Commonly Used Modal Scales and Chords in Electronic Music

[D.Josef]

MfLi, sir, you are a class 1 troll of galactic proportions.

I really don't know what to say to you, if all you're coming away is some resentment at the "evil stingy old people", who shouted you into the ground.

If you haven't noticed, when you posted this topic, there was an almost identical one below it ("Playing in modes"), where people have already explained several times why you cannot just build triads and seventh chords over modes mindlessly* and expect them to remain modes.
* - Contrary to ghettosynth's interpretation, mindlessly here doesn't mean "stupidly", or "while also being stupid", but instead it means "without thought". It means "hey I have these seven notes, so let's see, one triad, two triads, three triads, hey it's working haha".

That, in itself, is an act against all known forum etiquette. Then, when you were called out, you began a psychological game of shifting around and trying to come out of the whole thing looking as good as you can, which, I think, is the pinnacle of trolldom.

BTW, not that it counts for anything, but did you or did you not in the end understand what is wrong with your chords? If you did, then just write the whole exchange here up as "well older people can be aggressive as hell", but since you've learned something new, I'd just let it go in your place.

[jancivil]

Well, while in the midst of some bellicose gestures, I was quite generous in spending my time explaining the issue here, as I am wont to do. One can, instead expend quite some effort in the exercise this 'ghettosynth' enjoyed here, pointless dishonest argumentation, a poor man's sophistry and towards a laundry list of logical fallacies, to no gain, least of all to himself. Which is where I think 'you have little business here' comes in. These threads where someone failed to respect teh EDMs is where he decides to really waste some server space.

You're so COMPETITIVE. But you have no chops. There is no idea there (and you expose yourself as lacking the first clue), it's just reaction. It's a great wasteland of garbage. Don't kid yourself!

[jancivil]

Let's look at language clearly, as D.Josef indicates: Mindless has an opposite, 'mindful'.
I really expect people will for the most part at least be mindful of a forum and the use of space. I think it's in the rules here, to look for a thread with your issue a bit first. It is normal etiquette for a forum in any case.

There are so many iterations of this topic more or less identical to this, so we have had to rehash what is in a thread just next to this for the benefit of a guy that can't be arsed to find even that, or he doesn't care? I predicted that he won't learn. He is interested in justifying himself rather, I think. Certainly all he managed to come away with, after I rather clearly explained the actual issue, was I had 'pseudo-psychology' (Dunning-Kruger, sorry, no. I say you need to understand exactly this top-down assessment of yourself, it's all abundantly evident) and he was able to 'wrap' the substance up with one remark, which isn't relevant to the substance at all. Of course 'ghettosynth' the cherry-picker gets right behind these moves.

[tapper mike]

That actually makes it EASIER to make. The music theory that covers that is rather simple compared to all the other stuff out there. It's stuff every garage rocker knows

So to bring this back home, tell us what garage rockers know about modes?

Tonnes.

The Ramones, The Romantic, Sponge, Kid Rock, Bob Seger, Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels, ICP, on and on and on. All started as garage/basement musicians.

The thing is they know modes pragmatically (what works for them) In the context of Rock you only need use what applies to what you are doing right now.
Kenny Olson - http://kennyolson.com/kobio/
I know this guy. He taught here - http://www.musiccastle.com/mainFrame-1.htm
Along with Joey Mazolla http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sponge_(band)

They both taught students how to play rock using modes. It's not rocket science.

Many of his lessons were about how modes are used to develop riffs and leads over various progressions. When he started out he took what he needed and left what he didn't for another day. Same with many others.

Here is a clear cut example of playing modes in rock.
Johnny B Goode by Chuck Berry.
There are only three chords in the song, All of them are major. Bb-Eb-F The key is Bb. Chuck Berry does not use the Bb major (ionian) mode to solo over the progression. He uses mostly the Bb Mixolydian mode.
mostly as in 95 percent of all the notes in the song are directly from the mixolydian scale. the rest are neighboring tones as blues rock guys can tend to mix and match pentatonics with diatonics.

When one actually learns songs one gains a pragmatic approach. It may not be the original usage approach as cast in stone centuries gone by but creating music shouldn't be about waiting your turn and following everyone else's rules to make them happy. It's more about learning enough to satisfy your needs.

it takes less then an hour to understand how modes work in a rock context if you are willing to commit yourself to applying yourself. That understanding can easily be lost without applying the method later on.

Learn the mode, learn a song that uses the mode. Understand that the song can use other elements and don't disregard them. Apply the mode to your own improvisation. Later if you actually did learn the mode you will begin to recognize it in other songs as well you may learn riffs, licks, lines which are either wholly or partially derived from that mode.

