KVR :: View topic - A very basic question about modal transposition

KVR :: Music Theory » A very basic question about modal transposition [View Original Topic]
There are 48 posts in this topic.

Krakatau - Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:17 am

As a very basic question :

- when you say about a scale "B Locrian" for instance, does it mean in fact "the Locrian mode or C major" ...or not ?

manducator - Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:53 am

Here you can see a scheme of intervals for all modal scales:

http://www.jacmuse.com/melodic%20resources/newpage2a.htm

B Locrian, means that you take the note B as first note and count the others from there.

So for B locrian, it means that the second note is a half step up, that would be C, and so on.

Krakatau - Thu Feb 14, 2013 3:15 am

Thank for the detailed answer,

As far as i can see it only concerns major/relative minor scales rather than melodic minor or harmonic minor ones...

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:15 am

Krakatau wrote:

As a very basic question :

- when you say about a scale "B Locrian" for instance, does it mean in fact "the Locrian mode or C major" ...or not ?

No. C major's tonic is C. B Locrian's tonic is B. You can say 'Locrian is the seventh mode of Ionian/major', but you can equally say 'major/Ionian is the second mode of Locrian'. The modes coincidental to each other should not be confused for one another.

you can be using the seven notes we're calling 'major', 'Ionian', outside of the meaning of 'major' in a certain regard, 'major' suggests in a stricter sense harmonic usage. At any rate, if you're in C major, ie., you've a solid tonic C with the seven white keys, the term 'Locrian', or any modal name is just a confusion of two things that aren't the same, you've obliterated the meaning.

Locrian is the most striking example of the difference of harmonic usage v. modal usage. You have so much as a triad on the tonic note, the convention of harmonic function tends to make us believe it needs resolution, eg., B diminished to C. The reason for eg., Locrian is its identity/character, the thing we notice about it is that flat fifth. Some seem to take the fact of constructing 7 trie on major or minor scales as something desirable to do with the modes concidental with major , but there are problems that arise such as that we find at once with Locrian, there really are not necessarily seven useful chords to apply if you want modal character intact. Particularly the occurrence of B/F has to be considered, does it want to turn into C major...

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:29 am

The given link has a very biased and erroneous information about modes, about tonality, and seems like a very personal working pespective from the author.
The way modes are referred today is more like as "working scales" within the tonal setting of intervals - so, they are not treated as modes, at all, since their own "way of being" is not used, but just their peculiar succession of intervals, for colouring purposes.
That said, the modes always have a beginning note, and use the natural notes. The mentioned "locrian" (these names are all wrong, and should not used when we are talking about modes as a system, although widespread) is the B mode, so, you have the mode in it's natural form if you play a succession of notes from B to B (bear in mind that "in illo tempore" modes were never used like that).
Regarding the use of modes as "scales" within the tonal environment, you can use that same mode in whatever transposition you want, to fit the particular tonality, as long as you use the same interval relationship (half tone, tone, tone, tone, half tone, etc).
For more information about modes used in thae perspective you seem to be interested on, you may refer to: http://musictheoryblog.blogspot.pt/2007/01/modes-of-major-scale.html or http://docs.solfege.org/3.21/C/scales/maj.html
For the historical view of the modal system, you may read:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_(music) or http://www.beaufort.demon.co.uk/modes.htm or http://www.cartage.org.lb/en/themes/arts/music/vocalmusic/liturgical/churchmodes.htm

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:36 am

fmr wrote:

Within the use of modes as "scales" within the tonal environment, you can use that same mode in whatever transposition you want, to fit the particular tonality, as long as you use the same interval relaionship

'the use of modes within the tonal environment' is nonsense, there is no such thing, there is no use. If you're IN C MAJOR, there is no other mode. There is no point to the term, you're uselessly renaming C major and confusing the issue. The 'interval relationship' belongs with the tonic in the first place, the relationships cannot be the same, that's meaningless lingo. The character of these modes does not exist in major. If you want D Dorian, the tonic is D. D is not C. Et cetera.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:41 am

jancivil wrote:

fmr wrote:

'the use of modes within the tonal environment' is nonsense. If you're IN C MAJOR, there is no other mode. There is no point to the term, you're uselessly renaming C major and confusing the issue.

