Commonly Used Modal Scales and Chords in Electronic Music

[egbert]

Mixed in with all the abuse in this thread are some interesting points. The one about the role of musicianship is interesting to me.

If you look at the role of 3D printing in fabrication of parts, none of the traditional skills involved in manipulating and working materials on a lathe for example are needed. If you can define the shape mathematically in a CAD program, it can be made. This is comparable to musical composition in a DAW.

Are traditional music making skills still useful? When neuroscientists look using real time scanning equipment at the way the brain processes music in real time they find that professional musicians are in a category of their own - different neural activity patterns from those observed in amateurs and from ordinary folk who merely listen to music. It seems likely that such people are perceiving and understanding more about what is going on in a musical context - these people are more likely (I suspect) to be able to play or sing back what the different instruments were playing in a section of music they just heard.

Without training your ear and your perception of pitch and time the music you can make is itself perhaps limited. Whether you can acquire this sort of perception just working in a computer environment is an interesting question. Without doubt, a lot more of the music we hear is going to come from this kind of music creator.

[Frantz]

I am the biggest self-proclaimed expert in the universe. How dare you talk about modes without discussing the Depeche mode! You are all misedumacated.

[ghettosynth]

You're equating success with quality

Those are your words, not mine. Success is success, and quality is subjective.

, don't you think that there's something "wrong" with that line of argumentation?

I don't know, it's your argument, not mine.

Or why are you citing people who produce inconsequential fluff but are successful with it? What's your point?

To refute the validity of your statement that you must walk before you can run. Clearly, it's not necessary. I have given you two solid counterexamples, I can give you dozens more.

You're celebrating mediocrity, that's basically all you're saying.

I'm not celebrating anything, and it's your opinion that their music is mediocre. They will disagree with you, and by all rights, they have the sales to tell you STFU.

If even one "producer" reads this and takes music lessons as a result of having been exposed to these opinions, wouldn't that be worth it?

Why? How would that change the world? You can't even state how it would change that individual's EDM? Maybe it would be worth it, maybe it would be a waste of time and a distraction. Every choice to do something is a choice to not do something else.

[fmr]

But ignorance will always be ignorance, no matter how successful it is.

Did you read that off of a halmark card? Is BB-King a part of this "ignorant success" that you're talking about? Why don't you send him and email and tell him how ignorant he is and how he should buckle down and study church modes some more so that he can be a real musician like you guys?

How do you know that these kids are still ignorant? How do you know that they aren't learning what they need to learn to be successful in their craft and grow as artists? You don't. Moreover, how ignorant is too ignorant for a 19 year old? Should they halt their career to meet this forum's vision of musical success?

Regarding BB King, I have no interest in calling him ignorant. or diminishing his work based on his lack of knowledgeable. He was humble enough to recognize his limits, and my rspects to him for that. And at least he didn't create of blog pretending to teach others what he didn't know in the beginning, or claiming that was the right path.

Let's talk about that vision and how successful people are here who are following this path. Should people strive to be like jancivil, is that a measure of success as a musician? How many people here actually live off of selling records and performing? From my vantage point the overwhelming majority, like most of my musician friends/acquaintances, earn their living from 1) Teaching, 2) Retail sales, or 3) Commercial work, e.g. jingles, music on hold, etc. Oh, but they have knowledge. The happiest and most successful friends/acquaintances, with one relatively famous exception, work in EDM where DJing is still in demand.

Then of course we have academics, a couple in here. That's not even interesting to someone into EDM. Not in music at any rate. Someone who's into EDM is not interested in "starting their Ph.D. in church modes."

So, tell me again why this path of "nose to the theory grindstone" is the only true way to music bliss, especially for someone who's primarily interested in EDM?

There are many ways to work in music, and make a living in music, Many great artists and composers worked much time in the shadow, doing their jobs humbly, concerned just with their art and craftmanship. Evetualy, some becam successful, others remained in the shadow until they died. That doesn't make them less artists, just less successful.