Here is another example of using modes....


Skip to about 4:50
Freddie King is using a minor mode (minor pentatonic) against Major Chords. This minor against major creates the opporitunity for tension and resolution. It is a different approach to modes then Johnny B Goode and is explained in the RockSchool video a publication of the BBC from the 80's
Modes used in different contexts will affect different characteristics. However modes are but only a portion of the greater picture. Timing and technique. There is no golden secret of modes, no super mystery to unlock. There is only context.

Bizet's Carmen is resplendent with Chromaticism as is Chicago's 25 or 6 to Four. Does that make 25 or 6 to 4 sound more like Carmen then any other song by Chicago? No because the context is different.


I've already over explained it Too much explanation and contradiction defeat the purpose of learning how to play modes. A more practical and long term solution is simply to take a few minutes out of your playing day to improvise over the given mode and always try to incormporate some type of variance in expression such as timing technique etc. Drawing from what you hear and can learn by playing songs that incorporate them.

Thinking about modes too much while not applying them enough is like staring at your feet while trying to walk.

There is another matter which needs to be addressed in this thread which is fear.

When I first tried to play leads I was always afraid that I didn't know enough or I wasn't good enough and maybe with more knowledge I'd be a better player. That isn't necessarily true. If you are afraid that you have to have everything dead perfect before you can play anything it's a destructive force that closes off your potential. Playing scales and modes offers at first a chance to alieve fears by strengthening technique. It's not the end of the world to practice scales/modes for a few minutes every day while you work out the physical connection between hands and mind. You'll find you have to think less and play more consistently (anything not just scales) if you do. That's a decision you have to make for yourself. Are you in earnest wanting to be a better musician? Are you willing to learn from others? Can you enjoy performing works of others who you may enjoy listening to?

Fear stifles creativity it does not enhance it. Fear feeds on fear. Success feeds on success. You build on successes by putting fear to the side and focusing on what you want to accomplish not by avoiding what you don't want to.

[MfLI]

MfLi, sir, you are a class 1 troll of galactic proportions.

I really don't know what to say to you, if all you're coming away is some resentment at the "evil stingy old people", who shouted you into the ground.

If you haven't noticed, when you posted this topic, there was an almost identical one below it ("Playing in modes"), where people have already explained several times why you cannot just build triads and seventh chords over modes mindlessly* and expect them to remain modes.
* - Contrary to ghettosynth's interpretation, mindlessly here doesn't mean "stupidly", or "while also being stupid", but instead it means "without thought". It means "hey I have these seven notes, so let's see, one triad, two triads, three triads, hey it's working haha".

That, in itself, is an act against all known forum etiquette. Then, when you were called out, you began a psychological game of shifting around and trying to come out of the whole thing looking as good as you can, which, I think, is the pinnacle of trolldom.

BTW, not that it counts for anything, but did you or did you not in the end understand what is wrong with your chords? If you did, then just write the whole exchange here up as "well older people can be aggressive as hell", but since you've learned something new, I'd just let it go in your place.

I posted the triads of Aeolian in A and asked to point out which chord specifically you guys think doesn't fit. None of you guys have specifically answered. None. Untill you do that it really is quite all the same to me.

I'm actually even not so interested in literally following "modes" or "modal composition". I just picked up the idea of trying to find and create melodies/progressions by using scales based on modes since some articles made the point some modes (the Aeolian for example) is used more often than others.

I then studied various sources about which chords are acceptable per which scale and the built the VST preset based on those chords. Nothing more complex. Naturally I understand not all chords included sound good if played in random, but according to my current understanding they're all acceptable within that very scale and can be used in various situations.

Now you guys keep on ranting how this is totally unacceptable, all wrong and telling me how full of shit I am coming and teaching you here. Even tho I never did anything else but opened the discussion by: "Someone of you might find this interesting...". LOL. Some go all the way and by effort claiming you are right because you hold a PhD in music or aim at studying for one. I mean... How friggin desperate is that?!

Yet none of you have made the slightest effort in pointing out which chords I've put in my little midi-file or VST preset are unfit or totally out of place. The example midi-file is in A Aeolian (A natural minor) and the file is downloadable at my little blog post. So according it should be fairly easy for you "pro":s to point out which ones deffo doesn't fit that scale.

Point the flawed ones out and I'll gladly correct the file.

It really seems for you "modal purists" my approcah is straight out heresy (actually pretty funny in this very context don't you think! FYI: I'm left handed too - so... Pretty, darn evil I am!)

