How important are modes when playing piano?

[lilawreebeats]

Ive been doing research and trying to understand the purpose of modes when composing these tracks. I usually make my beats in the natural minor scale, but Im ready to venture out...never took piano lessons, but I'm wondering can learning modes really up your skills?

 

[bandcoach]

1) You know the modes already: simply start on a different note and play the same scale, new mode of that scale.
2) The modes for the natural minor are the same as the modes for the Major, as the natural minor is a mode of the major
3) Modes of the harmonic Minor are known as Klezmer scales
4) Modes of the Ascending Melodic Minor are known as Jazz minor modes

Modes of the major (C major example)
Ionian: CDEFGABC ~ TTSTTTS
Dorian: DEFGABCD ~ TSTTTST
Phrygian: EFGABCDE ~ STTTSTT
Lydian: FGABCDEF ~ TTTSTTS
Mixolydian: GABCDEFG ~ TTSTTST
Aeolian: ABCDEFGA ~TSTTSTT
Locrian: BCDEFGAB ~ STTSTTT

As for expanding your horizons, most edfineitly

Key to using the modes is to emphasise The key note (naming note), the 3rd, the 5th and the 7th as these go towards identifying the sound of each mode.

Chord progressions differ depending on mode. Experiment and see what works first before asking more questions.

 

[Rapper's Friend]

The "lydian mode" is a synonym for "Major scale". The "aeolian mode" is a synonym for "natural minor scale".

Modes are simply scales. They are obsolete nowadays. The main purpose of modes is to tell who has studied music theory and who hasn't. When people actually "use" modes, it just means that they are starting on/emphasizing a note other than the tonic. However, it's a lot easier to say "hey I'm in the C Major scale but I'm ending my melody on D." Modes are worthless pieces of craps that are just there to make music theory seem more complicated than it really is.

 

[bandcoach]

The "lydian mode" is a synonym for "Major scale". The "aeolian mode" is a synonym for "natural minor scale".

You got 1 for 2. The Ionian is the name of the major scale.

EG
Parent ~~ Mode ~ Notes
C Major ~~ C Ionian ~ C-D-E-F-G-A-B-C
Bb Major ~~ C Dorian ~ C-D-Eb-F-G-A-Bb-C
Ab Major ~~ C Phrygian ~ C-Db-Eb-F-G-Ab-Bb-C
G Major ~~ C Lydian ~ C-D-E-F#-G-A-B-C
F Major ~~ C Mixolydian ~ C-D-E-F-G-A-Bb-C
Eb Major ~~ C Aeolian ~ C-D-Eb-F-G-Ab-Bb-C
Db Major ~~ C Locrian ~ C-Db-Eb-F-Gb-Ab-Bb-C

Modes are simply scales.

No, they are not. A mode is a variant on a scale type. it may use the same notes as its parent scale but the melodic and harmonic emphasis is different. What works in terms of cadences in the major and minor does not necessarily work in any of their modes.

They are obsolete nowadays.

Tell that the to the jazz fraternity. Tell that to Latin community. Tell that to Carlos Santana

The main purpose of modes is to tell who has studied music theory and who hasn't.

Damn, if you don't know, then don't comment.

When people actually "use" modes, it just means that they are starting on/emphasizing a note other than the tonic.

Not just that: This again: A mode is a variant on a scale type. it may use the same notes as its parent scale but the melodic and harmonic emphasis is different. What works in terms of cadences in the major and minor do not necessarily work in any of their modes.

However, it's a lot easier to say "hey I'm in the C Major scale but I'm ending my melody on D."

Only if you haven't got a clue or you want to present yourself as some kind of fuul when talking with real musicians

Modes are worthless pieces of craps that are just there to make music theory seem more complicated than it really is.

This obviously is an area that you are yet to understand properly or you would not be saying this. I am happy to educate you further if you insist/persist with this kind of misinformation and disinformation.

