New starter here... a little advice on modes?

[joe2758]

If you don't reference the parent scale, say if you're playing over G7 but superimposing Bmin7b5 lines over it (you don't always start from the root I pressume), so now you're thinking B locrian scale and be able to instantly play it anywhere on the fretboard instantly? Or are still thinking G dominant scale but starting from the third. If you do that, then aren't you still driving your lines from some sort of parent scale?


PS. I can drive any mode easily because I know their construction and I can find any interval fairly quickly but that's different. I still think in terms of the chord I'm playing (it could be a super imposed chord).

I guess my contention is that each mode is either dominant or major (minor keys aside). Locrian would be weighted the same way as my mixo scale.

Some people think dorian as their dominant sound scale, pat martino and others. Some use mixo as their dominant sound scale, Barry Harris. It probably affects the flavor of the language the player develops over time I guess. But not as much as one might think after reading modal concepts on the internet.

Like Christian said, it streamlines things this way. Better to have a huge vocab in one scale than a little in a lot of scales. This way you use substitute scales.

You can try to play dorian to mixo for a ii-V, but that's a big shift in thinking for a 4-3 suspension. However, mixo to major has to be a shift in thinking because we need to play that change. We are shifting what notes the weight is on

[joe2758]

On piano every key is a different fingering. So a pianist that doesn't use parent scale approach must learn 84 scales just for the major?

not sure about piano, i don't play it. but, i can play any mode on a piano without thinking of a key sig. That may be useless to a pianist-- not sure.

[christianm77]

not sure about piano, i don't play it. but, i can play any mode on a piano without thinking of a key sig. That may be useless to a pianist-- not sure.

Everything, all of this stuff, makes a lot more sense on the piano I would say.

You can also see how chord scales relate to the central key in standards and things....

[joe2758]

Everything, all of this stuff, makes a lot more sense on the piano I would say.

You can also see how chord scales relate to the central key in standards and things....

i agree, i was just meaning to address his question about fingerings--i don't know what real pianists do

[matt.guitarteacher]

Other instrumentalists think more in terms of absolute pitch. The piano may as well be a treble clef. My own irritation with how easy understanding music on the piano is - compared to guitar, even after decades - is what led me to really commit to learning Reg's fretboard organization.

It feels a lot more like sax or piano and references absolute pitch much more strongly.

[christianm77]

i agree, i was just meaning to address his question about fingerings--i don't know what real pianists do

I think the fingering thing for scales is actually pretty straightforward IIRC from that time I asked my piano flatmate, it's just applying the rules. Scales in octaves both hands are tricky cos one goes backwards as it were, but I think one handed scales are a fairly simple set of rules that are fairly clear regarding black notes and white notes and direction changes etc.....

I'm sure there are more advanced applications, but it struck me that the basic rules are the sort of thing that would become intuitive very quickly after a few months of consistent daily practice. Maybe someone with a bit more knowledge can expand/refute?

[onborrowedthyme]

This video was a load of help! I think an issue I had with my book was that it tried to describe modes by showing what modes used the notes in the key of C major. However the video showing the modes all on the same root note gave much more clarity!

Thanks.

And to update everyone else: I've not given up yet, this is evidently going to be a long and bumpy ride.... so I've booked a tutor.

[christianm77]

This video was a load of help! I think an issue I had with my book was that it tried to describe modes by showing what modes used the notes in the key of C major. However the video showing the modes all on the same root note gave much more clarity!

Thanks.

And to update everyone else: I've not given up yet, this is evidently going to be a long and bumpy ride.... so I've booked a tutor.

I'm so glad something on this thread was actually helpful lol

Booking a tutor is the best idea I think.

[matt.guitarteacher]

Another example.

G A B C D Eb F could be called G7b13. It is 5th mode melodic minor, aka mixolydian b6.

G Ab B C D Eb F could be called G7b9b13. This one is 5th mode harmonic minor, aka phrygian dominant.

Change one note. Instead of specifying the change, the naming goes from mixob6 to phryg. dom.

