Modal Harmony vid series

[Tanburi]

@ the OP, thanks for posting the vid series. I can't watch atm, but will take a look tomorrow.

Interesting points by many here. I play both Turkish classical (a "true" modal form) and original music on Turkish bowed tanbur (studied in Turkey, Greece, and the U.S.) but I'm also a Western-trained musician. I'm just saying this to give a quick disclosure of background.

IMHO, Jazz and other Western musicians/Western musical scholars basically take the church modes from Byzantine music and apply them to a world at least originating in a tonal/harmonic perspective. That's cool and legit in my book. But, it's not the same as actual modal music, which is centered on systems of melodic types and any "harmony/aggregation" comes from the actual musician's instruments (via overtones from sympathetic strings and the performance practice of hitting extra notes (usually lower register) to support the main melody.

NOW, here's an interesting short essay by recognized master modal musician Ross Daly on "Makam and Creation" which I feel gives voice to the "Eastern" perspective on this topic: http://rossdaly.gr/en/texts-recommendat ... d-creation

[Tanburi]

Sorry, apparently I need to have more posts to actually post my post so that it makes sense. Anyway, I'd encourage any musician in the world to look up Ross Daly if they are interested in performing or composing "modal" music.

[MadBrain]

IMHO, Jazz and other Western musicians/Western musical scholars basically take the church modes from Byzantine music and apply them to a world at least originating in a tonal/harmonic perspective. That's cool and legit in my book. But, it's not the same as actual modal music, which is centered on systems of melodic types and any "harmony/aggregation" comes from the actual musician's instruments (via overtones from sympathetic strings and the performance practice of hitting extra notes (usually lower register) to support the main melody.

That's true... Western musicians borrow whatever little modality and put it into the vice grip of the tonal system, to serve their own, different goals (which are generally harmonic!).

Typical compromises that I can think of:
- Forced strong tonic.
- Forced dominant on the 5th.
- Scale forced to be the same on all octaves.
- Loss of microtonal tuning that isn't compatible with harmony (= forced tuning in 5ths).
- Loss of melodic types and patterns.
- Conflation of "ascending", "descending" and "ascending-descending" modes.
- Conflation of "authentic" and "plagal" modes, and modes that differ by pitch range.
- Temporary flats and sharps forced to follow harmony instead of melodic patterns.
- Typical Western melodic patterns where scale degrees 1-3-5 alternate and contrast with degrees 2-4-6-7, designed to land strong structural melody notes on chord notes.
- Forced harmony, independent basslines, voice leading, chorus-verse-like song structure...

If you let us Western musicians get our hands on Turkish Makams, that's what's going to happen to them, be warned...

[Tanburi]

@ MadBrain: Indeed! Well it's already happened as evidenced by any mention of "Arabic scale" in any collection of guitar scales. This is usually a 12 TET version of Hicaz (Hijaz) makam scale structure (A Bb C# D E F G(#)) and it's often called by Mid-East musicians "Hollywod Hijaz because it's 12 TET and doesn't have the true characteristic altered augmented 2nd between the 2nd and 3rd degrees. Since the Turkish makam system and the Arabic maqam system have so many analogues to each other (my understanding is that the Ottoman makam system was borne out of influences and cross-pollination with the Arabic maqam system, and both were heavily influenced by the Persian dastgah and other Central and Near-East modal systems), Western musicians have already gotten hold of makams! They are no longer makams at that point, though. This is fine, because there are ultimately no rules in music, but imo, it's useful to recognise when one has left a musical world for a fundamentally different one.

Western influence on Turkish music pedagogy has been apparent for many years, e.g. translating the makam's "Durak" note (literally "stopping point" or the equivalent of the Gregorian "Finalis") as "Tonic" is one example. Also, the same with translating the "Güçlü" (Strong note) as "Dominant".

[Googly Smythe]

Do drummers/percussionists have similar discussions about rhythm?
-
This thread has given me a headache.
-
Earlier this year I did a series of tunes that I thought were vaguely modal - I may have to expunge every reference to modality...