 

[Rapper's Friend]

True. I guess I did get the Major Scale wrong. It's the "Ionian" mode. It's been a while since I've actually used modes. Do you know why? Because they are useless! They are just as redundant as your response method. You made a separate response to every phrase basically saying the same thing: "you are not a real musician... gr..." See? This is what I'm talking about. Modes are used to make yourself feel like you have class; hence, the reason why you think of yourself as a "real musician". The only thing you can say I was wrong about was which mode represented the Major Scale. Everything else was true, and all you could respond with was "you low class anti-mode person, you! grr...". Redundant. You obviously don't understand theory enough to see the redundancy.

Modes are just another way of saying this to classical theorists: "Oh do you remember that rule saying we have to start and end on the tonic? Never mind that."

"Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity." -Charles Mingus

 

[bandcoach]

True. I guess I did get the Major Scale wrong. It's the "Ionian" mode.

....rant about stupidity deleted....

You obviously don't understand theory enough to see the redundancy.

You obviously don't understand theory enough to understand that there is no redundancy in the use or naming of modes. You are also effectively saying that the Yiddish-Hebraic tradition of Klezmer has no right to distinguish it musical structures based on the modes of the harmonic minor scale.

Modes are just another way of saying this to classical theorists: "Oh do you remember that rule saying we have to start and end on the tonic? Never mind that."

It is easy to be smug when you know a little of something. It says nothing of the sort. Modes dictate a range of harmonic choices that go beyond standard major harmonic progressions. Each mode has forms of chord progressions that produce finality or pauses - the chords used to achieve such things are different to the chords used in major harmony.

"Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity." -Charles Mingus

Thank you for quoting "Chollie" at me - he also used modes in his music as the common-place and did not stray from calling them what they were. If you are wondering why I use "Chollie"; go and read "Underdog" a semi-autobiographical novel by Charlie Mingus.

Your assertion that I am making things complicated is nonsense - your refusal or inability to understand the uses and applications of modes means that you don't realise how elegant and simple they actually are in practice (and not in the way you claim).

 

[Rapper's Friend]

It's as I said. Modes are just another way of saying this to classical theorists: "Oh do you remember that rule saying we have to start and end on the tonic? Never mind that."

Bandwagon, you seem to be a great example of regular school band kid. You cling to traditions because you've invested a lot of time and energy in them. You refuse to believe that they are worthless because that would mean you wasted all your time and energy. You lack the practicality of the true jazz musician. The music world is moving forward while you stay in the past. You are most definitely making the simple complex. The simplest way of explaining modes is posted in the above paragraph.

---------- Post added at 02:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:40 PM ----------

Oh and by the way, if you are going to quote me, keep YOUR words out of my quote. I don't want people thinking what YOU said is something I said.

 

[bandcoach]

It's as I said. Modes are just another way of saying this to classical theorists: "Oh do you remember that rule saying we have to start and end on the tonic? Never mind that."

Bandwagon, you seem to be a great example of regular school band kid. You cling to traditions because you've invested a lot of time and energy in them. You refuse to believe that they are worthless because that would mean you wasted all your time and energy. You lack the practicality of the true jazz musician. The music world is moving forward while you stay in the past. You are most definitely making the simple complex. The simplest way of explaining modes is posted in the above paragraph.

---------- Post added at 02:43 PM ---------- Previous post was at 02:40 PM ----------

Oh and by the way, if you are going to quote me, keep YOUR words out of my quote. I don't want people thinking what YOU said is something I said.

Last things first - if people can't scan back two posts and see what I deleted and realise that I added those words after deleting a whole bunch of other words then, there is no hope of anyone understanding anything any more - give people some credit.

Now back to the real point of this exchange - you demonstrate yet again that you do not truly understand how modes function - if you did you would not persist with the disinformation that you are engaging in.

Please do not make any assumptions about what I do or don't know, what I do in practice as opposed to what I write about theory and certainly do not make assumptions about my age and qualifications to talk on these matters, if you are interested, then have a look here.

