What are good modes/scales for writing dark heavy electronic srtuff?

[Forgotten]

I think per fmr's comment it's really down to wording, and it sounded like you were suggesting to flatten the 9th in the Phrygian mode, which would make it the octave. I assume you weren't (as it's obvious you have musical education), but it was how it sounded on first read. Obviously compared to a major scale the 9th is flat.

[fmr]

Good grief.

Phrygian certainly does have a flat 9th, relative to the major scale’s, which is typically what modes and scales are related back to, in this way.

"relative to the major scale's"??? "in this way???

It also has the same "flatten 9th" relative to the minor mode, or to the Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, etc. Why should it be "relative" to anything? And "which way" are you talking about?

Phrygian is a mode. The "major scale" is ANOTHER mode (actually, it's the major MODE - technically, a "scale" is a succession of notes, whatever it is. You can play "scales" withing the phrygian mode). Phrygian is phrygian, major is major, minor is minor, dorian is dorian, etc. Nothing is "related" to anything else, except if you are trying to determine how you modulate from one to the other. Then yes, if you "flatten" the ii degree, you can modulate (pretty much any other mode) to the phrygian mode, somehow, depending how you proceed.

For someone who studied "music theory" you talk a lot of rubbish. But that doesn't surprise me. You Tube is full of people "teaching" music theory, and talking the same rubbish. I'm lacking the patiente to fight against these stupid "music theories" made by people who know very little to nothing about modes (or music theory, for that matter).

[Etienne1973]

What if I wanna describe the Phrygian structure: 1 b2 b3 4 5 b6 b7

b2 gives me the info that the 1st step is a halftone.

What's wrong?

[fmr]

What if I wanna describe the Phrygian structure: 1 b2 b3 4 5 b6 b7

b2 gives me the info that the 1st step is a halftone.

What's wrong?

What's wrong? Everything? What does those b mean, anyway? Flats? What if you start the Phrygian mode in C# or F#? Or in Bb?

It's the same as if you define the minor Mode as 1, 2, b3, 4, 5, b6, b7 - that's WRONG, because there are no absolute flats or sharps in a mode. It always depend on which note you start. That's why we use key signatures too.

And how do you define the major MODE that way then? 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7? How do you know where to place the semitones? You have no flats there...

That means you simply don't know much about the modes, that's all, Thats why you need stupid mnemonics. It's the stupid modern tendency to define EVERYTHING in relation to Major and to 4/4, as if there was nothing else in music. Narrow minded.

[Etienne1973]

I agree, it's not the most official way. Sure b2 (flat 2) has no absolute meaning if we imply actual notes. But it gives (at least) me a quick overview about mode structures and their differences.

Yes, you got me with Major (Ionian). I would describe its structure in a chordal way:

1 9 3 4(11) 5 13 maj7

You won!

I'm inconsistent.

Positive is that you made me criticize my own way of communicating modes, really.

Negative is that you come off like one of those arrogant Frank Zappa fans.

[fmr]

Positive is that you made me criticize my own way of communicating modes, really.

Negative is that you come off like one of those arrogant Frank Zappa fans.

Sorry, I appear as arrogant, but that's just my temper. When I'm angry, I tend to react in a way that seems arrogant, but I usually make an effort to not fall into that trap. So, picking your method:

Positive: You made me recognize I lost my temper, and appear as an arrogant prick. For that, I sincerely apologize. I'm not a Frank Zappa fan, BTW

Negative: You showed me, once again, how bad the music teaching is nowadays, and how confusing people are about tonality and the tonal system, what are modes, what are scales, etc. There's nothing wrong in having quick mnemonics. The problem is when people take mnemonics as a theoretical base for something. When you start from a wrong base, you most certainly will reach wrong conclusions.

[Etienne1973]

Peace!

So no sarcasm. I think this a good chance. I wanna learn. What is the best way to describe (write down) mode structures? How should we communicate in this regard? You wrote something about degrees.

