentatonic Minor in G

(G-A#-C-D-F-G)

G-WH-W-W-WH-W]

 

I'd suggest that while you need to know the "geometry" of that note series (it's W+H steps & their sequence), it's an extra step compared to thinking of it as [1-b3-4-5-b7-8].

[owens hound]

Thanks for the posts. Looks like I've got some reading and learning to do!

Hey d,

Can you explain how the "geometry of the note series" works? And how do you know by looking at [1-b3-4-5-b7-8] where the half and whole steps are? If it were a C scale would it be 1-2-3-4-5-6-7-8? (Since there are no sharps or flats?)

I appreciate your take on my question, it certainly helps put this new learning together. I'm interested in circle of 4ths and 5ths but that will take more reading and time.

Initially I was most interested in learning the whole and half steps to play scales/modes in all keys as they would be the same half and whole steps with the root note determining where the scale mode is played.

Thanks,

Jason

[TimR]

Originally posted by Dan South:

Every time we move UP a fifth, we add a sharp (or lose a flat). Every time we more DOWN a fifth we add a flat (or lose a sharp).

Unless I'm mistaken you Move up a fifth or Down a FOURTH.

[Wally Malone]

Originally posted by TimR:

Originally posted by Dan South:

Every time we move UP a fifth, we add a sharp (or lose a flat). Every time we more DOWN a fifth we add a flat (or lose a sharp).

Unless I'm mistaken you Move up a fifth or Down a FOURTH.

Dan is correct. Starting in G for example and going up a fifth to D. The key of G has one sharp, the key of D has two sharps. Starting on G and coming down a fifth you end up on C which has no sharps.

 

Looking at flats starting on Bb, which has two flats and going up a fifth takes you to F which has one flat. Starting a Bb and going down a fifth takes you to Eb which has three flats.

 

Back earlier in the thread Jeremy references the cycle of fourths which is going up, example C, F Bb, Eb, etc. It really is the same going down in fifths. Starting on C and going up a fourth takes you to F, starting on C and going down a fifth takes you to F also, but that F is the lower octave of than that of going up a fouth.

 

Sometimes when playing through the cycle I play up a fourth and then down a fifth. It's all relative.

 

This may have cleared this up for some of you and may have made it even more confusing for others. Sorry to those of you in the later group.

 

Wally

[TimR]

Wally, I think you misunderstood me.

 

Going from C to G is up a fifth agreed.

So going from C to F cannot also be a fifth. F is the fourth of C. So to get from C to F you go down a fourth.

 

This is why there are two schools of thought. Go up or down a fourth and add a Flat (remove a sharp)

or

Go up or down a fifth and add a sharp (or remove a flat)

[Wally Malone]

Tim, I understand where you are coming from. Notice that I didn't say you were wrong in my last post but that Dan was correct. Yes F is the fourth of C and you can play F up or down from a C and that is what you are saying. What Dan is saying is that if you walk down from C and C is the first note, B would be the second note, A the third note G the fourth note and F the fifth note. Neither of you are wrong, just another way of looking at this.

 

The good thing about all of this it's making everyone think.

 

Wally

[jeremy c]

I just got off the phone with Wally.

 

We're going to confuse everyone even more now, but every word that I say will be true.

 

If you play a C, the fifth of C is G.

 

As a bass player, you will play roots and fifths very often.

 

You can play the G above the C (on the next string and two frets over). You can also play the G below the C (on the previous string on the same fret).

 

Now take a deep breath. If you play the G higher than the C, you are going up a fifth. If you play the G lower than the C, you are going down a fourth. So the interval from C to G can be either up a fifth or down a fourth, but G is always going to be called the fifth of G once you start talking about chords. Got that?

 

Yes, the circle of fourths and the circle of fifths are exactly the same intervals going in opposite directions.

 

If you practice going down in fifths or up in fourths you get the same results:

C F Bb Eb Ab Db Gb B E A D G.

 

However nearly every theory book I've ever seen gives the circle as C G D A E B F# C# Ab Eb Bb F, which seems to be encouraging you to go up in fifths (or down in fourths).

 

Here's the beginning of Fly Me To The Moon:

|Am7 |Dm7 |G7 |CMa7 C7 |

|FMa7|Bm7b5 |E7 |Am7 A7|

|Dm7 |G7 |CMa7|Em7 A7 |

|Dm7 |G7 |Bm7b5 |E7 |

 

Here's I Will Survive:

|Am7 |Dm7 |G7 |CMa7 |

|FMa7|Bm7b5|Esus|E7 |

 

Pretty good reasons to practice chords in fourths order. (And as Wally says, you can go up from the Am to the Dm or down...up is up a fourth, down is down a fifth)

 

Are there any songs where the chords move up in fifths (or down in fourths)(for more than two chords in a row)? I can't think of any off hand.

