How to use Modes for playing real songs?

[djg]

I watched Alessio Menconi play over the weekend, he also was using Modes in his workshop lessons, but he also has an extremely good ear, knowing the name and sound of every note on the fretboard, which he subsequently demonstrated. Very impressive player.

in the 80s in europe there wasn't much teaching material. the jazz revival was just getting started. the few teaching materials avaialble were heavily influenced by berklee. so basically all we got was modal theory. the worst offender imo being that dreadful scofield video. i remember when i saw it for the first time it sounded *nothing* like the bebop i was listening too.

[GuyBoden]

How come?

I think teaching modes won't give a player the notes needed to play authentic sounding older Swing and Bebop Jazz improv.

Most beginners who are taught modes never sound like they're playing with the "Jazz language".

About 25 years ago, I was taught modes by the great UK guitar player educator Mike Walker. That was using Major, Melodic minor, Harmonic minor modes.

The modes debate gets a bit boring after all these years, but teaching "Modes with added chromatism" could potentially be a good foundation for a Jazz beginner.

But, Bebop is so, so, so far away from using modes. Using modes to play Bebop would be a very, very, long, long journey. (IMHO)

[James W]

The way I think about jazz isn't that I'm after some historically correct form of it, and in any case I think you could analyse older jazz from a modal perspective - it would make historical musicologists grumble no doubt but oh well. I'm not going for a pastiche and I'm interested in the history of jazz insofar as I can use it for music making in the present. So it's not like I learn modes because I want the authentic 60s post-bop sound or something, if such a thing exists.

You can complain that modes don't give you the 'authentic' bebop sound, Guy, or say it takes a long time. I say it takes a long time whether you learn modes or not!

[ragman1]

I think teaching modes won't give a player the notes needed to play authentic sounding older Swing and Bebop Jazz improv

Well, before 'modes' it used to be tonal centres. Proper modal playing in the modern sense isn't meant for functional harmony simply because it ignores both tonal centres and functional relationships.

A nice standard is going to sound lovely when the improv is essentially diatonic (which doesn't exclude b9, #11, or chromatic passing notes because that's what gives the music its jazz flavour). Knowing how the standard modes (Ionian to Locrian) function is part of theory knowledge but modal harmony in the modern sense is not that at all.

I think that's the basic confusion between the two. But the question here is whether modern modal harmony can be used to play over the old standards and the simple answer is no, they're chalk and cheese.

So when this thread asks 'how to use modes for playing real songs' it's essentially a wrong question.

[ragman1]

Just to bang on a little, with apologies, one of the most interesting tunes is Blue In Green. Is it functional or modal?

If we take the chords:

BbM7 or Gm - A7 - Dm/Db7 - Cm/F7
BbM7 - A7 - Dm
E7 - Am - Dm

One could say with justification that it drifts functionally through various key centres (if I've got them right):

Dm - % - % - Bb
% - Dm - %
Am - % - Dm

So it's constructed functionally but operates modally because it floats, loops, and creates a mood. So should it be played like a ballad or a modern modal tune, or both? And with what?

[James W]

Well, before 'modes' it used to be tonal centres. Proper modal playing in the modern sense isn't meant for functional harmony simply because it ignores both tonal centres and functional relationships.

A nice standard is going to sound lovely when the improv is essentially diatonic (which doesn't exclude b9, #11, or chromatic passing notes because that's what gives the music its jazz flavour). Knowing how the standard modes (Ionian to Locrian) function is part of theory knowledge but modal harmony in the modern sense is not that at all.

I think that's the basic confusion between the two. But the question here is whether modern modal harmony can be used to play over the old standards and the simple answer is no, they're chalk and cheese.

So when this thread asks 'how to use modes for playing real songs' it's essentially a wrong question.

Such twaddle. I don't know where to begin taking apart this so I won't even bother. I'm just posting this message as a warning in case someone like the OP takes what you say seriously.

[Christian Miller]

I'm struggling to see anything inaccurate about what Ragman said?

(Checks outside his window for porcine aviation.)

