How to combine modes??

[Sascha Franck]

Some of you might know about chord-modes, right? Its THE missing link between chord and mode.

I don't agree with that. There's no "missing link" between chords and modes because both are exactly (!) the same from a harmonical point of view.
In case anybody wants, I could explain it more or less easily.

- Sascha

[Ojd]

I meant missing link in my understanding - I could not get this system for so long! I just wanted to emphasize this to anybody who wants to get into harmony but feel really intimidated by these dizzying rules (i know i was).

[lockheart]

Lots of people seem to get involved in organizing he guitar fretboard according to modes. I think this is a learning-by-internet phenomenon. Few songs are modal, and although it can be useful to understand modes, I think that thinking of most popular music is terms of "this mode for this chord" is off wildly in the wrong direction.

[jancivil]

I never heard of 'chord modes'. however you are onto the value of modes when you say apply them to a drone to find out what it is. apart from a simple vamp of a couple chords, i-IV for Dorian I've given, I-VII for Mixolydian etc, chords are not going to much enhance a mode. get out of the mode's way, it's a very rich thing, enjoy it for what it is.

the western musician loves them chords as though they're the most crucial thing in music. it doesn't have to rule over everything, there is a great wide world of music and this idea's been around for aeons.

I absolutely agree that for pop music in general 'this mode for this chord' is 'wildly off the mark'. I'm reiterating the same points in many threads but this is a pet peeve for me. If you have harmony, it's major or minor and you have the major and minor 'modes'. it's about the law of identity, don't be giving them other names, the thing is not changed by another name, and the other name properly identifies another identity.

Major is not the ruler over the modes, it's coincidental. Dorian is mode 2 of Ionian, Ionian is mode 7 of Dorian.

[Sascha Franck]

Few songs are modal, and although it can be useful to understand modes, I think that thinking of most popular music is terms of "this mode for this chord" is off wildly in the wrong direction.

I only agree with the "this mode for this chord" thing. That really doesn't make sense.
But, there's tons of songs that are indeed written in a mode, using "functional" chords to establish the mode. The most commonly used modes in all sorts of popular music:
- Ionian. Basically anything in major is based on that mode. Think "La Bamba" for a role model.
- Aeolian. Sure, you may often find a dom7th chord for the V chord, but the rest of such tunes often is in plain aeolian. Think the verse of "Sultans of Swing" for a role model.
- Dorian. Think "Oye Como Va" from Santana as a role model.
- Mixolydian. Think the verse of "Sledgehammer" as a role model (really, it doesn't get any more mixolydian).

I don't know of any functional progressions in lydian, there might be some in phrygian (not exactly in most popular music, though) and I don't know of any tune that is in locrian.
But the modes listed above are all used a) regularly, b) in "functional" progressions. So it makes a whole lot of sense to learn them. Plus, you can even treat, say, a blues as a combination of modes - that'll expand your vocabulary a lot.

- Sascha

[Ojd]

I was posting not from pop point of view, but rather electronic/vamp-based music. Think cabaret voltaire, like Just Fascination

It sure uses some mode, and only that one. No chord changes, its a track not a song, its measured in intensity rather than in minor/major

or neu!, or can
Rother uses few modes, that are his favorite. I think its Lydian

Can are more avantgard - they use 4 modes (or scales) simultaneously, sometime one is a part of the other (like pentatonic is a part of a major or minor), their songs 70-72 are essentially a bunch of scales, but each musician plays his own, and it makes result really complex and deep. I think this is the one way to make modern electronic music more varied and, well, more music.
And yes, using modes vs playing chords on guitar is Internet phenomena, it is really striking once you put some 30+ yo guitarist versus 18-25 yo.
We really hit the sound-variety limit. There's some phenomenal sound out there, that are electronic and there's aesthetic to it.

This whole album is a true masterpiece of 2000's , they always had exceptional taste in sound-aesthetic, even in 81 (when its even more evident).

[jancivil]

Few songs are modal, and although it can be useful to understand modes, I think that thinking of most popular music is terms of "this mode for this chord" is off wildly in the wrong direction.