So, now, let's say you're reading a new tune. The chord is G7b9b13. Where is the need to learn that it's "phrygian dominant"? How does that make learning the material any easier? Sure, if you want to, you can do it in Greek and you end up at the same place as if you just went with chord symbols. Doing it with chord symbols isn't perfect for every situation, but I think it's a better way for the novice to graduate to intermediate.

OK. If you're playing major, do you KNOW that it's major while you're playing? Does the KNOWLEDGE of the "major" label slow you down in the process of playing something which you can otherwise play?

And if you can play major, do you then HAVE to think "major" in order to play it in the first place? Or is the label itself completely SEPARATE from your ability to play it?

This over-worrying about "other players" who "HAVE TO" think about the name of the mode in order to play is made-up worrying over nothing. I think it may seem confusing if you've never learned the labels, but it's not. Honestly, there's no need to learn them if you don't want to learn them, but this way of talking about what OTHER players are experiencing and thinking is just completely off in my opinion.

Folks on other non-jazz forums talk the same way about knowing note names etc. As if the mere knowledge of the note names will somehow cramp your creativity or something.

[ragman1]

onborrowedthyme -

That video was good. It was well presented and the guy was cool, etc. But he was basically playing rock. Jazz is somewhat different.

A tune like 'So What' (sorry to go back to it) does the same sort of thing as the video but in a jazz style, improvising over just two chords, Dm and Ebm. And there are other modal tunes like that.

But modes are also used all the time in non-modal tunes. For example, a simple 2-5-1 in C is usually played textbook-style with D dorian, G mixolydian and C ionian, i.e. all C major scale.

It can, however, be spiced up by using D melodic minor, G altered (7th mode of Ab melodic minor) and C lydian (4th mode of G major) - in other words, by using modes.

Also, where you get a non-diatonic chord in a progression, like Am7 - Eb7 - Dm7/G7 - CM7, the question arises as to what to do with that Eb7. One might expect to play Eb mixolydian (Ab major) over it but it's not normally done that way. The tune hasn't actually modulated into Ab so it has to be treated differently. So they use Eb lydian dominant (4th mode of Bb melodic minor).

If the odd chord out were, say, an AbM7, as in Am7 - AbM7 - Dm7/G7 - CM7, again the tune hasn't gone into Ab so the AbM7 would be played with Ab lydian (4th mode of Eb major)... and so on. Non-diatonic chords are often played lydian.

There are also tunes like 'Naima' by Coltrane. There the chords are really, really complex. Not only are they awkward in themselves but it's further complicated by the use of pedal tones unrelated to the chord, like BM7/Bb and GM7#5/Eb. So one has to understand how to cope with all that.

These are the complications that arise. I know this is probably taking you well away from where you are (if you'll forgive me) but it's wise to be aware of this. It's not just a question of improvising away in one mode on a set chord or two.

Hope you don't mind all that (I'm not trying to show off) but the point is that jazz tunes also use modes if an improvisation is to be effective.

But all in good time... don't be frightened off :-)

[ragman1]

If you want to check out 'So What', here's a transcription of the original Miles & Co's version. They're mostly using dorian plus a bit of melodic minor, aeolian and phrygian to spice it up. But the style is different and they double up the notes a lot. If it interests.

[christianm77]

Thanks for posting.... Bar 54 is a case in point about the Melodic Minor being in a sense the ascending form of the Dorian mode, he's heading to the D of course so it doesn't really count. When ever Miles emphasises the seventh it's C, esp. in the second chorus where he goes from outlining the basic chord to playing on the upper extensions. Ah - structure and poise....

BTW Who has the musical wherewithall to write out the whole track but writes that note as a D flat? Bizarre. Its C#.

[ragman1]

I just listen to it :-)

[Tal_175]

You can try to play dorian to mixo for a ii-V, but that's a big shift in thinking for a 4-3 suspension. However, mixo to major has to be a shift in thinking because we need to play that change. We are shifting what notes the weight is on

I have to admit I don't get the "cool guys don't play the ii-V in their solos" attitude (ie they think dorian or dominant over ii-V). It seems very arbitrary to me. 4-3 suspension is not nothing. ii going to V is a functional progression, subdominant to dominant. It's more significant than I going to vi, which is just a prolongation of the same function, yet that's perfectly outline-able change. Go figure.