I Am not. It's the misconcepted common practice I am referring about. As I said, modal system is a system as is tonal system, with it's own rules, which are particular to each mode (BTW - locrian never existed as a mode, B mode is te plagal mode of E mode, or second mode, or Deuterus, and sometimes also called HypoPhrygian). It's the use of modes as "scales" with names given that creates the nonsense you are talking about. Read the links I gave.

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:48 am

I have to read other material to interpret the actual sentence you provided? I have no interest whatsoever in the link. Whoever said, then, 'the use of modes within tonality' has provided us with nonsense.

Locrian in currency today is an artifice provided by the method of deriving the other modes, which do have some basis historically. People use it, it's something encountered as such. "Plagal of E" is not current, the theory is of historical/academic interest, for instance modal counterpoint rules. If one is required to sound just like this narrow practice period that would be useful I suppose.

I just want to be perfectly clear about the difference of modal vs harmonic usage, which is a fundamental confusion which crops up here with fair frequency.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:50 am

jancivil wrote:

The character of these modes does not exist in major. If you want D Dorian, the tonic is D. D is not C. Et cetera.

Several mistakes in the above statement:
1. Modes were always used in several transpositions, simply these were not notated becasuse in the middle ages there was no fixed pitch reference, hence there was no need to "rename" the notes.
2. Modes have no "tonic" - they have a finalis - which, in the B mode, is E, BTW.
3. The character of the modes indeed exist and is commented abundantly in the literature about them. invite you to make some research upon the subject.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:59 am

jancivil wrote:

There is no such thing as "nonsense" in music, IMO - you are being dogmatic and creating nonsense yourself.
And we are basically saying the same thing, so, I don't know exactly what's your point. A reality may very well exist within another reality, and actually they do. I don't know what's so shocking for you about "modes within tonality". As you pointed yourself, tonality is basically about harmony, while modes are basically about melody. You can create a modal melody, and harmonize it tonally (actually there are examples of that in some very popular songs). Would you say it changed from modal to tonal because of that?

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 4:59 am

there is no mistake. You're referring to a practice that is just academic today. and trying to pull me into a pissing contest on ancient terminology.

The character of D Dorian means D is the tonic, today.

I'd invite you to stop dancing around your own whopping error and clouding the issue. The modal counterpoint practice resulted in the hegemony of Major. The use the whole point of musica ficta, you know.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:07 am

jancivil wrote:

"Plagal of E" is not current, the theory is of historical/academic interest, for instance modal counterpoint rules. If one is required to sound just like this narrow practice period that would be useful I suppose.

That "narrow practice period" lasted for about 400-500 years Wink

And although the designation of "plagal of E" may not be current, it has the advantage of being correct in the modal system context. Locrian (as well as Ionian), OTOH has no reference, historical or musical. It's just a misconcept that was born lately in the XIX century of early XX century, derived from some middle-age theoreticians. It's the same as saying they are the base of the modern Major and minor modes. The minor mode is directly derived from the D mode, while the major mode is derived from the F mode or the G mode (all by means of the alterations systematically made during the transition period).

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:08 am

fmr wrote:

There is no such thing as "nonsense" in music

what utter bullshit. The term Dorian or any of the 'ecclesiastical modes' confuses the issue in major. There is nonsense IN LANGUAGE; you're perpetuating bullshit via language now that you've been caught promoting nonsense, 'the use of modes in the tonal environment', resorting to a narrow topic to carry meanings out of its narrow focus. You're trying to pull off 'tonal environment' in talk of modal counterpoint? Bullshit.

there is no usage of modes in the tonal environment in modern terms.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:10 am

jancivil wrote:

there is no mistake. You're referring to a practice that is just academic today. and trying to pull me into a pissing contest on ancient terminology.

It doesn't matter how ancient it is - it's the correct terminology. The right is right and the wrong is wrong, no matter how old each one is. It was you who brough the subject to the table, and you are WRONG, so take it.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:12 am

jancivil wrote:

there is no usage of modes in the tonal environment in modern terms.

Bullshit. You have a very narrow perspective, it seems.

Lode_Runner - Thu Feb 14, 2013 5:22 am

You're fighting over music theory? Confused

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 6:36 am

in the old church music where that terminology, eg., 'plagal of _' applies, there was no 'tonal environment'; by the time there was a music that one could possibly call 'tonal', the musica ficta practice took the character tones and fit them into major (or minor) and so the terms simply do not resemble what a modern musician uses practically today. At one time in the old church music there was a hint of the modes, and more than one occurred as such in the music, but to call that 'tonal environment' is a terrible confusion of language. At this point the character of the modes was the opposite of the thrust, they were interested in the other thing which promoted their values better they believed.