[jancivil]

MfLi, sir, you are a class 1 troll of galactic proportions.

I really don't know what to say to you, if all you're coming away is some resentment at the "evil stingy old people", who shouted you into the ground.

If you haven't noticed, when you posted this topic, there was an almost identical one below it ("Playing in modes"), where people have already explained several times why you cannot just build triads and seventh chords over modes mindlessly* and expect them to remain modes.
* - Contrary to ghettosynth's interpretation, mindlessly here doesn't mean "stupidly", or "while also being stupid", but instead it means "without thought". It means "hey I have these seven notes, so let's see, one triad, two triads, three triads, hey it's working haha".

That, in itself, is an act against all known forum etiquette. Then, when you were called out, you began a psychological game of shifting around and trying to come out of the whole thing looking as good as you can, which, I think, is the pinnacle of trolldom.

BTW, not that it counts for anything, but did you or did you not in the end understand what is wrong with your chords? If you did, then just write the whole exchange here up as "well older people can be aggressive as hell", but since you've learned something new, I'd just let it go in your place.

I posted the triads of Aeolian in A and asked to point out which chord specifically you guys think doesn't fit. None of you guys have specifically answered. None. Untill you do that it really is quite all the same to me.

I'm actually even not so interested in literally following "modes" or "modal composition". I just picked up the idea of trying to find and create melodies/progressions by using scales based on modes since some articles made the point some modes (the Aeolian for example) is used more often than others.

Your answer to D.Josef's question is NO, you didn't get it. I predicted you won't learn it. You have perfectly shown what I meant. You can't be bothered to read the material offered you. You still want people to, for free, go through your midi and make corrections. The corrections aren't it. This was indicated to you numerous times by three people. You weren't interested in modes at all, as I suggested. So great, you show us that you had the full capacity of mind required to automatically form triads up to the seventh onto each of seven notes (Where you exceeded that task, I think you botched it.).
Did you think this was news worth sharing? No, you can't be arsed to look around, you had to share the blog, where you framed it as 'modal'... 'in electronic music'. If it totally sounds like the triads in C Major, you do not have 'the triads of A Aeolian'. I'm sure you don't give a shit, but that has to be clarified.

If it's all the same to you, shut up and go do what you find interesting to do. You're a waste of everybody that understands the thing here's time.

[JumpingJackFlash]

Very similar than the "lot" here is. With their PhD's and what not. Already then I made the simple assumption they would never achieve much at least in the context of becoming cool and liked well performing popular music artists. Cert not superhot DJ's! ROFLMAO!!!

Indeed. The fact that you value being "cool" above actually learning stuff says a great deal.

In a more perfect world, music theory experts would be well-respected by society, well-paid for their knowledge, and secure enough in their sense of self-worth that they wouldn't feel the need to rage and skirmish over minuscule scraps of recognition and validation on some obscure website forum.

Incidentally, I consider myself quite well paid for what I do (teach music), generally fairly well respected too. I'm not saying this to blow my own trumpet, but just to correct your incorrect assumption.

Point the flawed ones out and I'll gladly correct the file.

I actually dealt with this at the bottom of my first post on this topic; right there on the first page. You don't appear to be listening. Why bother asking the question if you're not going to listen to the answer?

[MfLI]

You still want people to, for free, go through your midi and make corrections. The corrections aren't it.

... ...

You're a waste of everybody that understands the thing here's time.

Yea... It's about money and your superior talent. You now need to work free for me!

BUUAAHHHAHHAHAHAH!

[MfLI]

I actually dealt with this at the bottom of my first post on this topic; right there on the first page. You don't appear to be listening. Why bother asking the question if you're not going to listen to the answer?

I'm gonna use you for free too now!

Seriously... Just point out the flawed chords in the scale... Or go away. I'm not one tad interested in reading your intended goodwill from between the lines after all the crap you have written here so far.

[jancivil]

OMIGOD. I'm not cool to someone with the intellectual and emotional capacity of an 11 year old.

Yes, I think I'll decide how generous I need to be with you. This is the limit of it.

[MfLI]

OMIGOD. I'm not cool to someone with the intellectual and emotional capacity of an 11 year old.

Yes, I think I'll decide how generous I need to be with you. This is the limit of it.

Really!? Is this the last I'm reading from you?

....



THANK YOU!

[IncarnateX]

Modes are MELODIC material, not harmonic material. The person interested really in modes is looking for the character and feel they avail us of. The interest is in melody, chords isn't it.