[TimR]

I was mistaken!

 

Sorry for the confusion. It just looked wrong reading on my screen here. I think it's partly because too many replies are talking up/down fourth/fifths. I always have looked at going up a 5th add a sharp. Up a 4th add a flat. It's easier for me to think that way.

 

Going down intervals was my 'Downfall'

[Wally Malone]

Tim, although I'm aware of and understand down a fifth I don't think that way either. If I'm in C I would, as you, still think of F as the fourth even if it is the lower octave.

 

Wally

[Fred TBP]

One of the things I've been practicing lately is transcribing my notes into numbers like the Nashville method. It came out of necessity because I've come across situations where I'm doing the same song in 3 different bands in 3 different keys, and taking the time to learn the progession as notes can be a little confusing at times. So by keeping a sheet using numbers I can ask someone to give me a key and within a minute or two work out all the notes for that song.

 

Another advantage to this was one I didn't expect. I had a fill-in guitarist join us for a set on Saturday night, and as it turned out the singer/guitarist and I were tuned down a whole-step and this confused the fill-in who asked me to help him along. Can't describe how easy it was to pull out the number sheets and quickly pencil in the appropriate notes for each key.

 

At the moment I'm not doing a great job explaing "Nashville tuning" so I'll leave it to the experts because I have to log off and get back to business. But I can see how handy it is thinking in terms of numbers rather than notes and I hope you'll give it a try.

[D_dup3]

Originally posted by owen's hound:

...Hey d,

[1]Can you explain how the "geometry of the note series" works? ...

[2]And how do you know by looking at [1-b3-4-5-b7-8] where the half and whole steps are?...

Excuse my vagueness.

[1]By "geometry..", I meant what you're doing by charting the placement of intervals as groups of steps. I didn't mean that I was describing a "geometry of note series" theory construct.

 

What I hoped to suggest was that by thinking in terms of the scalar position of notes [1-2-3-etc...] & relating that to the major scale, one only has to remember one series of notes as opposed to remembering the whole or half steps (or even the occasional W+H steps) that would be involved in memorizing all the modes or the huge list of exotic scales that one might try.

 

 

[2]Once you know the major scale series of whole & half steps, when one sees/hears a b3 (or whatever) one knows that's 1 1/2 steps from the tonic/root, although that wouldn't inform you of what the breakdown between those notes was.

 

To me it's not a bad idea to go through the effort of listing those whole & half step formulae as a learning exercise in order to analyze the layout (the "geometry") of a scale but I just think it's easier, once you get through that, to use the major scale as a universal reference point & think of everything as matching it's series or having some adjustment to it...

 

I hardly ever think in terms of note names [C-D-E-etc] until I need to do so.

By thinking in terms of scale position numbers I seem to be able to respond faster.

A simple minded approach, I guess, but it's easier for me to not "translate" so much.

[Dan South]

Originally posted by TimR:

Wally, I think you misunderstood me.

 

Going from C to G is up a fifth agreed.

So going from C to F cannot also be a fifth. F is the fourth of C. So to get from C to F you go down a fourth.

 

This is why there are two schools of thought. Go up or down a fourth and add a Flat (remove a sharp)

or

Go up or down a fifth and add a sharp (or remove a flat)

Tim, I think that you and the guys have already covered this, but yeah, you are correct in that going "up a fifth" is IDENTICAL musically (except for the octave) to going "down a fourth":

 

up a 5th: C D E F G

 

down a 4th: C B A G

 

Both end up on G. It works with all notes, all the time.

 

Similarly, "down a 5th" is the same as "up a 4th".

 

down a 5th: C B A G F

 

up a 4th: C D E F

 

Both end up on F.

 

So, anywhere I said to go up a fifth, you could go down a fourth and reach the same result musically, and vice versa. This is good to know, because if you keep going up, up, up, you get out of the right range quickly. You need to mix up and down intervals. This is really important in walking jazz or blues lines.

 

Let's say you have a blues that goes from D7 to G7.

 

You can go up: D E F F# G

 

Or you can go down: D C B A G

 

And then maybe keep going in the same direction for a while or switch back the other way.

 

Scales are like a spiral staircase. At some point you're direcly above the first step, one flight up (octave). Then later, you're above that step again, two flights up (2 octaves). You're in the exact same spot on the floor plan, just removed by elevation. And when you reach the top floor (end of the neck, or the last note in your hand position), you can start going back down the same stairs, passing all of the familiar points along the way.

 

Music is cool!

 

[Dan South]

Originally posted by d:

d=Halfnote

Hey d!

 

Have you ever met o?

 

And don't you have a brother named p?

