Modes vs. Major scale

[yairhol]

Hello,
This is my first post here although I've been surfing this amazing forum from time to time and trying to absorb the material.
I'm at a stage where I'm learning the 5 major scale patterns all over the neck as Jimmy Bruno and Carl Verheyen teach. I understand modes but don't understand fully what you gain from them as opposed to thinking in a major scale form. For example, some educators (in books and videos) will talk about a "ii" "V" "I" as simply playing the major scale of the "I". Others will talk about playing the Dorian on the "ii", Mixolydian on the "V" and Ionian on the "I". But... (and this is what I don't understand), these are exactly the same notes as the just playing the major scale so what do you gain by thinking in modes as opposed to just playing the major scale?
Thank you.

[fumblefingers]

the same notes, but perhaps not the same note choices.

the II-V-I progression may not give you much time to explore modal expressions as much as harmonic ones. so the next question for you to ponder might be:

what sounds interesting to play while the II chord is sounding? (same for the V and I)



do you have some improv books or other materials that help you with II-V-I ideas?

[yairhol]

The problem for me is not coming up with lines but the concept of modes vs playing the major scale.
As I understand, the mode of the moment is set the instant a chord is played in the background and we are playing the notes of the major scale of the "I" (context is everything). So if an Am7 is the "ii" chord and it is played in a ii V I progression, then as soon as I play the G major scale over it, I get Dorian whether I like it or not. When I continue playing the G major scale over the "V" chord I'm playing Mixolydian, whether I like it or not and the same goes with Ionian over the "I" chord. So what is the benefit in modes? This is confusing for me.

[Bambus123]

Hi yairhol

Im learning from Bruno, and I had the same question as you (if I understood you correctly).

Bruno is teaching the "white notes on the piano" on the guitar neck with 5 sets of fingerings that never go out of order (starting with the C major scale or pitch collection as he prefers to call it) and asks you to learn the five fingerings inn all 12 keys(pitch collections), then starts to explore so called outside notes (outside the scale/pitch collections) which could be compared to modes (but Bruno refuses to use that word)

I am currently working on Satin Doll and when the chord changes from the key of C to the key of D in the first part, I just change the "pitch collection" or fingering accordingly.

So if I were to play the first bars in Dm7-G7 (which is a ii-V-I in the key of C) I play the C scale or C pitch collection, then it changes to Em7-A7 (which is a ii-V-I in the key of D) then I play the D pitch collection.

Its not easy in the beginning, but when you start to memorize those fingerings and change them when the keys changes you will hear it clearly. I use iRealb with 12 sets of ii-V-I from C to G in the circle of fifths to practice the different pitch collections/scales.

I dont think in modes, but in fingerings/pitch collections when I play. The modes confused me as well in the beginning, but when I saw a video with Morten Faerestrand it all became clear to me:

Here is what I wrote in another thread:

The light went on for me when I watched Morten Faerestrands video about the Modes-the complete walkthrough, of the seven modes. Www.mortenslessons.com

I will try to recap what he said, but please dont kill me if I have misunderstood:
He talks about the confusion regarding the 7 modes, and thinks the reason this happens is caused by the way the modes often is explained, which is somehow...confusing.

The traditional way the modes are explained is that you take for instance the C major scale and uses the notes from the C major scale. If you start on the D-note, then you have the D Dorian scale, which is true, but leads to a lot of confusion because it doesnt say anything about what the Dorian scale actually is.

And the second reason is that if you play in the key of C and then wants to play the D Dorian scale starting on the D note, its still the same scale and the same notes as the C major scale. That is not D Dorian, because you are still playing in the key of C major.

He then goes on explaining what are the charachteristics about the different modes, which are three major scales and four minor scales, where the most important difference is the third note, which is lowered a half step in all the 4 minor scales.

If you use numbers to form a pattern of the major scale the pattern would be 1-2-3-4-5-6-7 and then 8 if you count from C to C. He explains that all numbers in a scale form like this are related to the major scale, so when a note is lowered or raised in a scale it is always compared to what it would be in the major scale.