EDM is now a field where kids with little knowledge can achieve great success? Fine for them. In spite of some interesting works that can come from that field, the majority are just consumer products, that I have no interest on. They can be mass entertainment, but they surelly lack artistry, IMO. Sincerely, I don't care how successful those guys and gals are. or if they are or not interested in real music artistry (some are, and are even very experimental and knowledgeable, using very advanced tools, and very gifted musicaly in their path).

As long as those with little knowledge that achieve success don't try to establish their values and their (lack of) knowledge as "the way to go", all is fine with me.

[ghettosynth]

Without training your ear and your perception of pitch and time the music you can make is itself perhaps limited. Whether you can acquire this sort of perception just working in a computer environment is an interesting question.

Out of curiosity, do you DJ? By which, I mean either with records, or digitally with manual synchronization? The reason that I ask is because hearing out of sync records is a learned skill. It would be interesting to see how DJs differ from the public, and other non-DJ musicians in a neuronal sense. The real point here is that neuronal differences are something of a chicken and egg phenomena. Because brains are different owing to training doesn't mean that the difference is necessary, it just means that it is a consequence of training.

It's interesting because it's one of those things that, once learned, you become attuned to it. You can hear when records slip a little bit and nobody around you is noticing at all.

Without doubt, a lot more of the music we hear is going to come from this kind of music creator.

Indeed.

[ariston]

To refute the validity of your statement that you must walk before you can run. Clearly, it's not necessary. I have given you two solid counterexamples, I can give you dozens more.

(...)

I'm not celebrating anything, and it's your opinion that their music is mediocre. They will disagree with you, and by all rights, they have the sales to tell you STFU.

The "counterexamples" you have given are, to stay with my metaphor, people who are trying to walk before they can crawl. But feel free to post some more musical tripe to further undermine your weak position.

You're saying that "quality=success" is not your line of argumentation, and then you say something like "they have the sales to tell you STFU". Come again?

If a million people do a foolish thing, it remains a foolish thing.

[JumpingJackFlash]

Then of course we have academics, a couple in here. That's not even interesting to someone into EDM. Not in music at any rate. Someone who's into EDM is not interested in "starting their Ph.D. in church modes."

So, tell me again why this path of "nose to the theory grindstone" is the only true way to music bliss, especially for someone who's primarily interested in EDM?

You keep changing the subject, probably because you realsie you're out of your depth.

As I said before, this is a music theory forum. We discuss musics theory. Yes, of course it is possible to be successful without knowing any music theory, but that's not the point. We're not talking about being successful, we're talking about music theory, which lies primarily in the sphere of academia.

Nobody is forcing you to look at music theory, by all means avoid it completely if you wish. You may or may not be successful, it doesn't matter.

But if you do look at music theory, then you should learn it correctly, and more importantly, you need to teach it correctly.

The OP was concerned with "scales and chords", which clearly falls into the category of "music theory". Not only that, but he presents himself as an authority on the subject, presenting information to others. As such, any criticism of the "blog" is perfectly valid. Upon reading comments from people more knowledgeable that himself, the correct response would have been something with the words "sorry" and/or "thank you" in it, but instead we get all this stubborn bravado and defensive argumentation. There are lots of things I don't know much about, and if some professor with more knowledge than me comes along and puts me right on a few things, then that's great - I would be grateful to benefit from their wisdom. I certainly wouldn't keep insisting that I was right, or that my ignorance is actually helpful to me!

Another thing you've mentioned is an "anti-EDM" vibe, which is again changing the subject. The point here is the music theory not the style, specifically the use of modes and chords. Whether you appreciate it or not, those terms carry a certain meaning. You can't just hijack them to mean whatever you want them to. Using them in the wrong context is incorrect - you might think you're using D Dorian or whatever, but in reality, if you don't appreciate what that actually means, you won't really be in D Dorian at all. - So in effect, you've taken something useful and distorted it through ignorance so it becomes something entirely different. As such, something important has been lost. It doesn't matter what the style is; if it isn't D Dorian (for example), it is wrong to call it such.

