Singing Scales

[D.R.22]

Hi all,

I've recently decided that to improve my playing, singing and 'ear' I would run through scales and sing the notes I hear but I was wondering what I should sing --the note i.e. "G" or the notes position in the scale i.e. "root?"

I was thinking of doing this while following Ted Greene's "Single Note Soloing," going through chords, scales and arpeggios. Does that sound like a good plan?

Also, don't hesitate to suggest any improvement!

Thanks guys,
Dom

[fumblefingers]

nonsense syllables are better.

la la la

dah dah dah

buh dee buh dee


sing your arpeggios too.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I'd go with solfeg. It's like singing scale degrees, but on easy-to-sing, pure vowels. It's really becoming standard, even in the states, for singing that kind of thing. You can't really sing chromatic numbers anyway, but chromatic solfeg works really well.

[Pocket Player]

starting to do the same thing myself !

[D.R.22]

nonsense syllables are better.

la la la

dah dah dah

buh dee buh dee


sing your arpeggios too.

Thanks guy! Is there a particular website/resource you recommend for me to learn solfege?

Also, will signing the scales, and arpeggios improve my signing? Or should I learn about technique et al?

[fumblefingers]

Thanks guy! Is there a particular website/resource you recommend for me to learn solfege?

Also, will signing the scales, and arpeggios improve my signing? Or should I learn about technique et al?

it will improve your ability to hit pitch and to keep time - if - you keep time while singing.


but vocal technique is another course of study.

[CactusWren]

I used solfege studying classical guitar and feel it helped a lot in memory and just kind of getting a solid feel. It serves as a memory anchor but also helps the ear. I also made my daughter use it for piano.

do re mi fa so la ti = C D E F G A B

to sharp a do, re, fa, so, substitute a "i"

scale of G:
so la ti do re mi fi
scale of D:
re mi fi so la ti di

to flat a note, turn it to "e"

scale of F:
fa so la te do re mi

Things get a bit hairy when you have C flats and such, but there are extensions, if you want to go that route. Just choose one of the systems and go with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solf%C...matic_variants

[matt.guitarteacher]

I used solfege studying classical guitar and feel it helped a lot in memory and just kind of getting a solid feel. It serves as a memory anchor but also helps the ear. I also made my daughter use it for piano.

do re mi fa so la ti = C D E F G A B

to sharp a do, re, fa, so, substitute a "i"

scale of G:
so la ti do re mi fi
scale of D:
re mi fi so la ti di

to flat a note, turn it to "e"

scale of F:
fa so la te do re mi

Things get a bit hairy when you have C flats and such, but there are extensions, if you want to go that route. Just choose one of the systems and go with it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solf%C...matic_variants

Cool. So that everyone is clear, this is fixed Do, and is a bit more advanced in level of difficulty.

Fixed Do could be seen as just a substitute for singing pitch names. They certainly work better and are more musical than singing "F sharp" for example. But the benefits of starting with fixed Do, I would think, are much more long-term than learning movable Do, even with chromaticism.

[christianm77]

Hi all,

I've recently decided that to improve my playing, singing and 'ear' I would run through scales and sing the notes I hear but I was wondering what I should sing --the note i.e. "G" or the notes position in the scale i.e. "root?"

I was thinking of doing this while following Ted Greene's "Single Note Soloing," going through chords, scales and arpeggios. Does that sound like a good plan?

Also, don't hesitate to suggest any improvement!

Thanks guys,
Dom

I do numbers from the key centre - moveable do. So in G, G is 1, A is 2, B is 3 and so on.

Chromatic solfege seems good to though I don't do it ATM. Wikipedia lists the syllables.

excellent exercise. I'm sure others have mentioned relative pitch learning materials as well. Bruce arnold etc. EDIT - it seems not... Check out Bruce Arnold.

in terms of phrases I like nonsense syllables that articulate the rhythm. I find it good to work on pitch and rhythm separately.