 

 

[Phil W]

At the risk of mass confusion 'If you go down a fourth you get to the fifth!' -sorry.

 

Cycle of fourths for me, going round the cycle C,G,D,A etc. comes from a 'Classical' perspective, I've heard. Jazzers are going to go around C, F, Bb etc. Any music vaguely derived from jazz (ie what most of us play) makes the latter more useful. You can think of it as the same cycle/circle (which of course it is) with the jazzers going anti-clockwise and the 'classical/orchestral' guys going clockwise.

 

As a minor pentatonic has a flattened third this would be Bb in your example, not A#

 

As for the original question, like many above, I have found the whole step half step business of very little use in over 20 years of playing. One problem is that it locks you into thinking of scales as sequences rather than palettes of tones to choose from though it is the most useful approach to diminished scales. I think in terms of intervals like others have said. So as you say, a major scale is 1234567 and then every other scale/mode is a combination of intervals related to that e.g. Dorian 1, 2, b3, 4, 5, 6, b7. Say/sing the names of the notes aloud as you play each scale.

 

One of my teachers, Lynne Davis, recently stressed the value of being able to know the names of any notes in any key at any time that you're playing, for instance - oh - I just played the b13 in the key of G - Eb. In reality, this is for practice only as we don't really want to be thinking about this as we perform.

 

Lynne also suggested that we should know every key very well so that if asked we could name the sharp 11th of Ab or the flat seventh of Db without thinking about it. One method she suggested was that each key has it's own pattern of accidentals which if recited rhythmically makes a unique rhythm pattern.

e.g. for a C major scale say the scale as walking quarter notes, for a Bb major scale, say the Bb and Eb as a pair of eighth notes. Just another idea, I wouldn't rely on it.

[owens hound]

So I take it that the best approach to learning scales, modes and how they work in each key is to learn the circle of 4ths and 5ths?

Initially I thought that learning each scale/mode in whole and half steps would be a good place to start. I figured that I could play any scale in any key if I knew the whole and half steps. As I read the information in this thread, I see that I am just scratching the surface! A lot of this information is over my head at this point but certainly gives me something to work towards.

Thanks for the insight and help and I'll get started on this new chapter of scales and theory!!

 

Jason

[Dan South]

Originally posted by owen's hound:

So I take it that the best approach to learning scales, modes and how they work in each key is to learn the circle of 4ths and 5ths?

Initially I thought that learning each scale/mode in whole and half steps would be a good place to start. I figured that I could play any scale in any key if I knew the whole and half steps. As I read the information in this thread, I see that I am just scratching the surface! A lot of this information is over my head at this point but certainly gives me something to work towards.

Thanks for the insight and help and I'll get started on this new chapter of scales and theory!!

 

Jason

Neither is better or worse than the other. All of these relationships between notes are occuring at once, even if you are only focused on one (or none!) at a time. It's just different views of the same thing - like front view, top view, and side view in drafting. They're all describing the same object, or in the case of the cirle of fifths (or fourths) or intervals or scales, the same piece of music.

 

The more ways that you can understand music and how it works, the more the doors of inspiration will open for you. And that goes for intuitive approaches in addition to the analytical.

[TimR]

Jeremy also hinted that it's better for a bassist to think of going up fourths as the strings are in fourths. This is actually a complete revelation for me.

 

example, works anywhere though.

Start on

F 1st string 1st fret.

up a fourth

Bb 2nd string 1st fret.

up a fourth

Eb 3rd string 1st fret.

up a fourth

Ab 4th string 1st fret.

reposition fingers down an octave!

Ab 1st string 4th fret.

up a fourth

Db 2nd string 4th fret.

etc.

 

Works for sharps as well. Start on C

4nd string 5th fret.

work the rest out yourselves.

Marvellous!

 

This is stuff I knew years ago, it's still there underneath, if I think really hard, but now I just play. I don't have time to think while I am playing. It's good to know where the music comes from in theory but not essential. What is important is that it sounds good.

[TimR]

Most of us cheat when it comes to playing scales.

Learn both the common fingerings for the major scale. For 2 octaves!

Then just move your hand to suit.

[Wally Malone]

Dan South said:

 

"The more ways that you can understand music and how it works, the more the doors of inspiration will open for you. And that goes for intuitive approaches in addition to the analytical."

 

I agree with Dan, the more ways you understand helps you communicate with more musicians, even those with limited knowledge that only have one way at looking at music. Just as Fred had mentioned above about the Nashville system, when one goes into a recording session that could be what the person that hired you will lay in front of you. Someone could also lay a chord chart out with the chord symbols or give you a sheet of music with notation. Again, the more ways you understand the better chance of communicating with others.

 

Wally