The thing is, triadic harmony is a feature of tonality, but it doesn't work the same way (if at all) with modality. Typically, modal music uses very few chords.

Actually, you couldn't be more wrong. You need to get off your high horses and start doing your homework. I suggest reading Jeppesen, especially page 80.

Here is a short quote for you:

Every ecclesiastical mode actually has at its disposal many more
chordal possibilities than the major and minor scales. If we compare,
for example, the Dorian with D minor (the two having almost the same
scale) we see that the Dorian has two triads (D major and D minor)
on the first degree, whereas the D minor scale has only one. On the
second degree there are two possibilities available for the ecclesiastical
mode, but only one for the D minor scale.
...
As may be seen, we have in the Dorian no less than six pure triads — the
most valuable tonal combinations — which deviate from D minor: D
major, E minor, F major, G major, A minor, and C major.

Your complete lack of understanding of modal music is immediately apparent to anyone with the slightest knowledge of the Palestrina style and you are totally out of line lecturing the OP the way you have been doing. The only thing you have achieved in this thread is making yourselves look like arrogant idiots. YOU are the ones spreading misunderstandings and you need to just STFU and stop pretending you are music theory experts.

Why do things always get so blurred and complicated at higher academic levels?
Where is the simplicity of being an undergraduate in all this? I only spend a couple of years at music school before shifting my interests but at that time the distinction between tonality and modality was quite simple. Tonality referring to musical principles from about 1700 and forward that were based on the basic minor and major scales and the functional harmony of triads like dominant, subdominat ect. That is Chords. Modality reffered to the church like melodies which may be harmonized but would not necessarily fall into the standard functional harmony of the basic minor and major scale (e.g. the dominant triad of mixolydian is actually a minor and not major as in c major). In addition the musical context was said to be more based on the melodies relation to the tonal center than to their relation to the the basic triads, especially since modal melodies could be based both on harmonisations or elder forms of counter point to which the general rules of harmonisation do not apply. At that time it sounded quite simply and could swear I got it, but now I am baffled by the above. I guess it will be in vain to hope for some consensual clarification here? And yes I may not be knowing what I am talking about, so need to point that out for a starter.

[JumpingJackFlash]

I'm gonna use you for free too now!

You're welcome.

Seriously... Just point out the flawed chords in the scale... Or go away. I'm not one tad interested in reading your intended goodwill from between the lines after all the crap you have written here so far.

See, this is the problem right here.
You can learn a lot from people on here (not just me), but not only do you refuse to listen, you actually take time to insult us.

As a teacher, I'm happy to help you - the student - but first you have to respect that dynamic, or it's not going to work (that is, you won't learn anything). The sooner you drop the arrogance and start listening, the better off you will be.

[jancivil]

I suggest reading Jeppesen, especially page 80.

Here is a short quote for you:

Every ecclesiastical mode actually has at its disposal many more
chordal possibilities than the major and minor scales. If we compare,
for example, the Dorian with D minor (the two having almost the same
scale) we see that the Dorian has two triads (D major and D minor)
on the first degree, whereas the D minor scale has only one. On the
second degree there are two possibilities available for the ecclesiastical
mode, but only one for the D minor scale.
...
As may be seen, we have in the Dorian no less than six pure triads — the
most valuable tonal combinations — which deviate from D minor: D
major, E minor, F major, G major, A minor, and C major.

You have confounded this rather later text with Palestrina in some remarks which seem to want to support you as one with more expertise.

(The Dorian in the Palestrinian style has naught to do with 'minor'. Minor is a MUCH later development. Do you actually take Palestrina, your example in this bullying gesture, for working triad to triad? Please demonstrate through your work with his music how this happened.)

Let me get to the heart of the matter: One might find these six triads useful to support modal tunes. But did you notice that the very argument I have made, that JJF has made, that these two things do not work the same, is that missing #7 chord? The one with the B and F 'vi' vis a vis D Dorian? Because it will do what it does, beg for C major.

So in your haste to call me and JJF idiots, you have actually produced a document in support of the thing our argument hinges on. Basically your whole move is evidence of incompetence. Do shut up.

[JumpingJackFlash]

I got it, but now I am baffled by the above. I guess it will be in vain to hope for some consensual clarification here? And yes I may not be knowing what I am talking about, so need to point that out for a starter.

I followed up on that a few posts later (it was nonsense).
There's little point in going over the ground here now because it will be missed in all the flaming, but a few misconceptions aside, your basic understanding is essentially right - certainly I would say you have a better grasp than some others who have posted on here.