Does the scale really matter?

[Negoba]

Music theory should make your life easier, not harder - at least in the long run. It especially helps when you're listening to someone else's music and try to figure out what they're doing.

The first thing to learn is the intervals of the major scale and how those translate into chords (sometimes called the Nashville number system or the Roman numerals). I ii iii IV V vi viio - once you have that down then so many other things are just modifications.

In the beginning, I echo the idea that if it sounds good to you, go with it.

[jancivil]

While I do find the vast majority of pop music today, that's all major key all the time as boring as anything which has ever been, I do not agree at all that music which sticks to a given set of seven notes [ie., heptatonic scale] is boring per se. That's actually a naive view, it's basically saying that more complex is better in itself, when everything is a matter of craft and that's obviously not a given.

Then, maybe we'll be well-advised to realize 'scale' is a wider and deeper concept than 'major' scale (as has been supposed as the meaning here), or minor scale; and even recognize that there is no 'minor scale' in the stricter sense; since usage - even in the example given above, ca 1595 - includes "harmonic" and "melodic" variants, so here's a potential 9 notes as material.

Indian Classical Music in nearly all cases is built on a 7 [or fewer, 6 or 5] note set (leaving aside the bends and intricacies of inflection), some of which in the north is derived from Bilaval Thaat which is the same intervallically as the western major scale or Ionian mode. {It isn't that thing, as "major key" is inextricable from tonal function really. but it's the same set (only usually not 12-t ET but one or another form of just intonation).} i don't find the melody of Frank Zappa's Watermelon in Easter Hay {E Ionian} boring. Even for regular western music there is absolutely some gorgeous music which doesn't exceed the seven notes given as a scale.

When I was interested in composing from my ICM-influence I made up a few modes of six tones, for material I consider quite rich.

We can go to Harmonic Minor and extrapolate 'modes of' and arrive at some things for advanced interest. Sixth mode of, aka "Lydian #2"... Or, second mode of Melodic Minor ascending: "Dorian b2"; fourth mode of: Lydian b7 (aka Harmonic and jazzers like to say 'Lydian dominant'); fifth mode of: Mixolydian b6; third mode of: Lydian #5; seventh mode of; Phrygian b4...
{That 4th mode of harmonic minor Satie used for the melody of Gnossienne 1.}

[starlitewalker]

100% no, it can be a great basis to get started but rules are made to be broken! <3

[jamcat]

We can go to Harmonic Minor and extrapolate 'modes of' and arrive at some things for advanced interest. Sixth mode of, aka "Lydian #2"... Or, second mode of Melodic Minor ascending: "Dorian b2"; fourth mode of: Lydian b7 (aka Harmonic and jazzers like to say 'Lydian dominant'); fifth mode of: Mixolydian b6; third mode of: Lydian #5; seventh mode of; Phrygian b4...
{That 4th mode of harmonic minor Satie used for the melody of Gnossienne 1.}

That’s what I was talking about when I said maybe the OP wasn’t in the key he thought he was in. It could actually be a related mode, or perhaps it momentarily modulates.

And speaking of the 4th mode of minor harmonic, I used to think I was writing in it quite often a long time ago, but it was in fact Hungarian minor, aka double harmonic minor.

[jancivil]

Lotta these names confuse me. Double harmonic minor, I mean there's a certain logic at work in that the aug 2nd-min 2nd characteristic top of harmonic minor occurs @ 3 #4 5, but harmonic major has it (@ b6 ^7 8 and) @ 1 b2 3.

But, so, in music deploying deliberate scalar devices obv. it does matter. (I don't know how it can simply not matter. Some times you ditch the scale (key, mode, what-not) for a minute. )
I was into synthetic scales to a fault when I was young. What I didn't do was consider the vertical material you can derive therein (or scale-as-chord); I was strictly from modal.
I liked a row of chromatics in a scale, more typically it'd be 8 note. G Ab Bb C C# D E F.

I decided to create hard limits on my latest compo and fabricated a little 'chord bible' from two of these jobs, ie., not exceed these 9 notes, the total of tones from two scale objects, that and "Eb Lydian #6".
The 3rd mode of C Dorian b2 is Eb Lydian b7; as it turned out the {linear} strength of the latter - to my ear a force majeure - was true as pertains to sonorities as well. C wasn't much of a chord root, but Eb... I don't tend to do a lot of thinking/planning but this had stuff happen like magick.
took the notion from Brett Clement's article "Introduction to Frank Zappa's Chord Bible". I was always doing "7-note chords" as it were but systematizing seemed a smart move.

[ESMedia24]

When it sounds good it probably is good. Some guys do not look at music theory at all and are able to produce beautiful songs. I am interested in music theory though, because I think when you only rely on your ears you might waste a lot of time and maybe stay stuck in familiar grounds all the time. So knowing the basics and maybe more complicated stuff like the Circle of 5ths etc. might speed up your workflow, which isn't a bad thing in my opinion.

[LocrianLocrian]

There are fundamentals to organising notes in the first place. There are certain colours our ears are attracted to. However to much of the same thing and the ear becomes bored. Lots of modern pop music for quite some time has suffered from this. Guitars are good instruments to take a scales pattern then use the same chord shape on each scale note which can produce some interesting harmonic effects. C to E to F for example. Guitars following dots on the fretboard generates similar effects. I understand the intro to Wilson Pickett "Midnight Hour" came about as such.
It's knowing when to put your odd note or chord in there. That's the art form aspect to music. Trust your ear.

[Ananmusatili]

Hello there,

I always asked myself this. Sometimes I am writing some chords and stuff and I always write whatever sounds good to me, and sometimes it does sound good with a chord that doesn't belong to the scale I am working on. Is this a good practice in music? How can I avoid this?

Luciano

It's a good idea to at least know which scale you're in as it makes it easier to correct issues if you encounter any. That being said, you shouldn't feel you need to be constrained to a scale. Remember that a lot of songs use borrowed chords and even change the key mid-song.

So, you don't need to avoid anything really. Your ear tells you when it goes "wrong", and even then it might not be wrong if the sound is what you anyway wanted. Dissonance is sometimes exactly what's sought after.

[Starbright]

Ok, really lovely thread, allow me to throw my hat in the ring!!
Are scales important: Of course they are!
But not in the way many of us think.
There are 3 ways to look at them but overall they are just like tiny rulesset to this game we call music to have a frame we can work like different dice or card games:
1. You can see scales as a tool of set notes to get you started and even create your own like - c d# e f# g ab b c.
2. You can use them as a tool to bind melodies in between harmonies like having Ab and C which means you can use c eb e f g ab as dots to connect both chords.
3. Or use them as jump off point defining each chord as a different scale indicator using Ab to play Ab Major and C to play C Major. Which would be a simple modular approach.
3a. Or define the nearest scale that have both chords in common like for Eb to C would be F melodic minor or G alterated and from Eb to C F melodic minor.

Each scale can create different moods and give starting points. But that doesn't mean we can change the rules or break and redefine them as long as when we have someone else to collaborate with we can define them.

[akaiguy86]

I'd say a scale is just a guardrail to keep you on course when writing music, if you can get where u need to go quicker, then its cool to venture off.