[AsPeeXXXVIII]

Chromatic.

[fmr]

Peace!

So no sarcasm. I think this a good chance. I wanna learn. What is the best way to describe (write down) mode structures? How should we communicate in this regard? You wrote something about degrees.

I will try to be as clear and simple as possible.

Modes started a long time ago (in the Greek civilization), as a system to create music. Then in the Middle Ages, something similar (in terms of names, nothing else) appeared.

Basically, each mode is a "mood" (it creates a certain atmosphere). Music was purely monodic (there was no harmony), and each mode had its own behavior.

There were eight modes (authentic/plagal), grouped in pairs:

First/Second (Mode of D / Mode of A)
Third/Fourth (Mode of E / Mode of B)
Fifth / Sixth (Mode of F / Mode of C)
Seventh / Eighth (Mode of G / Mode of D - this last one not to be confused with the first mode).

Second, fourth, sixth and eighth modes had no autonomy regarding the first, third, fifth and seventh. They were kind of secondary. Although the first note of these modes was respectively A, B, C and D, the last note (which we could consider as the modern tonic) was still D, E, F and G.

Music evolved slowly, first by flattening the B, to avoid the augmented fourth, and later with the raising of the seventh degree to create a leading tone to the "tonic", among other things. This mainly happened when music started to be performed polyphonically. Polyphony strated around the X century, and these "alterations" started around the XIII century. They contributed to close some gaps between the different modes. Then, two modes arose as the main ones - the mode of D (which was always the most important), and the mode of F. The first gave birth to the minor mode, and the second to the Major mode (Major is nothing else then the mode of F with the B flat, which was commonly used instead of B to avoid the augmented fourht, and minor is the mode of D with the already mentioned B flat, used for the exact same reasons, and the raised seventh to create the leading tone).

This, connected with the apearance of the Opera, which created the accompanied melody (one single voice supported by harmonic instruments) led to the appearance of the tonal system, which preserved only two modes - D and F, now called minor and Major, mainly because of the third degree. Minor mode, however, was always a kind of hybrid, allowing the ancient modal practice (without the leading tone) allowing also the tonal functions, especially the V - I chord progressions (with the leading tone) and finally, with a modification introduced by Bach, using a major upper tetrachord when going up, and a minor upper tetrachord when going down. This of course, also because the mode of D was always the most important, kept the minor mode somehow predominat over the Major.

Now, how do we determine what each mode is? Exactly the same way we determine how a melody is in Major or minor - by the way it is played/sung. Each mode has its own "mood" (again, that what mode means).

The Mode of D (Dorian) is very close to the minor mode (natural). We can think of it as D minor with a raised vi degree. So, when we want to use it starting in other note, we think minor and raise the vi. This gives it a kind of solemn/religious/mystic flavor (my personal feeling). We can treat it almost tonally, except for the absence of the leading tone, which avoids the V - I. One very well known melody in the Mode of D is Scarborough Fair.

The mode of F (Lydian) is the Major mode with the augmented fourth (raised IV). Again - think major and raise the IV degree. This gives it a very hard behavior, great for majestic/heroic tracks (this is my personal view). This is basically tonal.

The Mode of G (Mixolydian) is the Major mode without the leading tone. So, think Major, and lower the vii degree. This gives it a tonal/modal flavor that's very appropriate for calling "ancient" atmospheres, with strong feelings but without the tonal V - I progression.

Finally, the more tricky mode of E (Phrygian). This mode has very unusual sequence, with a semitone between the I and the ii degree, and a minor upper tetrachord without leading tone. This calls for mystery, meditative, maybe even thrilling music, because of the tension that can be created with it. One of the most beautiful hymns from the Medieval Ages, the Pange Lingua, is in the mode of E. Take a listen.