I was put in honors curriculae at CCM, including history and we had the most pedantic professor, deeply interested in this period, we were immersed in it month after month and had to write essay answers to tests... I'm familar with the facts and the wrong person to get over on here, do not assume people that disagree with you are ignorant.

if you want to demonstrate how modal usage works in 'the tonal environment' in modern terms, feel free. In fact, if you want to demonstrate it in the ancient church usage, feel free.

My interest here is STRICTLY in clarifying a confusion of terms and you're muddying the waters with pointless academic lingo trying to get over.

NB: the closed mind argument is fallacious, I don't have to be open to falsities and nonsense.

jancivil - Thu Feb 14, 2013 6:59 am

Concretely: the nominative F lydian in the practice of "modal counterpoint". Once F is the tonic, the B that is the character tone as far am we're concerned today is corrected to Bb, 'musica ficta'. Before this practice, the nascence of tonal practice as we know it, your meaning 'tonal environment' is impossible.

the character of a mode is lost where there is [major/minor] *tonality*. The character of B in D dorian (or in F lydian, or the F in G mixolydian etc) is impossible if there is a C tonic. It's nonsense to call this statement a mistake. There is no dogma there, that's how the thing works.

JumpingJackFlash - Thu Feb 14, 2013 8:08 am

I don't really want to get involved in the argument here (I think both of you are correct from different perspectives), so I'll just refer to the OP:

Krakatau wrote:

- when you say about a scale "B Locrian" for instance, does it mean in fact "the Locrian mode or C major" ...or not ?

No. The major scale and the Locrian mode are two completely different things.

It just so happens that, if you take the notes of C major starting on B, you end up with the Locrian mode. This can be a useful way to work out the notes, but it's purely coincidental - there is no inherent musical relationship there.

Like the major scale, the Locrian mode can start on any note. If it starts on any note other than B, the notes will not be the same as the notes in C major.

My post on Scales, Modes and Chords might be useful.

Harry_HH - Thu Feb 14, 2013 9:22 am

JumpingJackFlash wrote:

It just so happens that, if you take the notes of C major starting on B, you end up with the Locrian mode. This can be a useful way to work out the notes, but it's purely coincidental - there is no inherent musical relationship there.

Like the major scale, the Locrian mode can start on any note. If it starts on any note other than B, the notes will not be the same as the notes in C major.

Yes - but the relation is always the same: e.g. when you play the Locrian mode starting from C (C Locrian), the scale follows the Des major etc.
I don't have any argument concerning your comment - my interest awoke from your statement "(the relation) is purely coincidental". I have never thought WHY there's that relation, i.e. the mathematical relation to the one major scale concerns all the 7 church modes. Is it really "purely coincidental"? (And does this realation have anything to do with the parallel key - e.g. C - Am /Ionian - Aelolian realations). If someone (maybe you) can elaborate this - I don't know if this question belongs more to the neurobiology and brain physilogy than to the music theory - or maybe to the philosophy, no matter it interest me. H.

JumpingJackFlash - Thu Feb 14, 2013 10:29 am

Harry_HH wrote:

my interest awoke from your statement "(the relation) is purely coincidental".

Perhaps I didn't explain myself very well with that comment. You're right that the mathematics is always the same; i.e. the notes of any Phrygian Mode will correspond to the notes of the major scale a major seventh below it, but the point is that this isn't really relevant to anything. - It's useful way to work out the notes, but there's nothing really significant musically, other than they happen to be the same notes.

So, in other words, B Lydian is not a part of C major, it just happens to share the same notes.

Harry_HH - Thu Feb 14, 2013 10:50 am

JumpingJackFlash wrote:

Harry_HH wrote:

my interest awoke from your statement "(the relation) is purely coincidental".

... but there's nothing really significant musically, other than they happen to be the same notes.
..., it just happens to share the same notes.

Thank you - I think I got you right in your first comment, you repeat here
those statements I'd just like someone to elaborate. Do they really "happen" to share same notes and in the realation "there's nothing really significant musically". I don't know, maybe there's someone who knows the theory more deeply and can say something more. H.