So yeah - standards - as in Tin Pan Alley songs, not as in So What - were written and played long before modal theory was developed in jazz. Modes surface in jazz during the 50s via George Russell's ideas and are popularised by Miles in the late 50s.

Bebop isn't modal. Neither are swing, early jazz or mainstream.

The use of colour notes - #11's and so on - was a common feature of bop melody, but a lot of the music is surprisingly diatonic and triadic. Just go listen to some Charlie Parker if you don't believe me. OTOH guys like Lester Young (and pre-modal) Miles Davis) were coming from a melody approach. Both were infused with blues.

If you want to play post-bop, fusion or contemporary, a knowledge of modes is pretty much mandatory. But I don't think students should start there.

You can play standards with modes, but you won't sound like the old guys. I always know when a player is thinning that way, because they'll make certain choices. It's not a bad or good thing, it's a style thing.

But I think anyone interested in playing songs should start with chord tones and authentic jazz language to get the feel and style of the music. Modes are a pitch resource for improvisation, nothing more - it's easy to add them on after the basic stuff is all in place.

[ragman1]

You can play standards with modes, but you won't sound like the old guys.

Bernstein does that quite a bit. Whether it's attractive is another matter :-)

[pauln]

Seems like you got your answer though — which is that for the most part they aren’t used for playing jazz.

Modern folks like us might use modal concepts for addressing sort of standalone chords in otherwise tonal tunes — eg the Bbm7 to Eb7 in Out of Nowhere — but even then chord scale theory doesn’t really get you there. For example, knowing what an Eb Lydian dominant is would help you play that spot, but wouldn’t help you know why that sounds good since Eb Lydian dominant doesn’t actually fit that pair of chords.

That's a good example, the preceding chord is a G major (6/9 is nice), and to momentarily play modally through the Bbm7 - Eb(9) one can "play" Eb Lydian Dominant through them, while intending or thinking of G as a continuing tonic... so as G is the third of Eb, the third mode of Eb Lydian Dominant is G Locrian Natural 2.
It is not necessary to know the Loc Nat 2 is the third mode of Lyd Dom, nor that the Lyd Dom is the fourth mode of Mel Min, nor that the Loc Nat 2 is the sixth mode of Mel Min.

4th plus 3rd equals 6th (!?). If one does think that way (modes of modes) then you run into the question, How is the third mode of the fourth mode becoming the sixth mode and not the seventh mode of the original scale? One has encountered the result of the early theorists not distinguishing between cardinal and ordinal numbers... they used ordinal and one can't do even the simplest arithmetic with ordinals. It is also unnecessary to think of these things.

As we come to discover what sounds good, looking back we may realize elements of theory, and in time a lot of theory just naturally fills in behind our path as we go forward, but don't be fooled; it is the sound of music itself that must be grasped to forge ahead.

[Tal_175]

People also get themselves confused by the terminology. Using the terms "chord-scales" and "modes" interchangeably leads to people conflating very distinct applications without realizing.

The following are different notions:
- Milestones or So What being in the Dorian mode.
- The idea of minor conversion as used by players like Pat Martino or Wes Montgomery. That is, for example, using Dorian chord-scale based vocabulary over ii-V's for a more bluesy feel. Similarly dominant chord-scale variations such as Lydian dominant, altered scale or diminished scale for emphasizing different extensions/alterations.
- Dorian being a choice for the tonic chord for tonal minor key tunes like Softly as in a Morning Sunrise or Blue Bossa as well as brighter (MM) or darker (Phrygian) chord-scales.

I think it makes sense to distinguish between "Modality" and "harmonic color" when talking about these concepts.

[GBRow]

Personally, I don't think you have the knowledge to achieve your objectives, without getting a good Jazz Teacher.

Contents of "Modal Jazz Composition and Harmony Vol1" by Ron Miller's book is the Bible for "Modal Jazz".
Attachment 131330

Ron Miller's book is not about noodling in "D Dorian" over "So What" or Impressions etc.

Still wondering why this book is excellent for the topic by just looking at the index of content.

[AllanAllen]

Such twaddle. I don't know where to begin taking apart this so I won't even bother. I'm just posting this message as a warning in case someone like the OP takes what you say seriously.