Some modern scholars, based on a treaty written in the Renaissance, tried to "complete" the system. But the proposed new modes (like the Ionian and the Locrian) were never used in music - they were just theoretical. By the time that first treaty was written, the system was already changing anyway, and the modal system was about to be replaced by the tonal system (minor/Major only). That's why I didn't mention the "other" modes.

Another thing. Some authors mention "ancient" modes and "modern" modes, aor ancient ways of working with modes and modern ways of working with modes. I don't subscribe or accept that. Modes were used the exact same way even modernly, by composers like Debussy, for example, or more recently Messiaen and others. What happens is that these composers also used OTHER modes, modes with less than seventh notes, like the whole tone mode and the pentatonic mode, or with more than seventh notes. I personally also use modes with more than seventh notes. But that's another subject entirely.

I should also mention two other well known modes, that are outside of the classic modal system, but were present in traditional music since a very long time: The hispano-arabic mode (also known as phrygian dominant, although it has nothing to do with the mode of E), which can be found in flamenco music and other traditional music of Spain and Portugal, and the gypsy mode - this one is very interesting, IMO, as it has two symmetrical tetrachords, both with augmented second intervals. It can be found in gypsy folk music.

Sorry if this is TLDR kind of stuff. This is a subject that calls for treaties with hundreds of pages. I tried to keep it as simple as possible.

[Etienne1973]

It's a pleasure to carefully read and think about music that way, Fernando!

You are a musician but also a historian. Where does your deep interest in music history comes from?

[Forgotten]

I think what he posted is part of most curricula for study of music in any academic institute and most serious books.

[vurt]

It's a pleasure to carefully read and think about music that way, Fernando!

You are a musician but also a historian. Where does your deep interest in music history comes from?

he lived it. hes actually close to 700 years old.
doesnt look a day over 400 if you ask me.

[vurt]

I think what he posted is part of most curricula for study of music in any academic institute and most serious books.

i better eff off then ...

[Forgotten]

I think what he posted is part of most curricula for study of music in any academic institute and most serious books.

i better eff off then ...

Muzik iz serious busines

[fmr]

I think what he posted is part of most curricula for study of music in any academic institute and most serious books.

Yes, it is in the curricula for academic institutes. A few things I wrote are from my personal research, but most of it is common knowledge, that I humbly studied and learned, out of my passion for music, and for modal music in particular.

Unfortunately, either it has been badly teached in latest years, or most people haven't paid attention. I'm also aware that popular musicians and jazz musicians have developed "mnemonics" to quickly devise which notes or melodic sequences go with which chords, and have called those mnemonics "modes". This is a wrong approach, IMNSHO, and have been leading to all this confusion we now see spread all over about what are modes, how they are used, etc. This is also why many people say the modes are derived from the major scale (which clearly they are not). Modes preceded the Major mode by many centuries, and actually it was the opposite - it was Major that came out of a mode.

I am not the kind of guy that thinks there are "laws" in music, and I accept whatever fits in each one musical approach, as long as there is an inherent good taste (and good results). But I also think that a deeper knowledge of what things are would not hurt anyone, and stop spreading rubbish also wouldn't hurt either. Keep using the mnemonics, if they are useful, but keep in mind that those "modes" are not really modes, but simply scales played inside a tonality, which may be Major, minor, or something else.

I remember when I was learning piano, a common technique exercize was practicing "scales". We usually started our lessons by playing a scale (lets say G Major), first in octaves, then in sixths, then in thirds and/or in tenths. When we play a scale in thirds or in sixths, the right hand (if in G major, following the example I start with) would start in E (if in sixths) or in B (if in thirds/tenths), and play the scale from that note on. Following the popular/jazz logic, we could say we were playing the Ionian mode with the left hand, and the Aeolian mode with the right hand (if playing in sixths) or the Phrygian mode (if playing in thirds/tenths). Of course, it would never cross our mind to say that. We were very aware we were still playing G Major and nothing else, except starting in a different note.