JumpingJackFlash - Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:04 am

Harry_HH wrote:

Do they really "happen" to share same notes and in the realation "there's nothing really significant musically".

Are you asking about the history of them (their origins etc.), or the difference between tonality and modality, or something else?

The Major Scale and the Ionian Mode share not only the same notes, but in the same order too. Yet still the two terms should not be used interchangeably.

Harry_HH - Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:18 am

JumpingJackFlash wrote:

Harry_HH wrote:

Do they really "happen" to share same notes and in the realation "there's nothing really significant musically".

No, I'm asking to elaborate your comment that the realation (mentioned) is "conincidental", i.e. what did you mean by that. I assume that you are talking about the musical /harmony theory point of view. This would be most interesting - if this means discussion about "difference between tonality and modality" ok, but I think these are just names and I'd like to go deeper behind these labels. Why there's mathematical constant relation between all modes to one major scale? H.

JumpingJackFlash - Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:35 am

Harry_HH wrote:

I'm asking to elaborate your comment that the realation (mentioned) is "conincidental", i.e. what did you mean by that.

I meant that the major scale, and any mode are completely different things. They may share the same notes, but that's as far as the relationship goes.

I'm not sure this is a good analogy, but go with me:
If I have 6 cubes, I can arrange them in a 3x3 square or a 3-2-1 triangle. Even though they are made up of the same building blocks, the resultant shapes are completely different.

Harry_HH wrote:

Why there's mathematical constant relation between all modes to one major scale? H.

This relates to the history and evolution of modes and scales.

The modes came first, though not quite the same as jazz musicians think of them today (as fmr has already mentioned).

Later, our major scale evolved from them. - That's obviously putting it as simply as possible - entire books have been written on this!

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 11:50 am

jancivil wrote:

if you want to demonstrate how modal usage works in 'the tonal environment' in modern terms, feel free. In fact, if you want to demonstrate it in the ancient church usage, feel free.

OK, this will be my last post directly addessed to you. It's sad that you felt the need to "pull out for the epaulettes" as we say around here (perhaps there's an expression in english that means the same, but I don't know it). I also received my honours during my student life, yet I don't call on them to justify anything.
Regarding your "challenge" above, I don't know what you mean with "tonal environment in modern terms". AFAIK, tonal environment is tonal environment, and there not ancient and modern terms for it. Either it is tonal or it isn't. Back on the subject, there are several examples in Bach chorales (chorales that he harmonized), and one that comes to mind is the well known one wrote by Hans Leo Hassler. You can read about it here: http://legacy.earlham.edu/~tobeyfo/musictheory/Book2/FFH2_CH4/4B_BachChorales2.html
It's a melody in the mode of E, yet he harmonized it tonally. And you have the well knows "Scarborough Fair" canticle. And you have, in more modern composers, modal passages in Mahler works, yet the harmony is always there (the dense, late romantic harmony, but still tonal). Read about it here: http://gradworks.umi.com/34/00/3400562.html
Regarding the "musica ficta" ("ficta" as in ficticious, in case there are confusion about the latin term - because they were singing differently from what was notated), it's a practice, not a system. That practice consisted in raising or lowering some notes in some chords (basically for creating leading tones or avoiding the augmented fourth between F and B). It was that practice that slowly evolved from modality into tonality. This was a gradual and slow process, that took around 200/300 years. So "musica ficta" wasn't tonal - it was modal, yet slowly evolved more and more into tonality as we know it - mainly by creating cadences and the V - i progression, which is the base of it. Tonality as we know it wasn't born out of nothing - it was the result of an evolutionary process, and that evolutionary process didn't stop - or will ever.
Now, I'll try to get into the debate in general, and stop arguing with you.

JumpingJackFlash - Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:03 pm

fmr wrote:

there are several examples in Bach chorales (chorales that he harmonized), and one that comes to mind is the well known one wrote by Hans Leo Hassler. You can read about it here: http://legacy.earlham.edu/~tobeyfo/musictheory/Book2/FFH2_CH4/4B_BachChorales2.html

Interestingly, this melody was harmonised in several different ways by Bach.
In Cantata 153 for example, the opening phrase modulates to D minor.

Well worth studying if you're interested in harmony.

(Sorry for going OT).