So if you have a raised fourth (note number 4 raised a half step) in a scale that means it would be a raised forth note compared to what it would be in the major scale. So every scale is always compared to what it would be in the major scale.

He starts by using a single C note as a backing track playing a C major (ionian) scale first. 1234567

Then how it sounds when the 4th note is raised a half step - #4 (Lydian) over a C note backing track, emphasizing the raised 4th note. Lydian is a major scale with a raised 4th note. 123#4567

Then how it sounds when the 7th note is lowered a half step -b7 (Mixolydian) over a C note backing track, emphasizing the lowered 7th note. Mixolydian is a major scale with a lowered 7th note. 123456b7

And goes on with the 4 remaining minor modes in C, which clearly made me hear how different the modes sounded when played over a C backing track.

12b3456b7 - Dorian
12b345b6b7 - Aeolian
1b2b345b6b7 - Phrygian
1b2b34b5b6b7 - Locrian

This might not be what the op asked for, but it certainly made me understand the 7 modes and how they relates to the major scale

Hope this made some sense

[yairhol]

Thanks Bambus123. What you are saying is known as the parallel approach to teaching modes. I first encountered this in the Frank Gambale video "Modes No More Mystery". But it is different than what I asked because in my question I am staying in the same major key. My ii V I are all diatonic to the G major scale. What you are referring to is key changes because C Lydian is in the G major scale whereas C Ionian is in the C major scale, and C mixolydian is in the F major scale etc.
In a Carl Verheyen video he talks about the ii V I in the key of G. He talks about playing the A Dorian over the ii, The D Mixolydian over the V and G Ionian over the I. So I'm thinking, that's exactly the G major scale all the way through so why would he use the terms Dorian, Mixolydian and Ionian? Why not say play the G major scale. Playing the G major scale would automatically have me play A Dorian when the ii chord is heard, the D Mixolydian when the V chord is played and G Ionian when the I chord is played.
Still confused...

[Bambus123]

Ok, I see

I think I am starting to understand what you mean. And that is also something I have wondered about myself, but found a kind if answer.

I think it was Chuck Loeb who called it "center of gravity". He explained it like the key notes of the chords was the "gravity center"and the other notes in that scale key would "gravitate" towards the key note.

So if you played a song i the key of G you would use the G major scale starting and ending on a G note, which is the following steps 1234567 and 8, but over the ii chord you would start and end the scale on the A note instead, still using the G scale, but emphasize the key notes of the actual chord. This would be 12b3456b7 and 8 if you relate the scale to A minor.

This would be called the A Dorian, because the notes in that G scale now "gravitates" to the A minor chord for a while, and since the key note of that chord is A, the scale no longer relates to the "main" key of G. it is called A Dorian since the 3rd and 7th note is flattened if you started the scale from the A note instead of G.

I agree that using the modal terms is confusing especially when not playing them in parallel modes as you pointed out in the above post. Therefore I like Brunos approach, you can call it what you like, but ut is still the same notes

Dont know if this made it any clearer, but its how far I can try to explain it

[yairhol]

Bambus123, so what you're saying is this:
A Dorian = G Major scale gravitating to an A note.
B Phrygian = G Major scale gravitating to a B note.
etc.
correct?

[soto]

If I understood the question, the way I see it is the notes are the same but their roles change, so the notes you will be spending most of your time on will change and different notes will be "lighting up" for your fingers. I think it is easier to reuse your melodic patterns when you think of them as different scales as opposed to shifting an idea around within the same scale. Another way to look at it is that the pentatonics supporting each mode are different, so if you limit yourself to pentatonics + chromatics you'll be forced to change scales (unless you're doing something super cool of course)

[matt.guitarteacher]

Hi, yairhol, and welcome.

This is a very common question, and one that probably justifies some kind of sticky or place in a FAQ, as it always turns into a potentially confusing (for beginners) conversation.