[Irez87]

I used solfege to sing through Giant Steps. I posted it a little while back, but due to worrying about what Bruce would say (and the bickering I got from the podcasts. I am not talking about the fidelity, thanks graham and neatomic for helping me fix that) I took them down.

I sing every day.

I am a staunch believer of being able to create the music BEFORE you take it to the instrument, be it the guitar, piano, or goofus.

Music has to come from within, not from several pieces of wood, wire, and metal (though guitars and basses are the prettiest instruments on the bandstand, let's be honest )

these two books are becoming a part of my balanced nutrition of daily ear training and musicianship AWAY from the instrument:

Ear training and sight singing for musicians book with audioMuse EEK

and

Sight reading and sight singing exercises for musicians bookMuse EEK

You could get at least half a decade outta both books, even if you are a skilled singer of solfege

Singing is a necessary evil if you wanna train the ear. Evil, because some, like me, have horrible singing voices. I do it to sing through my guitar, you know what I'm saying?

[CactusWren]

Sight singing is good stuff, IMO. Only can do it slow at this point.

For the rhythm, Indian syllables are kind of cool.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Syllables.png

[Arpeggio]

Hi all,

I've recently decided that to improve my playing, singing and 'ear' I would run through scales and sing the notes I hear but I was wondering what I should sing --the note i.e. "G" or the notes position in the scale i.e. "root?"

I was thinking of doing this while following Ted Greene's "Single Note Soloing," going through chords, scales and arpeggios. Does that sound like a good plan?

Also, don't hesitate to suggest any improvement!

Thanks guys,
Dom

I use the interval names 1 (or root), 2 ,3 etc. the maximum syllables being three for "flat seven".

With no starting reference, sing a root then 3rd then go back to the same root and sing a flat 3rd. Here's another: Sing the 1, 3 ,5 of the I chord, 1, 3, 5 of the IV, then 1, 3, 5 of the V chord, then try the whole thing with 3, 1, 5 or 5, 1, 3 or leave out the roots for more of a challenge and go 3, 5. If you can't do those then my point here is that ear training uncovers many, many possibilities of things you cannot do, far beyond just these. Seemingly limitless frontiers you didn't know existed. The brain is the most advanced computer on the planet, it should be used to its full potential.

If you can't do something, break it into stages from supported to less supported like this: A) Sing with the guitar as you play same thing B) sing before the guitar 1 note at at time (you then guitar, you, guitar etc.) C) Sing before the guitar in larger chunks D) Sing the whole thing without the guitar.

Here's an example of something for later. In the key of G min singing all the notes of these arpeggios up and down the strings in fret-board position IX (G min tonic scale pattern 1) changing from one to the next at whatever interval it happened to be at that time.

ii (min7b5), V (7b9), i (min), i (min/maj7), IV (V9#11) but you'd never get to that unless you start with stuff like 1, 3, 5 of a I, IV, V first as mentioned above.

Learning to recognize intervals (such as minor 3rd is like Brahm's Lullaby or maj 2nd is first notes of Happy Birthday) is like learning your A, B, C as a kid. Relating intervals to songs you know to assist recognition is also counter productive in the long run (in my experience) because you want to recognize intervals on their own as separate components. It's like how 1's and 0's as separate components give us binary, whereas 2 codes such as 10011 and 01110 do not.

Another cool exercise to do is to hum root note drone while playing a complex sequence of intervals on your guitar from a scale such as the half whole diminished or the altered scale. Finished on the same root note you are humming, are you still singing the root note or have you been thrown off it by a few hertz or semitone?

[matt.guitarteacher]

Sight singing is good stuff, IMO. Only can do it slow at this point.

For the rhythm, Indian syllables are kind of cool.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._Syllables.png

Nice. I've been really curios about Indian rhythmic syllables. What resources are you using for that?