You might want to read the whole thread so that you begin to understand the dynamic here at FP; The type of disinformation and misinformation you are engaging in is the whole point of this particular thread.

PS if you refer to me as bandwagon again I will report you directly to the administrators of the site - if you cannot have the courtesy to use my username as written do not use it all

 

[Rapper's Friend]

Bandcoach, I was not talking to you. Obviously, I was talking to "bandwagon". Also, I'd like to add that if you misquote me again, I'll report YOU. What I find interesting is that even though you don't like people assuming things about your background, you seem to assume that everyone else's background is below yours; at least everyone you don't agree with. If you are going to make an argument, please stick with the logical aspect. Credibility for yourself means NOTHING online. You could very easily be a little band kid. Please provide citations from multiple accredited sources if you want more credibility. And if you don't want derogatory comments made about you, then don't make them at others.

 

[bandcoach]

I didn't assume anything about your background - I stated an opinion on your understanding of certain topics based on what you wrote which was clearly ignorant of the underlying facts of the topic area.

In fact, I can go one step further and say that you dissed the original poster by telling him not to waste his time learning it; he clearly has a different objective and perspective on the matter to yours, but you just cast that aside.

You are yet another of those who come out the woodwork to dis anyone who wants to explore the inner workings of music via the theory road, what krushing refers to as someone who half reads the title of the thread and posts something vaguely related to the purpose of the thread, or who I refer to as someone who believes "We don't need no stinking theory, use your imagination and your own creativity".

Just because you hold an opinion about the current state of music theory and it's application in pop music and other spheres of musical creativity does not mean that it is the dominant or even progressive paradigm. There are others here who wish to learn more than your "simple" approach to theory and I do not intend to allow you or anyone else to derail the pursuit of their goals.

Check around the forum a bit more before making assertions that are not based in fact - 32 posts does not mean that you know nothing, but it does mean that you know next to nothing about FP, the people who post regularly and the general dynamic of interchanges here.

 

[slanderson89]

If you want to make modern music then they aren't important at all.

 

[Rapper's Friend]

@Bandcoach Actually, you DID assume something about my background. You assumed I wasn't a "real musician". Now, you assume more about me by how many posts I've made??? And what makes you think this is my first account? Once more, you ASSUME that I am against theory; and you can't be more wrong. I strongly encourage theory. Just because you have no solid argument, you resort to personal insults. You seem to think that theory should be complicated. After all, if you teach people the SIMPLE way, then all the time you spent learning it the HARD way is in vein; it devalues your own efforts. You are not here to help the poster; you're here to help yourself. You are not Krushing, so I don't think you should speak for him. Please stay on topic. The poster of this forum should hear BOTH/ALL sides to this. I'm just trying to save the poster some time and effort. Back to the topic, addressing the actual post.

"Modes" are simply scales.

If this is false, then prove it. Don't attack me, attack my claim.

Piano Chords and Scales made easy

 

[Hosey]

I have never in my life come across another field of interest other than music where the participants have zero interest in actually learning about the thing they're supposedly interested in. I've never met an auto mechanic who didn't understand how an engine worked; probably a little bit about combustion in general, too. I've never met a doctor, in any expertise, who didn't have a very firm grasp on the general anatomy and physiology of people. I've never met a chef who didn't understand how an oven worked, or how flavors and seasonings interplay.

Why is it that musicians are the only field where it's a badge of honor to be ignorant? To people who are hatefully disdainful of knowing anything about theory: are you even interested in music? How could it not fascinate you to learn how it works? I'm not trying to be dismissive, I'm actually curious as to what goes on in your mind while you think about making music? I know you might just turn off your mind when you record or jam something out, but what are you thinking when you listen to it playing back? How do you communicate your ideas to other musicians?