[Chandlerhimself]

Sorry, apparently I need to have more posts to actually post my post so that it makes sense. Anyway, I'd encourage any musician in the world to look up Ross Daly if they are interested in performing or composing "modal" music.

Thanks for the recommendation. I'll check him out. I enjoy music from all over the world and I always try to learn something new. Unfortunately I don't know much about Turkish music. Is it written/memorized and played the same everytime or is it more improvisational?

[Tanburi]

Sorry, apparently I need to have more posts to actually post my post so that it makes sense. Anyway, I'd encourage any musician in the world to look up Ross Daly if they are interested in performing or composing "modal" music.

Thanks for the recommendation. I'll check him out. I enjoy music from all over the world and I always try to learn something new. Unfortunately I don't know much about Turkish music. Is it written/memorized and played the same everytime or is it more improvisational?

Hey, sorry been so busy with work lately, I've not checked out your videos (Yet!).

To answer your questions:

Turkish music is written in the same way (a modified form of Western notation) for every instrument. BUT the note "d" on the treble clef (an octave above the "d" just above middle "c") has a frequency of 440 hz. So this means that normally, the music sounds a fourth lower than written. But this could change if the instruments in an ensemble are tuned to a different register. Essentially, all instruments are transposing instruments in terms of the written notation. But instrumentalists don't transpose in their heads; they just play the melody "modally", having already tuned to a new register.

Nowadays (and for quite a few decades, I think) musicians who are well-trained in the system, can sight read notation (assuming the particular musicians are familiar with the makam(s) being played). Back in early and even into late Ottoman times, compositions were taught orally and memorized. There is an "improvisational" form called "taksim" (taqsim usually when referring to Arabic music). This takes place before a regular composition to introduce the makam about to be played. It's almost always performed by one instrumentalist and can include modulations to other makam, but it always arrives back at the main makam to be presented. Taksim is non-rhythmic (though there is one rhythmic form of it) and is actually considered a type of composition since it utilises the same rules of structure and sequence that the makam does in a regular composition. Some musicians consider a well-executed taksim the highest form of composition or realisation of a particular makam.

[jancivil]

There is no such thing as modal harmony. The term 'modal' relates to counterpoint.
The masters of modal counterpoint were Bach and Mozart.
Of course the term got corrupted: there is not written any relevant music in the 19th nor 20th century as it comes to modal counterpoint.

No. Modal Counterpoint was an M.O. centuries before Bach, the transition to the major/minor paradigm long complete; with Bach exemplifying that completion if anything.

[zethus909]

its modal harmony as opposed to "tonal" harmony. using chords based on the modal intervals...instead of using scalar-based harmony, like using harmonic minor or melodic minor scales and building your harmony from that. modal harmony is "cleaner"

[fmr]

its modal harmony as opposed to "tonal" harmony. using chords based on the modal intervals...instead of using scalar-based harmony, like using harmonic minor or melodic minor scales and building your harmony from that. modal harmony is "cleaner"

A lot of bulls!t.

First, what kind of "intervals" are "modal intervals"? There is only one kind of intervals, AFAIK.

Second, using harmonic minor or melodic minor scales. There is only one minor scale. Harmonic and melodic are variations of the same scale. The harmony, BTW, is the same.

Third, building your harmony from the "scale"... You don't build your harmony form the scale, you build it from the tonal functions, no matter what "scale" (i presume you meant "tonality") you are.

Forth. Modal Harmony is cleaner... Cleaner why? In what way? And what is "modal harmony" in first place? Does it have dissonant chords? Just prfect triads. Does it have polar chords? Cadences?

Perhaps you should start to post "your" definition, just to see in what basis you are talking.

[Harry_HH]

After reading every comment in this thread, the primary feeling I got, without taking any "sides": great that there are so much knowledge and expertice among Kvr!

The OP's video is, of course "vulgar", if not childish, but as someone said, there are many ways which lead to the world of music. The video has its own value (although the presenter should have played examples in every mode). Pop/jazz music interpretation/practices of the modes are OK and a "good thing", I think they serve the music and harm none.

The origin of modes or the origin of the western tonality is, of course facinating. How much do we need to "understand" these? The answer is: if learning these serve your music, expands your understanding (almost always they do) and stimulates you intellectually (or you have to pass some exam), spend time with the modes - or with the music theory in generally.

