scaleit

[papatomany]

For several years now, I've used a very simple program called ScaleIt to give me scale ideas. (Most often I use it to see possible scales for some melody I've come up with.) My old XP system finally gave up the ghost, and I'm now on Windows 7. ScaleIt seems to not run on 7. Does anyone know of a free program that does what ScaleIt does? (Not online, as I turn off my connection when I'm in Sonar.)

[JumpingJackFlash]

For several years now, I've used a very simple program called ScaleIt to give me scale ideas. (Most often I use it to see possible scales for some melody I've come up with.) My old XP system finally gave up the ghost, and I'm now on Windows 7. ScaleIt seems to not run on 7. Does anyone know of a free program that does what ScaleIt does? (Not online, as I turn off my connection when I'm in Sonar.)

You could always try using these?

[Fox Crazy]

You could always try using these?

As much as I agree that you can go quite far just playing around and finding something you like by ear, is this really necessary? Why is everyone's first impulse around here... This sort of thing?

Sadly, OP, I don't know of anything like this, else I'd suggest something. :/ I have a link to a huge list of "scales," which can be useful if you've found something you like but don't know the full family of tones it's part of, but I don't know if that's what you're looking for?

[JumpingJackFlash]

I have a link to a huge list of "scales," which can be useful

Using all sharps makes many of those incorrect and potentially confusing. There's also some seriously dodgy stuff further down the list. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot barge pole.

[Fox Crazy]

Using all sharps makes many of those incorrect and potentially confusing. There's also some seriously dodgy stuff further down the list. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot barge pole.

Of course you'd think this.

[coquillo]

Using all sharps makes many of those incorrect and potentially confusing. There's also some seriously dodgy stuff further down the list. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot barge pole.

Of course you'd think this.

He's right about incorrect and confusing, but bear in mind his glossary lacks the term "empathy".

If you're still there OP, what DAW are you using? Mine has built in tools for this stuff.

[Hink]

I have a link to a huge list of "scales," which can be useful

Using all sharps makes many of those incorrect and potentially confusing. There's also some seriously dodgy stuff further down the list. I wouldn't touch it with a ten foot barge pole.

I haven't suggested it because I dont know if the OP is a guitar player, but I really like a program called chordwizard. I bought it at least 10 years ago and for a guitarist who likes to use many tunings it's great, I think it was pricey at the time but the use I have got from it all these years makes it worth it.

You can select many tunings for all guitars and limited different stringed instruments, of course you can also create custom tunings. It creates a database of chords and scales/modes and you have one view that is a relation matrix with both. You see the chords and scales on a fretboard which you can set up pretty much any way you might need. You can view scales by note names of intervals, I prefer the latter because that's really how I learned.

It does have theory lessons as well but the reader's digest type version if you know what I mean. It also has features like it plays back scales and chords via midi and it has a practice section with patterns and stuff but I never use that. Once again, if you're not a guitarist why spend the money and tbh there is similar now online...still it's handy to have for me

[Tricky-Loops]

ChordSpace and ToneSpace are 2 great free plugins which can help learning scales & chords, especially for keyboard/piano players...

[Hink]

ChordSpace is from KvR member Nuffink IIRC who hasn't been around in ages

[Fox Crazy]

He's right about incorrect and confusing,

Classically trained (or whatever you want to consider it) music theory isn't confusing and unintuitive as all getout to begin with? People wouldn't be asking really confused questions here constantly if it was in any way straightforward.

All a flat or a sharp is, is a tone that's raised or lowered... Usually by a semi-tone from what I understand, but for instance, you could say "flatten by an octave" and while I'm pretty sure it'd be incorrect from a classical vocabulary standpoint, someone who's not a dullard would understand you're asking to lower a tone by an octave. Anyway, as such, every tone is a flat and a sharp of a tone around it. It's all relative.

My beef is with the mass of people who can't get it through their thick skulls that maybe the way they learned is a plenty confusing way, that music in itself can be expressed logically and mathmatically in dozens of different ways, and to put it bluntly EVERYTHING is relative. Middle C can't even be middle unless there's something for it to be middle against.

People who make posts like that serve to do nothing but make snarky useless comments, and then tell other people they're "wrong" when they try to help. Don't excuse that, just don't. There's dozens of ways to conceptualize music, the one that's "right" is the one that helps someone get the job done effectively. If their way is so much better, they can feel free to share, otherwise they need to can it.

It's really pretty sad that you go and post an EDM sound design question and you get dozens of useful answers, ask something involving music theory and you get slammed with idiocy. Some people like a bit of wine with their cheese, and that makes it awfully hard to have this.

[JumpingJackFlash]

Classically trained (or whatever you want to consider it) music theory isn't confusing and unintuitive as all getout to begin with? People wouldn't be asking really confused questions here constantly if it was in any way straightforward.

It's actually incredibly simple if you do it the right way.
And while "the right way" might be open for some debate, the kind of rubbish printed on that site is most definitely the wrong way. It will cause a lot more problems than it will solve.

There's dozens of ways to conceptualize music, the one that's "right" is the one that helps someone get the job done effectively.

This doesn't apply here.
The scale of F major is spelt with a Bb, not an A#. The former is correct, the latter is wrong.
This is not relative, it is absolute. It is not a subjective opinion or a personal approach, it is an undeniable fact. To argue otherwise is to argue that black is white.

Nobody is forcing anyone to study or learn music theory. If you don't want to that's absolutely fine. By all means do whatever you think sounds good. But, if you want to use music theory, you have to use it correctly.

If I want to learn how to speak French, but I just invent a load of random words that I think sound French, am I really speaking French or just a load of nonsense?

[ras.s]

The scale of F major is spelt with a Bb, not an A#. The former is correct, the latter is wrong.
This is not relative, it is absolute. It is not a subjective opinion or a personal approach, it is an undeniable fact. To argue otherwise is to argue that black is white.

Would you care to elaborate? They're both just signs and symbols and people understand them to mean the same thing -- the note between A and B. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

Sometimes when I've played with people and I've talked about the chord progression I had in mind I've said something like 'yadda yadda then there's a Bdim yadda yadda' -- and they've looked at me suspiciously and then said 'Ah, you mean H'. I say yea, and then we play it to our heart's content.

Just signs and symbols really..




edit: Ps. Fox Crazy -- I think JumpingJackFlash, through his presence here and continued contributions, is very well allowed to make as many snarky comments as he wants.

[Tricky-Loops]

The scale of F major is spelt with a Bb, not an A#. The former is correct, the latter is wrong. This is not relative, it is absolute. It is not a subjective opinion or a personal approach, it is an undeniable fact. To argue otherwise is to argue that black is white.

Would you care to elaborate? They're both just signs and symbols and people understand them to mean the same thing -- the note between A and B.

Because the key signature of F major has a flat, not a sharp?
Otherwise there would be one sharp as key signature if A# would be right (but then F major would be the same as G major).

[JumpingJackFlash]

They're both just signs and symbols and people understand them to mean the same thing -- the note between A and B. Please correct me if I'm wrong.

It's not quite as simple as that.
They might sound the same (in equal temperament), but there is an important theoretical difference.

To use an analogy; are the following words the same?
Their, They're, There.

All three sound the same, but are they the same word?
No. They mean different things. If you write (is that the same as right?) the wrong one in a sentence, people might still know what you mean, but it's still wrong.

[ras.s]

Um, ok, I understand your analogy.

But what's the theoretical difference you mention - and in what kind of situation does it make a practical difference? If we keep to equal temperaments with our pianos and things..