 

[Rapper's Friend]

I agree with Hosey for the most part. However, I'd have to say that this is the case many times: Pilots are to airplanes as musicians are to music. Pilots don't necessarily have to know exactly how every single part in the plane works and why it does what it does; that's the job of scientists and engineers. Pilots merely have to "fly the plane".

I WILL say this though, it can only help the pilot to know more about how the plane works. On what level you pursue that knowledge is circumstantial; you don't want to lose focus and forget how to "fly" the plane.

 

[Hosey]

"Modes" are simply scales.

And scales are simply notes. And notes are just vibrations. I'm not sure I understand your point here. Songs are collections of notes. Scales and modes are a way of understanding how you can arrange sequences of notes. It can be simple, if all you want is to make is simple music.

Theory is not about following "rules", it's about understanding what sounds pleasing to the ear and why. It's about understanding your options at any given moment. It's also a language, so that you can communicate efficiently with other musicians.

---------- Post added at 01:52 AM ---------- Previous post was at 01:45 AM ----------

Pilots are to airplanes as musicians are to music. Pilots don't necessarily have to know exactly how every single part in the plane works and why it does what it does; that's the job of scientists and engineers. Pilots merely have to "fly the plane".

I'm not sure that's an apt metaphor. A musician doesn't need to know how to build a guitar in the same sense that a pilot doesn't need to know how the engine is built. But I assume most pilots understand all the physics of flying--lift, drag, etc--in the same way that a musician would ideally know the "physics" (so to speak) of arranging notes. (a musician, especially someone who records, can also benefit from understanding the actual physics of acoustics)

 

[Rapper's Friend]

True. And there are many different ways of saying the same thing. Instead of saying I played the melodic minor up and down, you could say I played the natural minor up and the melodic minor down. The melodic minor isn't intuitive. Just like when you change modes, you can also think of it as simply changing scales. As long as we are doing analogies, let me put it in your own terms:

I have never in my life come across another field of interest other than music where the participants have zero interest in actually coming up with innovations in the thing they're supposedly interested in. I've never met an auto mechanic who didn't understand the importance of inventing new machinery and new engines.

The world of music has changed, and the way we think of music should change, too. We know SO much more than we did in the times of "modes". Now we have a chromatic scale based on "equal temperament"; something the Greeks knew nothing about. To be practical and keep up with the times, you have to actually think about the information you take in and not just regurgitate it.

---------- Post added at 11:55 PM ---------- Previous post was at 11:29 PM ----------

Also, I want to ratify my last analogy.

Musicians are to music as Taxi drivers are to transportation. So if the car is the instrument, then the car's physics would be the music theory. A taxi driver doesn't need to know all the physics behind driving a car; he just needs to know how to drive (as well as where everything is). Knowing the physics formulas isn't practical help for getting from point A to point B (although they could come in handy). Also, in this analogy, the destination would be the equivalent of the final product.

There are plenty of taxi drivers who drive to destinations all the time without having a deep physics background; there are plenty of musicians who make great final products without having a deep music theory background. The more fundamental the theory, the more useful. Just like taxi drivers should know that they can't take street most corners going 45 miles an hour. The relationship between depth of theory and usefulness is inversely exponential.

That should be a sufficient analogy for you.

 

[Carnage]

Very good thread this - please done ruin it with petty nit picking. Constructice criticism is good though.

 

[bandcoach]

@rappers friend
Ah, I see, that you equate modes with the Greeks - there is a mistake there.

Pythogoras's naming of the modes was in no way related to any constructs that we understand today. He used the names of the various tribes of Greece (Hellenikos) to represent different affects of the human spirit and then associated these with different arrangements of notes.

Nor are the medieval Church modes related to any of the modes as we know them today, given that they were named depending on whether the central note was the 5th or the root of the mode.

Modern modal naming is unrelated to the original naming beyond the names. However, they are still valid as a vehicle for expression and certainly the structure of each mode is different enough to allow for certain qualities to be attached to them.