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:10 pm

Harry_HH wrote:

Allow me to add some points:
C Major, which was the departing point of this thread, is not a "scale". Sure it has seven notes, but those notes are not equal - there is an hyerarchy that's "built" in them. That hyerarchy is given by the "tonality". Tonality means there is a relationshipt of chords, where there are are some "poles". The main ones are the I degree and the V degree, with the IV degree a little behind.
You don't have tonality until you have the V - I progression. IV - I progression, for example, is ambiguous, because it can be seen also as a I - V progression (in another tonality, in this case would be F Major). But if you have IV - V - I, then the hyerarchy is even stronger. Tonality lives around this.
Therefore, you can play whatever sequence of notes (what we use to call "scales", and some also call "modes" when they start in notes other than the tonic), but the relationship, if there is a harmony present and that harmony is tonal, will always be the same, so, it will not sound as a mode, but just as notes of C Major - which is what they are. Therefore, even if you start your sequence in a B, that B will always be the leading tone - the one that leads to C.
In the mode of B, this relationship does not happen. B is no longer the leading tone of C. How do we achieve that? Precisely by conducting the melodies built in that mode so that they lead to a "dominant" (called in that system "repercusa") of G or A, and ending in the note of E (the finalis). You don't have to do this, of course, but if you don't, you will loose the B "mood" (the exact meaning of the word "mode").
So, as I told before, if you have the mode of B (whatever you call it, which is not not Locrian, at least in the theory I learned and follow), you never have a succession of notes from B to B, because it isn't meant to be that way, exactly as in a piece written in C Major, you will not end it with the chords of D minor and E minor, for example - because it would not make sense, although the notes may fit.

fmr - Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:11 pm

JumpingJackFlash wrote:

Bach chorales are like a bible Wink

Another one that's a good example is my beloved "Wer Nur Den Lieben Gott..." composed bt Georg Neumark. Bach wrote an entire cantata based on this chorale, composed several chorale preludes based on it, and harmonized it several times too, in many different ways.

Harry_HH - Thu Feb 14, 2013 12:21 pm

JumpingJackFlash wrote:

I was wishing maybe concentration of these books I have not (time to) read.
In stead of just mentioning historical connections I was hoping some words of the harmonic realations of the modes and major scales and how the musicians have experienced these harmonics during the centuries (not a minor challenge! . Wink

Major-minor /Ionian-Aelolian relation could be one starting point, Dorian/minor seventh/Blues scale maybe an other. H.

seacouch - Thu Feb 14, 2013 2:01 pm

fmr wrote:

jancivil wrote:

there is no usage of modes in the tonal environment in modern terms.

Bullshit. You have a very narrow perspective, it seems.

Krakatau - Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:16 am

i'm afraid it will take time for me to read and grab the goods in this topic ...

Phew

you're making me feel suddently old you kids...

Smile

Krakatau - Fri Feb 15, 2013 12:26 am

More on topic, does this notion of modal transposition being usually applies in practice in other chromatic scals like melodic, harmonic or arabic minor for instance ?

And if it is the case woulds anyone have some .mp3 examples to share ?

Smile

.. i'll be really happy !!!!!!!!!!!

fmr - Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:07 am

Krakatau wrote:

More on topic, does this notion of modal transposition being usually applies in practice in other chromatic scals like melodic, harmonic or arabic minor for instance ?

If you are talking about the different forms of the minor mode (natural, harmonic, melodic minor), it of course is used in any key. Actually, the minor mode is just ONE. Natural is the remainings of the old D mode with the B flat as was the common practice in the already mantioned "musica ficta", and without a leading tone (instead it uses what we call a sub-tonic). Harmonic is a natural consequence of the tonality, where the V chord needs to have the leading tone to fulfill it "dominant" function. Melodic is a form used many times by Bach (and because of that also called "Bach scale"), where it uses the vi degree also raised to avoid the melodic interval of augmented second while preserving the leading tone in ascending form, but uses both degres lowered when descending, since the leading tone is not necessary when going downwards.
These variants of the minor mode lead to a much greater variety of this mode, when compared to the major, including the possibility of using it in some ambiguous tonal environment, mixing tonality and modality, which gives it a very "colourful" and flexible nature.

Krakatau wrote:

And if it is the case woulds anyone have some .mp3 examples to share ?