Come on man, you gotta do better. This is your argument, that one can play standards with modes and it's wise to focus on them. You have no rebuttal? Is it just a vibe for you?

[GBRow]

GBRow -

It's about time this farce came to an end. You can't really play the guitar. You don't like jazz. You want to do pop songs. On your video you strummed some basic chords and fell apart at about 3.30. The single notes you were playing were neither here nor there because you'd no idea what you were doing.

You might not like this but it's a fact. No one's attacking you. Allan was talking to someone else when he said 'the OP can't even play a rudimentary version of Autumn Leaves' which is no more than the truth. In fact, I doubt you can play any jazz tune at all because you want to play pop songs.

You're like a kid who reads elementary books and suddenly announces that he's interested in Shakespeare, Chaucer and TS Eliot. He can't do it.

You want to do calculus when you can't do basic equations. You want to speak fluent German when all you've read is a phrasebook.

Modal harmony is like that. You're trying to run before you can barely walk. It may intrigue you intellectually but you have no foundation to build on.

No one is attacking you so stop playing the victim. Either start learning seriously in a structured, meaningful way or go to a pop song forum and play the stuff you really like.

I was just showing how playing Autumn Leaves without looking at the staff just by trying to play the tunes I recall in my memory. Having practiced guitar for 4 months so far, I thought I was doing OK. OK, I am just here to learn about some Jazz Theories.

[GuyBoden]

You can complain that modes don't give you the 'authentic' bebop sound, Guy, or say it takes a long time. I say it takes a long time whether you learn modes or not!

Response.

I do feel that learning Modes wasted a great many years of my playing life, so the slightest mention of Modes does annoy me.

Years back, I remember simply adding chromaticism to the basic modes, hoping that this extra chromaticism would create a more "authentic Jazz language", but it still didn't sound authentic.

So, it will be an even longer journey, if you don't copy Jazz phrases from recordings to create an "authentic Jazz language". IMHO.

[GuyBoden]

Still wondering why this book is excellent for the topic by just looking at the index of content.

Sorry, don't buy it.

It's too advanced for you.

[GBRow]

Sorry, don't buy it.

It's too advanced for you.

OK, thanks.

[James W]

Ok, I suppose since Christian threw his weight behind this I'd better respond.

Well, before 'modes' it used to be tonal centres. Proper modal playing in the modern sense isn't meant for functional harmony simply because it ignores both tonal centres and functional relationships.

Modal music and specifically modal jazz, does not ignore tonal centres. Even something like Coltrane's Ascension - it contains modes and therefore features pitch centricity i.e. a tonal centre. A mode by definition requires some sort of tonal centre. And modes can be used in music that contains functional relationships.

A nice standard is going to sound lovely when the improv is essentially diatonic (which doesn't exclude b9, #11, or chromatic passing notes because that's what gives the music its jazz flavour). Knowing how the standard modes (Ionian to Locrian) function is part of theory knowledge but modal harmony in the modern sense is not that at all.

I fail to see your distinction between 'standard' modes and modal harmony in the modern sense. I bought Kurt's recently released book on modal harmony for modern jazz guitar and lo and behold, he just deals with the modes of the major and melodic minor scales.

I think that's the basic confusion between the two. But the question here is whether modern modal harmony can be used to play over the old standards and the simple answer is no, they're chalk and cheese.

Tell this to Kurt.

[pauln]

GBRow,
ragman1 has been around a very long time and has forgotten more about music than I'll ever know, but I think he gets grumpy when he's hungry and every now and then he forgets to eat before posting...

[James W]

I'm struggling to see anything inaccurate about what Ragman said?

(Checks outside his window for porcine aviation.)

So yeah - standards - as in Tin Pan Alley songs, not as in So What - were written and played long before modal theory was developed in jazz. Modes surface in jazz during the 50s via George Russell's ideas and are popularised by Miles in the late 50s.

Bebop isn't modal. Neither are swing, early jazz or mainstream.

The use of colour notes - #11's and so on - was a common feature of bop melody, but a lot of the music is surprisingly diatonic and triadic. Just go listen to some Charlie Parker if you don't believe me. OTOH guys like Lester Young (and pre-modal) Miles Davis) were coming from a melody approach. Both were infused with blues.