Many people use the term "mode(s)" to describe note collections or scale patterns, especially outside of jazz. It may also be generally used to describe the way notes (chord tones) are emphasized within the note collections.

Just so you know, real jazzers (which I ain't) don't like this use of the terms "mode(s)" or "modal". Modal jazz is it's own thing and is a different approach than just playing in a major key.

In your example, over a ii V I, they would tend to say that you're just playing major and not differentiate for each chord. Within the context of major, you can emphasize chord tones etc. There is a good reason players/teachers like Bruno sometimes stay clear of calling things modes. It's often a point of confusion and even contention among jazzers.

I would do a couple things:
1. think major over a ii V I
2. Do some research on "modal jazz" if you just have to know.

And welcome to the forum!

[MarkRhodes]

A person can go a long way with the major scale and work off of it in various ways. Jimmy Bruno seems to do this. Carol Kaye does this. Robert Conti does this.

However, for starters, not everything in jazz is ii-V-I in a major key. There are blues changes, such as I7,IV7, V7, which are not simply a major key. There are cycles of dominant 7th chords in the rhythm changes (D7, G7, C7, F7) and there are standards such as "All The Things You Are" which change keys several times.

And there are common practices, such as using Ab Jazz Minor over a G7 chord that will resolve to C (and Db Jazz Minor over a G7 that is going anywhere else but some form of C chord). You can do that thinking in terms of the major scale.

Carol Kaye says on one of her books/CDs that "Abminor9 IS G7" and also "Ab diminished is the same thing as G7b9," so you can go that way if you like, but as there is no diminished chord in a major scale, you're already going beyond it, but one can do this without thinking in terms of modes. (One can just think that, say, Ab diminished works over G7, and B diminished and D diminished and F diminished are the same thing as Ab diminished, so you can play F diminished over G7, or a B diminished over a G7 or a D diminished over G7. Some people find that easier than thinking in modes but others actually find that more confusing.)

Then there are the b5 (aka tritone) subs, such as Db for G. One can use the chord and its b5 too, going from G to Db back to G back to Db and resolving when necessary. In a way this is staying within major scale thinking, but G and Db are not from the same major scale, so it's not simply playing the major scale...

Then there are augmented (whole tone) runs and chord moves. Some people see / hear these as basic variations on a key or major scale, but they are a little more involved than that.

In a way, what can do with (or thinking primarily in terms of) the major scale is endless, and that's a lot more than just playing C,D,E,F,G,A,B,C in the key of C...

[Takemitsu]

I find modes useful only when you dont think about the parent scale (play D dorian without thinking C major) then you have access to a wide range of sounds (new pitch collection). But when you use the "just think of the parent scale" idea you lose all functions or what the note means in relation to the fundamental. I agree its very informative to know where it comes from and in domes cases it may sound good but I feel on the long run you lose most of the music by skipping over functions. Ted Greene for example is (was) a big advocate of not using the "parent" trick.

[Stuart Elliott]

D Dorian, G Mixolydian, and C Ionian are all modes that have the notes of C Major. But there are differences.

It's a little like the words "stop" and "pots." Same letters but different order.

Modes differ in the notes they emphasize from the parent chord and the notes that should be used rarely or only in passing. For example, for a C Major chord, the fourth, in this case, F is an "avoid" note that should only be used in passing. Over the Dm7 chord, use the Dorian mode, the F is a third and would be an emphasis note. The "avoid" note in Dorian is the sixth of Dm7 or B, which is an emphasis note for CM7 and G7 (Ionian and Mixolydian modes. For G7, the mixolydian mode is the one to use and the avoid note is the fourth or C, which is an emphasis note for both CM7 (Ionian) and Dm7.

I hope that clarifies things.

Now to add a little confusion. It is common to see m6 chords in jazz (eg. Dm6). In that case, they are functioning sometimes as a Im or minor tonic chord or more commonly as an inversion of a half-diminished chord which is a rootless voicing of a V7 chord.

[mr. beaumont]

A person can go a long way with the major scale and work off of it in various ways.