Smile

.. i'll be really happy !!!!!!!!!!!

Don't know about the arabic (it's an exotic mode, like the gypsy), but you can find examples of natural minor passages and melodic minor passages in the works of Bach, notably in the Preludes and Fugues (Well Temepered Clavier), or the organ works, specially in the chorales, choral preludes and variations. You will find these pieces easily on line, both in notation form as well as played. Note that the pieces are not in "melodic minor" or "natural minor" (there are no such things), they are simply in a minor key. These are only variants of the minor mode, and can all coexist within the same piece.

Krakatau - Fri Feb 15, 2013 1:37 am

fmr wrote:

Don't know about the arabic (it's an exotic mode, like the gypsy), but you can find examples of natural minor passages and melodic minor passages in the works of Bach, notably in the Preludes and Fugues (Well Temepered Clavier), or the organ works, specially in the chorales. You will find these pieces easily on line, both in notation form as well as played. Note that the pieces are not in "melodic minor" or "natural minor" (there are no such things), they are simply in a minor key. These are only variants of the minor mode, and can all coexist within the same piece.

Well this is still a bit exceeding me yet, let me apologize

Embarassed

...i might recognize though, typical feel induced by a melodic minor scale through some passage of the nutcracker suite
(especially one that inspired a passage of the original Fantazia from Walt Disney, in where a very shy fish rising through hidden parts of the water)

Emotionnally this kind of musical passage shines of a complex but intense feelings of despair and exultation simultaneously...i'm hoping i might sensitize my 2 years old daughter to it and i think this cartoon is a real gem if you want to open the mind of your kids, including it numerous synesthetic approaches !!!

JumpingJackFlash - Fri Feb 15, 2013 2:55 pm

Harry_HH wrote:

I was wishing maybe concentration of these books I have not (time to) read.

Very well, here's something to be going on with (though obviously it's not intended to be exhaustive):

The Ecclesiastical Modes

Although the origins of the modal system go back to the ancient Greeks, the concept of mode as a function of scale and final originated in the 10th and 11th centuries, when an attempt was made to organise the ("Gregorian") chants of the Roman church according to the categories of ancient Greek music theory. This classification and categorisation was done, in part, to aid the memorisation of the melodies.

Specifically, antiphons (short syllabic chants) were compared with psalm tones (fixed melodies to which Psalm verses were sung) to see how the interval was filled in between their ending note (the finalis or "final", similar to what we now call the tonic) and the pitch corresponding to the psalm tone's reciting tone (the "tuba" or "tenor", similar to what we now call the dominant), which was normally a fifth above.

There are four ways a fifth can be filled in using the diatonic pitch set and its arrangement of tones (T) and semitones (S):

1) TSTT
e.g. the white notes descending from A to D

2) STTT
e.g. the white notes descending from B to E

3) TTTS
e.g. the white notes descending from C to F

4) TTST
e.g. the white notes descending from D to G

The ending notes, D,E,F,G were called "the four finals" and each was named according to their Greek ordinal numbers; protus, deuterus, tritus and tetrardus respectively. (It must be remembered however that the notes are only an abstract convenience and do not actually refer to literal pitches).

The range of the chants was also considered.
Those with the final at the bottom of their range (usually extending to an octave above it) were said to be "authentic", while those that extended lower than their finals so that the final occurred in the middle of their range (usually from a fourth below to a fifth above), were called "plagal".

Thus, each of the four finals governed two modes:
1. protus authenticus TSTTTST
2. protus plagalis TSTTSTT
3. deuterus authenticus STTTSTT
4. deuterus plagalis STTSTTT
5. tritus authenticus TTTSTTS
6. tritus plagalis TTSTTTS
7. tetrardus authenticus TTSTTST
8. tetrardus plagalis TSTTTST (NB: This has the same order of intervals as protus authenticus, but they have different finals).

Originally, these 8 modes were reckoned as 4 pairs (there is a fable that St. Ambrose made the authentic modes in the 4th century and St. Gregory made the plagal ones in the 6th century).

With authentic modes, the tuba/tenor lies a fifth above the final. However, where the tuba/tenor would fall on B, it was later changed to C.
With plagal modes, the tuba/tenor lies a third below that of its authentic counterpart.