I see you've put your history hat on. Very good. I agree with what you've said and already knew it.

You can play standards with modes, but you won't sound like the old guys. I always know when a player is thinning that way, because they'll make certain choices. It's not a bad or good thing, it's a style thing.

Indeed. The important caveat added here is 'if you want to sound like the old guys'. Big if, and totally absent in ragman's post.

[GBRow]

Response.

I do feel that learning Modes wasted a great many years of my playing life, so the slightest mention of Modes does annoy me.

Years back, I remember simply adding chromaticism to the basic modes, hoping that this extra chromaticism would create a more "authentic Jazz language", but it still didn't sound authentic.

So, it will be an even longer journey, if you don't copy Jazz phrases from recordings to create an "authentic Jazz language". IMHO.

Interesting. Two questions for you. If Mode is not a useful topic, then why is it in every Jazz Theory books? Surely they don't wish to make the students waste time and energy learning useless topic?

And if one doesn't want to talk about the theoretical part of Jazz, then why do they ever come to the forum? Why not just keep playing their own phrases and other folks songs? Isn't the forum for discussing how some difficult topics could be learned and understood? And how to improve playing skills instead of judging other folks guitar playing?

[James W]

Response.

I do feel that learning Modes wasted a great many years of my playing life, so the slightest mention of Modes does annoy me.

Years back, I remember simply adding chromaticism to the basic modes, hoping that this extra chromaticism would create a more "authentic Jazz language", but it still didn't sound authentic.

So, it will be an even longer journey, if you don't copy Jazz phrases from recordings to create an "authentic Jazz language". IMHO.

Once again - modes are but one of several means of creating jazz language. Others include chord tone soloing and copping licks off records. None are mutually exclusive and learning modes does not entail not copping licks off records.

[GBRow]

GBRow,
ragman1 has been around a very long time and has forgotten more about music than I'll ever know, but I think he gets grumpy when he's hungry and every now and then he forgets to eat before posting...

His comments in some replies were unfair, negative and deluded at times, and they can provoke acute answering back. But then I just feel that there are bigger fish to fry.
We are here to discuss the interesting Jazz topics at the end of the day.

[GuyBoden]

Interesting. Two questions for you. If Mode is not a useful topic, then why is it in every Jazz Theory books? Surely they don't wish to make the students waste time and energy learning useless topic?

And if one doesn't want to talk about the theoretical part of Jazz, then why do they ever come to the forum? Why not just keep playing their own phrases and other folks songs? Isn't the forum for discussing how some difficult topics could be learned and understood? And how to improve playing skills instead of judging other folks guitar playing?

The thread has diverge to discussing the BIG question "are modes a good way to acquire the skills to improv over Jazz standards?"

I think many posts on this thread are stating that "Authentic" Bebop and Swing language won't be gained by using modes.

Modes create a "Non-Authentic" improv over older Jazz standards. (IMHO)

Yes, "Non-Authentic" is very subjective.

All good.

[AllanAllen]

The thread has diverge to discussing the BIG question "are modes a good way to acquire the skills to improv over Jazz standards?"

I think many posts on this thread are stating that "Authentic" Bebop and Swing language won't be gained by using modes.

Modes create a "Non-Authentic" improv over older Jazz standards. (IMHO)

Yes, "Non-Authentic" is very subjective.

All good.

Except James, isn't talking about jazz standards or bebop and swing language, he's talking about more modern jazz.

It's just different. You don't learn Cold Shot or Riviera Paradise if you want to sound like Bukka White. Every sub-genre has it's own idiosyncrasies that need to be studied.

This is why I kept asking what song OP wanted to use modes on. Because it matters.

[AllanAllen]

I was just showing how playing Autumn Leaves without looking at the staff just by trying to play the tunes I recall in my memory. Having practiced guitar for 4 months so far, I thought I was doing OK. OK, I am just here to learn about some Jazz Theories.

You posted an Autumn Leaves video? I didn't catch that. I would have picked another tune as an example if I realized.