All the way to 1959, or so

[Cunamara]

OK, way too complicated answers.

The modes are simply a way of relating your playing to the chords. They are a navigation tool. IMHO they are an overrated tool that tend to obfuscate playing actual jazz. Your playing has to relate somehow to the underlying harmony and knowing your arpeggios is IMHO a more direct way to accomplish this, including the basic triads, tetrads, tensions (b5, #5, b9, #9, etc.) and extensions (9, 11, 13).

[mr. beaumont]

Depends on the jazz you're playing...sometimes the simple way to think in the practice room is a scale.

Your comment about understanding the underlying harmony is spot on.

[fumblefingers]

i will try to be straightforward this time, even though you already know the answer.

Key of G.
The Ionian Mode is played by starting the G Major scale on G and ending on G (Ionian is the same as major scale)
The Dorian Mode is played by starting the G Major scale on A and ending on A
The Mixolydian Mode is played by starting the G Major scale on D and ending on D

If you want to play scales/modes up and down against chords, it will sound more logical this way than starting on G for the II and V chords. That's it. Try it both ways to hear the difference.


That said, playing scales up and down is insufficient for making music. Your improvised "melodies" need to be more interesting than that.

For simplicity's' sake some people like to broadly classify jazz songs as being either "tonal" or "modal", and this was alluded to above. If you're playing a standard or straight-ahead type of tune with a lot of II-Vs in it you're probably playing "tonal" jazz. In that instance the harmonic rhythm may be dense as opposed to sparse - meaning you may have more chords to play in a given measure or group of measures than you would when playing a modal tune, or even a simple blues. You may have frequent direct modulation (a series of II-Vs traversing through multiple "key centers" for example). In this instance you will not likely be able to "stretch out" with any single key/scale/mode. The way to make the music sound logical is to reflect the chords flying by, at least to a degree. This is why arpeggiation is frequently recommended as a starting skill set for developing the ability to play logical sounding jazz lines against fast moving chord progressions.

On the other hand, with modal tunes chords are held/sounded longer. One can go beyond the constraints of a strong focus on spelling out the chord with their improvised lines and can explore more scalar, motivic and (hopefully) lyrical ideas.

All of the above being highly generalized and oversimplified, of course.

[docbop]

For simplicity's' sake some people like to broadly classify jazz songs as either being "tonal" or "modal", and this was alluded to above.

Yes, people seems to think modal Jazz and modes means the same thing and they don't. The Modal Jazz that was popular on the West Coast was about changing the focus of composition and improv. The 40's Bebop focus was on lots of chord changes and making those changes in your improv. The 50's players wanted to focus on the melody not chords so they started Modal composition with few chords and soloist focused on melody of their lines.

The focus on modes came more from the CST that started coming out of Berklee. Then grew into the magic bullet of the Fusion and Shredders. Trouble was/is too many think knowing/playing modes is answer to making changes. As in my favorite Bergonzi quote goes.... Playing the right scale (or mode) will get you in the ballpark, but you're still not on base.

So you still have to know the essential tones and understand the color tones to create your lines.

[bako]

In my opinion, there is value to be found in both derivative and parallel viewpoints of modes/scales.

To better grasp a derivative viewpoint, improvise melodies with a G major scale against the following pedal tones:

G, A, B, C, D, E, F#

To better grasp a parallel viewpoint, improvise melodies from the following major scales against a G pedal tone:

G, F, Eb, D, C, Bb, Ab

[yairhol]

Did I get an answer to my question? I'm not sure.
I'm sticking with: It's the same thing as playing the G major scale gravitating to A (on the ii), then to D (on the V) and to C (on I).
I got lost in the other explanations.
But thank you everybody for the answers.

[mr. beaumont]

Yeah, it's always seemed to me there's real value in understanding derivative modes for a visualization/fingering pov, but in order to hear them correctly it's important to hear them as parallel modes...

If you have books that ACTUALLY say to use dorian, mixolydian, and ionian over a ii V I, burn them.