Later theorists assigned the modes different names adopted from late Greek sources (although the Greek usage was different and the nomenclature was technically incorrect):

Range Dominant Final
1. Dorian D-D A D
2. Hypodorian A-A F D
3. Phrygian E-E C E
4. Hypophrygian B-B A E
5. Lydian F-F C F
6. Hypolydian C-C A F
7. Mixolydian G-G D G
8. Hypomixolydian D-D C G

The Greek prefix "hypo" is roughly synonymous with the word "plagal".

After this system had been perfected, it began to serve not only as a description of existing music, but as a prescriptive guide to new compositions. (Though modal theory was not extended to the analysis of polyphonic music until the late 15th century where the tenor line was usually used as the primary reference point).

Centuries later (around 1547), a humanist called Glareanus recognised 4 additional modes which came to be knows as Ionian and Aeolian, and their plagal forms. The Ionian mode has its final on C, and the Aeolian on A (the Locrian and Hypolocrian modes, with B as a final, barely existed).

Ionian and Aeolian modes were not necessary however and existed in practice long before they were given specific names. Singers often used a Bb to avoid the augmented fourth from F to B, even though this wasn't always specified in the notation. Since the 11th century, the use of the Lydian mode with a Bb provided the "Ionian" mode (which corresponds to what we now call "major"), and the Dorian mode with Bb provided the "Aeolian" mode (which corresponds to what we now call "minor").

With the rise of harmony, a leading-note became a necessity, and the "Ionian Mode" effectively became one of the favourite modes. - Both this and the "Aeolian mode" were more suitable for harmony.

In addition, more notes began to be chromatically altered. In the Mixolydian mode for example, the 7th was often sharpened to provide a leading-note (thus making it identical to the Ionian Mode). The ancient modes gradually disappeared until only the "major" and "minor" modes remained.

Between around 1450 and 1650, there was a gradual change from "modal" to "tonal" thinking, the latter based on triadic harmony and the diatonic circle of fifths.

fmr - Fri Feb 15, 2013 4:08 pm

Very good explanation. I would just avoid to use the terms Ionian and Aeolian, because composers never used them (only some theorists, like Glareanus and Zarlino), and because, as you recognized yourself, actually the D Mode (Protus/Dorian) and the F Mode (Lydian/Tritus), as well as the G Mode (Tetrardus/Mixolydian) were the ones that played that role, because of the "musica ficta" pactice of lowering the B and raising the vii on the cadences (that's also why the first flat is the B, and the first sharp is the F).

Another point. IMO, it was the appearance of the opera, with it's "new style" of accompanied melody and a very vertical and simpler approach to composition, that played a major role in the transition from modality to tonality (Monteverdi is a good example, because he started writing his madrigal books in the old style (prima pratica) but then changed completely to the new style, which he called "seconda pratica". It was also Monteverdi that composed some of the first operas (L'Incoronazione di Poppea is from 1642). It was in the opera that all the inovations took place, and where the new tonal style and vertical writing of accompanied melody took place. For understanding how this evolved the Monteverdi Madrigal Books are a great example, as I said.

When Bach died (in 1750) no one was working with modes anymore. Actually, when Bach was in the top of his career (around 1720) he and his contrapuntal style were already regarded as "outdated" although he was deeply respected as an organist and improviser, and master of the then "old school" of polyphony (which he was, but done firmly in the modern tonal system, although sometimes twisted and tortured to fit the strict rules of the old style, which even so were disregarded in some moments). Bach is also very good (and perhaps more accessible) to actually understand how the old modes evolved into the new major/minor system, because he was still composing both vertically as well as horizontally (something no one else was doing as he was at that time), and because he revisited many times the old choral melodies, many of which were composed in a time where modality was still predominant (in the early XVI century, between 1500/1520).

jancivil - Mon Apr 22, 2013 1:32 am

fmr wrote:

jancivil wrote:

if you want to demonstrate how modal usage works in 'the tonal environment' in modern terms, feel free. In fact, if you want to demonstrate it in the ancient church usage, feel free.

This is pure ad hominem argumentation.

fmr wrote:

Regarding your "challenge" above, I don't know what you mean with "tonal environment in modern terms".