I have absolutely no problem with people who are ignorant, nor even with people who wish to remain ignorant. It's not something I understand, but if it works for you, fine. What I do have a problem with though is an ignorant person passing themselves off as an authority on a subject that they don't fully understand. It is dishonest and irresponsible, and it misleads innocent people who genuinely want to learn. - It is these hypothetical people that I am sticking up for here; if they want to learn, they deserve to learn correctly, not be confused by misinformation. Not everyone is happy with ignorance.

[ghettosynth]

Then of course we have academics, a couple in here. That's not even interesting to someone into EDM. Not in music at any rate. Someone who's into EDM is not interested in "starting their Ph.D. in church modes."

So, tell me again why this path of "nose to the theory grindstone" is the only true way to music bliss, especially for someone who's primarily interested in EDM?

You keep changing the subject, probably because you realsie you're out of your depth.

[Doug1978]

Very interesting thread, and whilst I don't pretend to understand all the points raised, it certainly has given me further food for thought.

In passing though (because I realise this is a Music Theory forum), is such a thing as a professor of ignorance possible?

Cheers

[andrew71]

In passing though (because I realise this is a Music Theory forum), is such a thing as a professor of ignorance possible?

As George Bernard-Shaw wrote, "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach."

[ghettosynth]

To refute the validity of your statement that you must walk before you can run. Clearly, it's not necessary. I have given you two solid counterexamples, I can give you dozens more.

(...)

I'm not celebrating anything, and it's your opinion that their music is mediocre. They will disagree with you, and by all rights, they have the sales to tell you STFU.

The "counterexamples" you have given are, to stay with my metaphor, people who are trying to walk before they can crawl. But feel free to post some more musical tripe to further undermine your weak position.

They're examples of people who are successful doing what they want to do.

[codec_spurt]

It is worth studying them - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mode_%28music%29#Analysis

Each gives a different flavour. And you laugh when you realise you just have to raise the tone a bar or two.


Egyptian. Jazz..


Now the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mixolydian_mode is something else


But all that is basic. Let us get fruity. It is the Minor for us.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_scale

Let us not get into the melodic minor and its counter intuitive ups and downs.

What we really want is the Harmonic Minor:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_scal ... inor_scale

It is unusual in that it has a whole tone and a half jump. Get used to it. It is part of this scale's charm. Almost exotic. This is the scale you want to play on guitar if you want to pretend you are playing Sitar.


Also check out this school. You will spend a whole lifetime if you want:


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic_maqam


You will find the harmonic minor in there.

[codec_spurt]

In passing though (because I realise this is a Music Theory forum), is such a thing as a professor of ignorance possible?

As George Bernard-Shaw wrote, "Those who can, do; those who can't, teach."

Tell that to the Indians who teach the Rag.

I know you are being ironic.

You are being ironic?

[ariston]

They're examples of people who are successful doing what they want to do.

And that's just wonderful for them. If that's all they want, great. My cousin's aim in life is to start something like Yogscast and become rich overnight. If he succeeds, more power to him. That would never be enough for me, but that's just my personal opinion.

Although it may not sound like it, but I tend to occupy some sort of middle ground between the snobbishness of the classically-trained crowd and the dumbed-down DIY mindset of the producer crowd (to use these terms as broad generalizations). To act like music is some sort of dark art that takes decades to master is just as wrong as acting like it can be done by stringing a few loops together. I'm glad that computers have levelled the playing field, but there are drawbacks. You can't just eschew centuries of knowledge and advancement and expect to come up with something meaningful. The more musical pablum is spread around, the more I feel I have to uphold certain standards, to keep things in balance. So while I'm not holding any claim towards the truth, I'm adamant in defending my truth.

[codec_spurt]

This is not just common to electronic music.

It is but it is common to electric guitar.

If you got a red Telecaster, then these scales will do.