Now, I know Barry Harris says to play the dominant over ii-V. His reasoning is, it was impossible for Charlie Parker to have thought ii-V and play the lines that he did. One can deduce from his lines that he was not playing ii-V. Barry Harris is teaching Charlie Parker and Bud Powell's music, so in that context it makes sense. But if you're not only playing pure bebop, that stylistic rule shouldn't apply.
Is there an inherent musical reason to dis 4-3? Bach didn't dis 4-3.
My outrageously speculative reason for why Bird and his gang didn't play it is because may be they grew up learning music that was before all V's were converted to ii-V's.

[mr. beaumont]

It's not so much "don't play ii V" as it is, "don't chase every change."

[KirkP]

I tend to think of the ii7 as V7sus4, especially if it’s voiced where that’s the only note that moves between the chords. I like the V7sus4 to V7 sound, but I find it tiresome when a chart insists on always preceding the V by ii. If I’m writing a chart for myself I’ll often write V through both chords. I’d rather decide whether to play ii on the spot.

[Tal_175]

It's not so much "don't play ii V" as it is, "don't chase every change."

I don't know. I'm under the impression than there is a stronger doofus factor in outlining ii-V's than any other change. Maybe I'm projecting.

[Tal_175]

I tend to think of the ii7 as V7sus4, especially if it’s voiced where that’s the only note that moves between the chords. I like the V7sus4 to V7 sound, but I find it tiresome when a chart insists on always preceding the V by ii. If I’m writing a chart for myself I’ll often write V through both chords. I’d rather decide whether to play ii on the spot.

I get this in the case of a split bar ii-V. But thinking two bars of V instead of a bar of ii and a bar of V seems a bit fanatical to me. Especially if V is going to I which most (non-split) ii-V's do.

[joe2758]

sorry, but where is the "cool guys don't play ii-V'" or dissing playing a 4-3 suspension?

[Tal_175]

sorry, but where is the "cool guys don't play ii-V'" or dissing playing a 4-3 suspension?

Sorry, I wasn't attributing this to you. I was referring to the general "bebop players think dominant over ii-V and more modern players like Pat Martino, Emily Remler et al. think dorian minor over ii-V" observation.
I was under the impression that you are on the Dominant over ii-V camp. In fact, the section I quoted seemed like you were making a case for it. Did I misunderstand? I was jokingly exaggerating this position, but wasn't focusing on you personally. It's something that I'm trying to understand. What's special about 4-3 that it seems to get lumped into one scale as opposed be seen as a change?

[joe2758]

looking at the chord tones/ target tones:

D-F-A-C
G-B-D-F

The B in G mixo has to be the target right? if there is to be an audible distinction. The "weight" is on the same notes aside from that B. You can approach the B from A, sure, but that C down to B is exponentially stronger.

So, it is easier to me to just think mixolydian and throw in a 4-3 sus/move/lick if I want to suggest that harmonic movement. Everything else is the same.

Looking at it this way, I can see why using dorian or using mixo only could get slightly different sounds. using mixo only you can get moments of leaning on a B or G over Dmin, where as if you use dorian only you can have moments of leaning on an A or C over G7

I wonder if that has part to do with difference between the players you said? I never thought about it. interesting.

[ragman1]

sorry, but where is the "cool guys don't play ii-V'" or dissing playing a 4-3 suspension?

Having heard all that, I tried only playing V for a ii-V and it doesn't really work for me. I think it leaves out a lot of possibilities.

Not only that but, if one's tempted to go for an alt sound over the ii (before getting to the V), it doesn't sound that good.

[joe2758]

Not only that but, if one's tempted to go for an alt sound over the ii (before getting to the V), it doesn't sound that good.

it can! I'll find an example

[joe2758]

here this is good:

all my points are old school and I don't play or study anything modern

[rpjazzguitar]

Do I play a C over a G7 or a B over a Dm? Sure, depending on the melody I'm trying to play.

When I learned the basics years ago, it was chord tones and underlying key.

So I'd be aware of the C to B movement - and the roots - but I'd be thinking "notes from the key of C will be inside".