Demonstrate how modal usage works in modern terms "in the tonal environment". I suppose english is a second language for you.

fmr wrote:

http://legacy.earlham.edu/~tobeyfo/musictheory/Book2/FFH2_CH4/4B_BachChorales2.html
It's a melody in the mode of E, yet he harmonized it tonally. And you have the well knows "Scarborough Fair" canticle. And you have, in more modern composers, modal passages in Mahler works, yet the harmony is always there (the dense, late romantic harmony, but still tonal).

So you can't do it. There is actually an analysis that shows how it moves very quickly to C Major! C major is not 'the E mode'. You absolutely proved my point there.

fmr wrote:

Regarding the "musica ficta" ("ficta" as in ficticious, in case there are confusion about the latin term - because they were singing differently from what was notated), it's a practice, not a system. That practice consisted in raising or lowering some notes in some chords (basically for creating leading tones or avoiding the augmented fourth between F and B).

EXACTLY MY POINT again. The practice of musica ficta, flatting the Aug 4th makes F lydian effectively into F major.

There was NOT chordal thinking during this time, there were certain desired concordances and the tritone was certainly not one of them. Effectively that avoidance amounts to an avoidance of what we today call Lydian mode.

I understand that at that time this was considered modal, and I am painfully aware of the centuries involved in this dull kind of music from having to make detailed distinctions of it in essays for a grade.
(I simply mention that to say, this is so not news to me. There is nothing impressive per se about academia to me.)

HOWEVER we are not talking to people about medieval practice or theory. To you, even so much as denoting a row of tones as 'Locrian' is oh so very WRONG. Who cares? People today in metal bands use locrian for the mood of it. That's how modes are approached since everyone went so very wrong, as you have it, in the nineteenth century.

We were in this argument because you made useless points in order to do no more than gainsay me as if you showed your own badge by this act. Your argumentation isn't good, note well. Now given a chance to go on with this music history lesson, you consistently make a distinction between modal practice and 'tonality', while previously you went to cloud this with the nonsense clause "[modality] in the tonal environment".

jancivil - Mon Apr 22, 2013 2:01 am

seacouch wrote:

fmr wrote:

jancivil wrote:

there is no usage of modes in the tonal environment in modern terms.

Bullshit. You have a very narrow perspective, it seems.

What a silly statement. I am deliberately narrowing this down to modern terms in the sentence you're addressing.

Somehow characterizing 'modern' usage of terms, ie., since the nineteenth century, as absolutely misconceived is a broad perspective?

Not getting that the thrust in jazz out of Indian music, *is* modal, that there is a whole world out there that does music as I have described it, and that is widely considered - I would venture to assert predominantly the meaning {modal} today - is not extremely narrow in focus?

- that sticking with this wholly academic area is evidence of a broad mind... that in fact can't really so much as address the following question?

jancivil - Mon Apr 22, 2013 2:10 am

Krakatau wrote:

More on topic, does this notion of modal transposition being usually applies in practice in other chromatic scals like melodic, harmonic or arabic minor for instance ?

yes.

http://www.prosonic-studios.com/Learning/Encyclopedia/Scales/Scales.aspx

Krakatau - Mon Apr 22, 2013 3:57 am

jancivil wrote:

Krakatau wrote:

More on topic, does this notion of modal transposition being usually applies in practice in other chromatic scals like melodic, harmonic or arabic minor for instance ?

yes.

http://www.prosonic-studios.com/Learning/Encyclopedia/Scales/Scales.aspx

Thank you, mate !

Totally relevant and very useful didactically....

thebaggytrouseredone - Mon Apr 22, 2013 4:34 am

A lot of what is being said here relates to classical and church theory. Modes were more used in folk music and not used in classical music.

Along comes Jazz and harmony, modern harmony, changes. In Jazz modes relate to chords and chords relate to modes, for example,

C Major - C major 7
D Doruian - D Minor 7
E Phrygian - E minor 7 flat 9
F Lydian - F Major 7 augmented 4
G Mixolydian - G Dominant 7
A Aeolian - A Minor 7 flat 6
B Locrian - B half diminished 7

The modes are played as scales C - C, B - B, D - D etc. I always use modes for writing riffs and chord sequences, each mode has a colour and a mood, but for some harmonies I would borrow notes, for eg, in the B Locrian mode I would borrow an F# from the B Phryian mode and harmonise as such so I can get a B minor chord instead of a diminished. Just do what sounds good and that's all that matters.

JumpingJackFlash - Mon Apr 22, 2013 6:04 am