I only agree with the "this mode for this chord" thing. That really doesn't make sense.
But, there's tons of songs that are indeed written in a mode, using "functional" chords to establish the mode. The most commonly used modes in all sorts of popular music:
- Ionian. Basically anything in major is based on that mode. Think "La Bamba" for a role model.
- Aeolian. Sure, you may often find a dom7th chord for the V chord, but the rest of such tunes often is in plain aeolian. Think the verse of "Sultans of Swing" for a role model.
- Dorian. Think "Oye Como Va" from Santana as a role model.
- Mixolydian. Think the verse of "Sledgehammer" as a role model (really, it doesn't get any more mixolydian).

- Sascha

You cite Ionian when you mean major and Aeolian when you mean minor. In say Indian music the Bilaval thaat, same seven notes as Ionian (and in fact influenced by the west) ≠ 'major key'. "Major key" is not a mode. 'Major key' has connotations of harmony... V-I. You can do things as Ionian that completely elude the expectation you have from 'major key'.

Also I'm not buying i-IV in a vamp, "Oye Como Va", as "functional harmony". It isn't what I meant by the term anyway. It is the change you want for dorian mode as I have said numerous times talking about modal usage. If you have as a definition, if there is "I chord as home" = 'functional', fine. It isn't what I would say, I don't think it's definite enough. the I chord has gravity by emphasis, not by tension such as V7-I. You could make the D in that Am-D vamp into D7 and there is a point where you tend to want 'G' and that's functional. D here doesn't function, it just is.

we're in the area of rock... there is modal usage and simple chord changes to be found a plenty here.

[Sascha Franck]

You cite Ionian when you mean major and Aeolian when you mean minor. In say Indian music the Bilaval thaat, same seven notes as Ionian (and in fact influenced by the west) ≠ 'major key'. "Major key" is not a mode. 'Major key' has connotations of harmony... V-I. You can do things as Ionian that completely elude the expectation you have from 'major key'.

To be perfectly honest: I don't give much of a damn about all that. Indian music is pretty far away from what I'm doing in my daily life. Might be a sad thing, but seriously, I don't exactly miss it.
And well, regarding what you can do in ionian or in whatever "major key", I also don't care much. For me, any standard chord progression such as I-IV-V in major perfectly describes the ionian mode. And I'm absolutely sure that it'll be like that until the end of my days on earth.

Also I'm not buying i-IV in a vamp, "Oye Como Va", as "functional harmony".

You don't need to buy it. I do.
And there's several progressions taking the dorian thing (or whatever other mode) further. Just as with ionian. Or aeolian. Or mixolydian. Or whatever.

If you have as a definition, if there is "I chord as home" = 'functional', fine.

That's precisely what things are like for me. And as said, I don't have any intentions to change that any day soon.

You could make the D in that Am-D vamp into D7 and there is a point where you tend to want 'G' and that's functional. D here doesn't function, it just is.

I may agree in case of certain situations. But as long as the D7 never resolves to any G chord, I can't help it but see/hear the Am7-D7 as something of its own, most likely with the Amin7 being the "tonic".

- Sascha

[tapper mike]

Jan, It's clear that you have a different perception of theory then Sascha or I.

It doesn't make Sascha's opinion on theory less or more valid then yours. The proof of the pudding is in the eating.

You went to school, learned how to play music learned how to read music learned how to analyze music and learned how to write music

I went to school learned how to play music learned how to read music learned how to analyze music and how to write music.

Sascha went to school learned how to play music learned how to read music learned how to analyze music and how to write music.

Sascha, You and I have all been in bands have all written music have all recorded music and have all performed music. Of the three Sascha is the industry professional. You are the indepentent and I'm the has been.

We didn't all have the same teachers the same study material or come to the same conclusions. Some songs are written harmony first and others are written melody first. If you write melody first your conclusions are drawn from the melody line/key. If you write progression first your conclusions about melody come from the chord progression. Thus making Sascha's observations relavent.

There are a lot of blues songs and most are built around the 12 bar blues progression. Simply because it's easier to start with a foundation of chords arranged in a logical order and then graft a melody to it. Likewise there are a lot of jazz tunes based on "rhythm changes" the jazz form attributed to "Facinating Rhythm" Different keys different tempo's different styles. The melody changes but the progression remains.

In those situations the theory of melody is derived from the context of the progression and not the other way around.

