tetrachords

[psychoxkps]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tetrachord
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mu ... _and_modes

please.. for what is it good when wikipedia bother themselfes to insert lower tetrachords and upper tetrachords into list of scales webpage?

something for exchange....

i dont know if u should use that tetrachord column in producing but this u SHOULD use:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_mu ... _and_modes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_chords

bye, bye:)

[murnau]

i dont know if i understand you right but most scales can be divided into his lower and upper tetrachord, therefore it's not a question that you find them in the list of scales.

[psychoxkps]

it is question.. it must have producing point.. or is it just-for-info or just-for-fun column?

thank you:)

[sammy24]

Tetrachords have their own "sound", or modality. When you put two of them together, you get a scale, which is the combination of the sound of these two tetrachords.

That's one way to look at it.

Also, learning tetrachords is a great way help simplify the process of learning scales.

For example, there are 7 modes of a major scale, but just 4 different tetrachord types -- ionian/major (2 halfsteps-2 halfsteps-1 halfstep), dorian/minor(2-1-2), lydian (2-2-2), and phrygian (1-2-2). You may find different names for these tetrachord types, as it is not standardized terminology.

So for example, Ionian mode or major scale is simply two major tetrachords put together. This may help you memorize, visualize on keyboard, and hear the scale more quickly.

Dorian is made up of two dorian tetrachords. Phrygian is two phrygian tetrachords. Lydian has a lower lydian tetrachord, and an upper major tetrachord. Mixolydian has a lower major tetrachord, and an upper dorian tetrachord. Aeolian or natural minor has a lower dorian, and upper phrygian. Locrian mode has a lower phrygian, and an upper lydian.

Point is, all these different scales can be created from the same 4 basic tetrachords.
There are 4 other important tetrachords as well, harmonic (1-3-1), hungarian major (3-1-2), hungarian minor (2-1-3), and Spanish phrygian (1-2-1).

Between these 8 tetrachord building blocks, you can create tons of scales, including all the modes of major, melodic minor, harmonic minor, harmonic major (ionian b6), and more. Putting together different combinations of 8 tetrachords is a whole lot easier than just memorizing so many scales outright.

[psychoxkps]

oh, so no point.. anyway.. it was something(i dont want to learn scales to mind) what was in my(i have minimal) key thing for producing and that key thing i want to know as much as i can! thank you very much sammy and murnau....

[tapper mike]

@Sam{/b]

Great response. Not just for pianists (though extremely helpful for those like me who identify all things chords first, scales second)

We less then literate guitarists often refer to these as "Chord Scales" I remember first reading of them in Guitar Player magazine by Howard Roberts founder of Musicians Institute. It was the great adventure for me to explore the possibilities available using "Chord Scales/Tetrachords"

Notable users include
Larry Carlton - While he shifted to standard diatonic modal playing early on when he first started playing solos he would use them as building blocks most notably on the "Hill Street Blues" theme.

Alan Holdsworth - He's actually done a number of videos on chord scale (tetrachords)

Our own Sascha Franck here at kvr.

Berklee press has a great book on this approach for guitarists
http://www.berkleepress.com/catalog/pro ... id=6057681


@psychoxkps
Don't be so quick to discount the methodology especially for minimal. The essence of minimal is playing few notes well. You don't have to play all the notes in a tetrachord. Reaching beyond conventional diatonic structures allow one to color the sound so it's interesting for the listener.

[coquillo]

@Sam{/b]

Great response. Not just for pianists (though extremely helpful for those like me who identify all things chords first, scales second)

We less then literate guitarists often refer to these as "Chord Scales" I remember first reading of them in Guitar Player magazine by Howard Roberts founder of Musicians Institute.

"Chord modes" are the heart of George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept (1953)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Rus ... omposer%29

[psychoxkps]

i just think tetrachords r little more complication then it should be.. on wiki is much good scales what ill use happily:)

[tapper mike]

"Chord modes" are the heart of George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept (1953)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Rus ... omposer%29

That was the tipping point in John Coltrane musical development. He quoted from it often as his source in musical direction.


While I'm not a classicalist by nature it makes for some great reading to those wishing to step outside the boundaries of conventional diatonic thinking.


@psychoxkps
It's just unknown territory for you now which is why it seems more formidable then it actually is. Yes there is a little brain work behind it...not much just a little.

When I was an aspiring fusion guitarist I'd get these sheets with chord progressions that would change keys frantically (every few measures) and be expected to keep up soloing on top. Being able to visualize the harmonic function allowed me to make these key modulations seamlessly as I no longer thought about melody as a function of the scale but a derivative of the chord function. It also helped me to assimilate scales that I had previously had difficulty with prior such as the half/whole (octatonic) scale http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Octatonic_scale

The scale "allows familiar harmonic and linear configurations such as triads and modal tetrachords to be juxtaposed unusually but within a rational framework" though the relation of the diatonic scale to the melodic and harmonic surface is thus generally oblique (Pople 1991, 2).

When I get a mental image of the "scale" I see it as primarily two diminished chords sitting a half step away from one another

Yeah it's a little headwork at first and sometimes while pushing boundaries they push you back as you try to get a handle on them. Not everyone gets "Sea legs" on their maiden voyage. If you aren't ready for it now...that's fine not everything works for everyone. It may be something you comeback to along the way. Music can be a journey or a destination in life you decide which every step of the way.

[sammy24]

Thanks, Mike.
Interesting stuff from you, as well.

Personally, the scariest part of tetrachords is probably just the term itself.

If they called scales "septachords" or "octochords", probably no one would want to go near them, either.