[Takemitsu]

If you have books that ACTUALLY say to use dorian, mixolydian, and ionian over a ii V I, burn them.

It will help global warming and make Canada a better place to live

[mr. beaumont]

Canada could get BETTER?

[Reg]

Just for some general reference... Tonal generally implies one tonal center... Key of C... the most important note is C, everything relates to that C. There are other notes with in say... that C maj scale that when used or combined with other notes have common practice... they have a system of organization that they imply when used. So when we say Modal... we're defining which notes are the notes that will define that organization.

Most music works within what we call Maj/Min functional Harmony... a set of guidelines and organization for use of notes and combinations of notes, chords or whatever. Even if we choose to not follow the basic guidelines and organization... it's still the basic reference... we just change how the relationship we create develop.

All these guidelines are based on Ionial... again that Cmaj scale collection of notes and guidelines.

When we say mode or modal we're changing the guidelines, which notes are going to create the guidelines and organization for making music... again the reference.
I need to go to gig... I have lots of earlier post when more details etc...

Positions for playing scales are not modes... they're a slang term we as guitar players like to use to describe starting scales on different degrees... it works, but generally still only has a Ionian modal reference.

[Takemitsu]

Canada could get BETTER?

Dont mess with us, remember the Baldwins...

[pkirk]

If you have books that ACTUALLY say to use dorian, mixolydian, and ionian over a ii V I, burn them.

yairhol

I think jeff's comment here is as close to a short answer to your question as you'll find.

I'll throw in my long winded attempt to answer your question.

Lets' assume that you are asking about *improvising single note lines in a bebop-derived style over
standards from the great american songbook*, which is what 99% of people who are starting out in jazz
want to get good at first. (Of course if you really meant something completely different e.g., trying to understand what Holdsworth is doing on Atavachron then maybe modes are relevant (or maybe not), and nothing I say below applies)

The first thing you realize when you start down this path is that you need to address the harmony, and shortly after you realize it is too hard at tempo, not to mention unmusical, to think chord-by-chord ("here's a chord, what notes can I play on it, oh, no, its too late, I missed it")

So you might take the approach: clump a few chord together and look for pitch collections that work over all the chords in that collection. So in your example, the notes of the Gmaj scale work over Ami D7 Gmaj. The trouble with this is that when you do this is doesn't sound anything like Bird/Miles/Rollins/Wes/etc. Instead it sounds like your lines aren't going anywhere, even though all the pitches might be "correct".

The second approach is to instead of thinking of chord/scales you might instead think of common progressions, and you quickly learn that the II-V-I progression is the most common snippet of harmony in standards, so that you conclude that if you can navigate II-V-Is you will be in a good position to improvise over many tunes. This is true, and almost everybody gets this. I'll assume you have made it this far in your playing.

However, what goes wrong next is that the mistake is made about how to learn to improvise over IIVI *in jazz*.


Often what happens is people come from rock, where the harmony never changes, or changes infrequently, or changes in ways that doesn't follow the formulae that standards do. In rock, (and in some streams in jazz, hence "modal jazz") it often makes sense to use interesting scales, and you can generate interesting scales by thinking modally, e.g. on an Amin there are many modes of the major, or melodic minor, or harmonic minor (parent) scales that make for useful pitch collections to improvise over a static Amin harmony.

But this is just *not* the way one thinks when improvising over standards in the bebop tradition, and attempts to translate the rock approach gets you to silly suggestions like "dorian on the II, mixolydian on the V, ionian on the I", which, as you've noticed, is equivalent to saying "ionian on all three".

There are lots of suggestions upstream and everywhere on this forum on what to do if you want to play II-V-I in jazz. More sensible approaches include emphasize chord tones, use arpeggios, enclosures, tritone subs on the V, etc. But probably the most direct thing to start with is get a book that has a list of II-V-I licks of clifford brown, Wes, Parker, etc, (e.g. the David Baker books) and commit 20 of them to memory in every key. Save the "theory" for analyzing these after you know them, then you'll be able to produce your own.