[jancivil]

well, my language defines this better. so someone doesn't give a damn, is he talking only to himself? is it more useful to blur the distinction between major and ionian, minor and aeolian for the rest of people that will encounter a thread? I would not agree.

I have a perspective on *using modes* that's different because it's more informed and pertinent.

if that's your definition, SF, I granted you the "fine". Mine is my opinion which is different. However my idea of Ionian mode vs 'major key' is not an opinion, there is a basis for it, one can use one in a very different way and I know about it. It might even be interesting to someone else to hear about it.

You want to talk about things authoritatively you're not that interested in?

[jancivil]

Of the three Sascha is the industry professional. You are the indepentent and I'm the has been.

None of this makes an argument better or worse than it is. I don't know what the point there is.

If you write melody first your conclusions are drawn from the melody line/key. If you write progression first your conclusions about melody come from the chord progression. Thus making Sascha's observations relavent.

Well maybe it does if you're talking about harmony first but the reason to use 'dorian mode' is not harmony first. If you can show me eg., Oye Como Va was "written progression first" there's an actual point there. I would venture to say that maybe both go hand in hand in that, i-IV, change. Actually the reason for IV there is the bass goes up to it, isn't it. That's pretty normal in musical composition. I would say that the rhythm of saying 'oye como va' is the primary impetus.

I don't know that melody is 'conclusively' drawn from 'progression' when one begins with the latter. as a point of argument it's general and we'd have to move to the specific to investigate it. it seems like "conclusive" would indicate you'd avoid certain things as 'inharmonic' per se, and I would find that problematic.

I will say I am more interested in melody than chords even when there is a lot of chord movement. People dig Giant Steps because of both the movement and the way it's informed by the lines, and vice versa. Or let's focus: My Funny Valentine. Definitely shaped by a chord change. Is the chord progression the really memorable thing about it in the first place? Are the things Mr Davis does in the bass solo extemporaneously in the Chaka Khan show strictly provided by the progression? He comes up with things the chord progression does not provide conclusively.

the memorable thing of songs is melody.

I think a distinction {between modal and tonal} is useful to make where there is a difference.

[jancivil]

there are a lot of jazz tunes based on "rhythm changes" the jazz form attributed to "Facinating Rhythm" Different keys different tempo's different styles. The melody changes but the progression remains.

In those situations the theory of melody is derived from the context of the progression and not the other way around.

Fascinating Rhythm's first consideration must have been the way the syllables scanned. The changes to these pop hits are codified from centuries of music, strong root movement and function, and were convenient and useful for popular music because they were normative.

show tunes made gigs possible as that's more commercial. "Rhythm changes" afaik derive from I Got Rhythm. i vi ii V I, then I I7 IV iv I. then a bridge which I'd have to look up. It became the thing to do when Charlie Parker et al started basing songs on it, including the bridge. In that kind of music, yes, the harmony was the basis for the tune. the whole thing of substitutions {eg., #ivdim7 for iv} informs the development of line particularly in bop. However, my guess is, the impetus for the song I Got Rhythm is all about some words by Ira that gave George an idea for A TUNE and he went to changes that were convenient and normative.

this has nothing whatsoever to do with a discussion of modality however.

[jancivil]

Jan, It's clear that you have a different perception of theory then Sascha or I.

No, my perception doesn't enter into it. My perception of things is quite clear. I have a good background in harmony, in fact I excelled at it academically. However you seem to want chord changes to be primary in cases where they are not, which is a perception thing.

[Sascha Franck]

well, my language defines this better. so someone doesn't give a damn, is he talking only to himself? is it more useful to blur the distinction between major and ionian, minor and aeolian for the rest of people that will encounter a thread? I would not agree.

Ok, then explain the differences to me.
I know that ionian is only a "subset" of major, but I never said anything else. Still, for me, say, a stock progression such as Bb Eb F is ionian. I don't see why it wouldn't be that. If you can, explain to me why it is "more" than ionian.

I have a perspective on *using modes* that's different because it's more informed and pertinent.

That statement per se is coming through way too self-confident and ignorant. You'll have to explain why that is so...

Otherwise I'll just rest my case and leave you with all your superiority.

- Sascha

[Sascha Franck]

Well maybe it does if you're talking about harmony first but the reason to use 'dorian mode' is not harmony first.

So? What is it then? Explain.