[jancivil]

this seems original:

For example, there are 7 modes of a major scale, but just 4 different tetrachord types -- ionian/major (2 halfsteps-2 halfsteps-1 halfstep), dorian/minor(2-1-2), lydian (2-2-2), and phrygian (1-2-2). You may find different names for these tetrachord types, as it is not standardized terminology.

So for example, Ionian mode or major scale is simply two major tetrachords put together. This may help you memorize, visualize on keyboard, and hear the scale more quickly.

Dorian is made up of two dorian tetrachords.

Tetrachords are generally given as conjunct. So Dorian is D E F G/G A B C. The lower tetrachord has no Dorian characteristic. It's the same as Aeolian's. At this point we have more words than we need and we have them as a misconception of tetrachords. There is no meaning to 'Dorian lower tetrachord'. The characteristic that distinguishes it lies in the upper tetrachord.

So. I think a simpler terminology, using the 'standard' of conjunct rather than disjunct (and one respecting the meaning of 'tetra-'), is probably clearer for most people.

IE: Dorian would be said to use a minor lower and major upper tetrachord.
Let's give Ionian as C D E F/F G A B. Major lower and 'Lydian' upper.

Aeolian: A B C D/D E F G. Minor/Minor.
And so on.


So in terms of advancing the idea, we avoid the possible confusion of constructions which exceed the octave.

Let's say 'Lydian/Minor': C D E F#/F# G# A B. Et cetera.

[stringtapper]

Tetrachords are generally given as conjunct.

I'd like to see a source for that. In my experience disjunct tetrachords are more often used to explain the construction of scales in modern contexts. Get into Greek music theory and you see both conjunct and disjunct presented as different explanations of scale construction.

Using disjunct tetrachords to explain modes can be just as simple:


Ionian: C-D-E-F / G-A-B-C
Two major tetrachords a perfect fifth apart.


Dorian: C-D-Eb-F / G-A-Bb-C
Two minor tetrachords a perfect fifth apart.


Phrygian: C-Db-Eb-F / G-Ab-Bb-C
Two Phrygian tetrachords a perfect fifth apart.


Lydian: C-D-E-F# / G-A-B-C
Lydian tetrachord + major tetrachord.


Mixolydian: C-D-E-F / G-A-Bb-C
Major tetrachord + minor tetrachord.


Aeolian: C-D-Eb-F / G-Ab-Bb-C
Minor tetrachord + Phrygian tetrachord.

Locrian: C-Db-Eb-F / Gb-Ab-Bb-C
Phrygian tetrachord + Lydian tetrachord.

So in terms of advancing the idea, we avoid the possible confusion of constructions which exceed the octave.

None of the disjunct constructions above exceed the octave.

[sammy24]

I would also like to know the source for the assertion that it is generally presented as disjunct.

Conjunct scale construction is fine as far as pure construction is concerned, but when we play and hear 7-note scales in actual practice, there are really 8 notes, in a way. The scale ends on a repeat of the tonic degree of the scale. That's how people practice scales, for example. They don't play the 7 notes and then stop, they finish on the tonic note again.

Furthermore, using the disjunct method allows us to see how all the major scales are "linked" together. If we view it as two major tetrachords, we can say that the upper tetrachord of C can also serve as the lower tetrachod of G, and the upper tetrachord of G is the same notes as the lower tetrachord of D, and so on, around the circle of 5ths/4ths, and we can do the same thing in the other direction.

I have no problem calling (2-1-2) a minor tetrachord, I wrote both minor/dorian in my previous post because some people call it a dorian tetrachord. It's just a name; it really is just "2-2-1". Anyway, it's not supposed to be the same as a dorian scale, just as a so-called lydian tetrachord isn't the same thing as a lydian scale. There are other "minor" tetrachords, like phrygian, and Hungarian minor, so the point of calling it dorian would be simply to give it its own name. And using disjunct scale construction, a dorian scale happens to have two of these (2-1-2) tetrachords. Personally, I interchange between minor and dorian, either one is fine as long as it's clear to everyone what we're talking about. Same thing with major/Ionian tetrachord. Either name works just fine.

Didn't understand your point about 2-2-1 being 5 instead of 4. Yes, it's 5 half steps, but it adds up to a 4th interval. Tetrachords have some kind of 4th from the 1st note to the last, whether P4, +4, dim4. Also, there are four notes in the standard tetrachord. According to the conjunct method, how is this any different? A major scale would have a lower major tetrachord, and an upper lydian; both of these contain more than 4 half steps. Major has 5, lydian has 6.

[psychoxkps]

yes sammy.. nothing to helps me.. but thank you all a lot.. i was just dreaming.. so i must change songs other way.. pff....

[jancivil]

So in terms of advancing the idea, we avoid the possible confusion of constructions which exceed the octave.

Tetrachords are generally given as conjunct.

I'd like to see a source for that. In my experience disjunct tetrachords are more often used to explain the construction of scales in modern contexts. Get into Greek music theory and you see both conjunct and disjunct presented as different explanations of scale construction.

Using disjunct tetrachords to explain modes can be just as simple:


Ionian: C-D-E-F / G-A-B-C
Two major tetrachords a perfect fifth apart.

[and more with C as the first and last note of two tetrachords]...

None of the disjunct constructions above exceed the octave.

You have the first note of the lower tetrachord in the upper tetrachord. Therefore your upper tetrachord contains three notes. If you can't see the sense of it I can't help you any more than that.

Again: you want two tetrachords, you have two four notes sets conjunctively. This is the least confusing option.
See my example 'Lydian/Minor': C D E F#/F# G# A B. They're both actually tetrachords! This is clearer, I think. If you like 3 notes as your tetrachord, good for you. I would find that confusing per se.