[fmr]

The origin of modes or the origin of the western tonality is, of course facinating. How much do we need to "understand" these? The answer is: if learning these serve your music, expands your understanding (almost always they do) and stimulates you intellectually (or you have to pass some exam), spend time with the modes - or with the music theory in generally.

As long as people play music and keep their mouths shut, using whatever wrong ideas they want doesn't harm anybody. However, when they start to "explain" or "teach" they better acquire some knowledge first. If they pretend they are playing something "modal", they first have to know what "modes" and "modal" mean, what they are and how they sound. When I see people trying to "teach" here when what they know about modes is some diffuse ideas they got from some other "jazz book" and how the "scales" have "modes", how you play in this "mode" over this "chord" and blah blah blah, then the boundaries are broken, and this is really hurting, because spreading wrong theories and ideas will only spread the error, and serves nothing.

OTOH, if people understand modes, know what they are and how they were (and ARE) used, but still say: "yet, I want to do this instead, this way", then it's OK with me, because they KNOW what they are doing, and then it's all about choices.

[zethus909]

its modal harmony as opposed to "tonal" harmony. using chords based on the modal intervals...instead of using scalar-based harmony, like using harmonic minor or melodic minor scales and building your harmony from that. modal harmony is "cleaner"

A lot of bulls!t.

First, what kind of "intervals" are "modal intervals"? There is only one kind of intervals, AFAIK.

Second, using harmonic minor or melodic minor scales. There is only one minor scale. Harmonic and melodic are variations of the same scale. The harmony, BTW, is the same.

Third, building your harmony from the "scale"... You don't build your harmony form the scale, you build it from the tonal functions, no matter what "scale" (i presume you meant "tonality") you are.

Forth. Modal Harmony is cleaner... Cleaner why? In what way? And what is "modal harmony" in first place? Does it have dissonant chords? Just prfect triads. Does it have polar chords? Cadences?

Perhaps you should start to post "your" definition, just to see in what basis you are talking.

someone's upset. music theory is descriptive not prescriptive . modal harmony is cleaner because it's based on Ancient Greek intervals, the C major scale , it's the cleanest sound . using these intervals at various different starting points will create clean harmonies that allow for the most flexibility . it's once u start using intervals that are more MELODIC based that you start to degrade the derivative harmony . this is just common sense. if you are using specific patterns of intervals (scales) that are meant to reinforce melody (jazz minor ), then this will intrinsically erode the intrinsic HARMONIC capacity of those interval patterns to be used as chords . this is basic. don't know why u r getting upset seriously but even still lis music theory is DESCRIPTIVE not PRESCRIPTIVE, so u shouldn't be referencing it to actually create musical pieces. music theory is just an explanation, it is completely worthless with respect to being creative and creating your own music .

[JumpingJackFlash]

Oh dear.

[jancivil]

Wowie zowie

1st, the dichotomy between looking at 'theory' and yer creativity is unnecessary, bogus and anti-useful. You're just being willfully ignorant. & No One should advise you to 'create' following a 'music theory' book in your hand, and no one here has.

Then, I should reinforce that 'modal harmony' has not heretofore been shown to be meaningful, really. We're merely talking of making triads off of a set of single notes; now the usefulness of really a language which suits the major/minor tonal (dominant/tonic) paradigm won't travel to modal use at all because the latter is antithetical to the former. Diff lingo. IE: V to I isn't it. Dominant in C major, eg., G B (D) F, B F D not only fails to enhance eg., D Dorian or E Phrygian particularly, by definition it creates a problem: the tension we'll all experience, as if resolution to Tonic, C, is imminent.

Chords in modal usage should enhance the experience of the mode, if not, lose 'em. Shut Up 'n Play Yer Guitar ie., Inca Roads vamp is D, C. D Mixolydian. The theme ultimately (@7:45) is MI FA SOL, MI FA SOL, MI fa,mi RE, DO ^DO SOL... etc.


Less is More. If yer tryina be cute with a whole lotta chords your thrust is antithetical to modal music PERIOD.