[CactusWren]

Well, none... just something I've read on flamenco forums and that my percussionist buddy does. I think these are the things that tabla players use. takadimi is easier to say than takataka or 1eanda

[matt.guitarteacher]

Well, none... just something I've read on flamenco forums and that my percussionist buddy does. I think these are the things that tabla players use. takadimi is easier to say than takataka or 1eanda

Found these earlier and thought they were interesting...


Takadimi book/cd:
http://www.amazon.com/You-Can-Ta-Thi.../dp/1930080026

Website:
www.takadimi.net

[Jonzo]

http://www.amazon.com/Hear-It-Sing-E.../dp/0634080997
This might interest some of you.

[Mr. Pocket]

I have a couple of questions for those of you using solfege to sing scales. I learned solfege in college so I am going to stick with it, but I am still deciding on some details of how to use it.

When singing a mode of a scale should I start on 'do' or always use 'do' as the root of that scale? And if I am singing arpeggios through chords, do I move 'do' for each chord? It seems like fixed 'do' would be easier for modes, since you learn one set of syllables and change the root, but move-able would work better for something like a cycle of dominant arpeggios.

Second, less importantly, do you use the same syllable ascending as descending? I've seen systems that use a different syllable when descending and that seems extraneous to me unless I'm missing something here.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Not something I'm doing a lot with at the moment. I wouldn't think to use DO at every starting point though. That's basically fixed DO. There are decisions to be made once you get pretty complex with things I guess, but in the beginning, it's going to be basically tonal anyway, isn't it? Depends pc what you're sound I guess...

I learned different ascending/descending syllables. I'm sure it helps with reading aspect at the least. Also, I'd think it makes sense at a really basic, almost subconscious level. We don't tend to mentally ADD scale degrees with chromatics, do we? the accidentals actually replace the scale degreeso thatyou always keep seven, at least inbasic diatonic systems.

Just my 2c.

[Mr. Pocket]

I think that always starting on Do is the movable method.

'Moveable do' dorian would always be: Do Re Me Fa Sol La Te Do
Fixed do *D dorian* would be: Re Me Sol La Ti Do Re
Fixed do *A dorian* would be(I think) : La Ti Do Re Mi Fi So

I am between using a sort of combination of fixed and movable, but only when thinking "modes" where do is moveable from key to key but fixed within that key so A dorian would also be Re Me Sol La Ti Do Re instead of whatever it is in fixed do system.

Or

Using Do for the beginning of each scale so the chord tones will always be the same syllables, and to get my ear around hearing every mode as it's own scale and not just 'the major scale starting and ending on a different tone'.

I don't see the point in changing the symbols to descend for basic ear training exercises. I can maybe see it being useful for sight singing to remember the key, or if you want to be very traditionalist, but it's just too much to think about for me. I guess the reason there are so many systems in use is that each one is good at something.

[matt.guitarteacher]

I think that always starting on Do is the movable method.

sorry. I probably could have stated better as "you might as well use fixed do".... I meant that, in the same way that fixed do doesn't really have a relationship to key center, the idea you're describing doesn't either. I would go for nonsense syllables or numbers over that. The whole point of solfeggio is relating things to key center, learning to hear pitches in the context key rather than simple intervallic relationship from a previous pitch.

The bright vowels of SI, DI, or the other "sharp" syllables mimic the leading tone quality in their brightness that you find in TI. There's some logic in the way sharps and flats are presented.

[Mr. Pocket]

The bright vowels of SI, DI, or the other "sharp" syllables mimic the leading tone quality in their brightness that you find in TI. There's some logic in the way sharps and flats are presented.

That makes sense, I like that idea. I think the reason I want to use solfege over nonsense sounds is the development of subconscious relationships between syllables and relative pitch. It seems pretty widely used for that purpose. So, yeah I think you have a point that always keeping Do as the key center is wise. Same sounds, same intervals across the modes. And less syllables to keep track of, which is better for me.