The site you cite has made the mistake of combining modes with scales in an effort to streamline their presentation.

As is said elsewhere, the internet is full of lies, mis-truths and half-truths, because anyone with a modem and access to any of the myriad free blog-like websites can write whatever they like. Learning to recognise the difference between accurate information and the rest is a difficult skill if you are not already educated in the areas you are seeking to research. I would trust a university web-site more than I would some independent piano teacher trying to make a quick buck and passing out advice along the way. Go here Marc Sabatella's Jazz Improvisation Primer: Major Scale Harmony for a better explanation of modes in the modern context. This site may also enlighten you further berklee modal harmony 1 pdf free ebook download from www.musicforums.ru as well as these:

http://www.thereelscore.com/PortfolioStuff/PDFFiles/QuickJazzTheoryRefFinal.pdf page 95

Scales and Key Signatures - The Method Behind the Music

mode (music) -- Britannica Online Encyclopedia

In essence a mode specifies how the harmony and melody should be evolved. It is different to how a scale works and should not be seen as a mere replacement of the scale or reconfiguinr of the scale so that it starts, focuses on and ends on a different note.

Your analogies are syllogisms; they fall short because you fail to account for the innate needs and abilities of the individuals in the different scenarios.

A pilot must be aware enough to know how to maintain the plane or assess if it has not been maintained prior to take off. They must apply various theories about weight-fuel ratios in determining required fuel, take-off speed, cruising speed, landing speed. They must know a large amount of theory about flight and the physics of lift and glide before they are even allowed to enter a plane.

Similarly, a taxi driver must know how to maintain her vehicle or assess if it has not been maintained prior to starting shift. They are required by various laws to know the topology of the area they are servicing and consequently know the most direct routes taking into account permanently or temporarily imposed traffic direction limitations. They are held to higher standard of driving skill than the average motorist, including defensive driving, as they are more likely to be involved in potential and actual accidents. Their understanding of the theory of driving is important, but so is their practical skill.

A musician, must know about the maintaining of their instrument. They need to know their way around the instrument, which is kinesthetic as well as theory based - arpeggios, scales, modes, studies and etudes. Whether they can read or not is irrelevant, the basic skills of playing well require them to understand where the notes are to be found on their instrument. Beyond this theory is a servant but never a master.

However, for you to assert that someone should abandon the acquisition of knowledge and understanding and experience because it is useless is simply reckless - for you, it may well be useless; for the person who originally asked the question it may or may not be - they need to have the experience first to know for themselves. Telling someone not to bother is putting obstacles in their path; no good teacher or mentor would do such a thing.

 

[dvyce]

Modes are simply scales. They are obsolete nowadays. The main purpose of modes is to tell who has studied music theory and who hasn't. When people actually "use" modes, it just means that they are starting on/emphasizing a note other than the tonic. However, it's a lot easier to say "hey I'm in the C Major scale but I'm ending my melody on D." Modes are worthless pieces of craps that are just there to make music theory seem more complicated than it really is.

Hey Bandcoach, Please correct me if I am wrong about any of this since specific theory is not my strong suit... though I understand music and have studied music both on a college and graduate level, and am a professional musician/composer, I really work on an intuitive level... I learned and internalized, though do not think in "names" at this point in my life.

Which may be a bit of what you are trying to express, Rappers Friend...


anyway...

Modes are not simply scales... they are based on scales, though...

Playing with a particular mode does not mean you are starting on a different note in the scale of the key you are in.

You can play a "C Major" scale over a "C major" chord.

But you can also play the "Lydian" and "Mixolydian" modes over the C major chord.

This does NOT mean that, with the "Lydian", you just play your "C major" scale starting on the "F" note...

What it means is that you can play a "G Major" scale (on top of your "C Major" chord) starting on the "C" note. This is because the "C Lydian", which is made from the "G Major" scale, contains the notes of the "C Major" chord (C, E and G notes)...

It is similar to playing the "C Major" scale, but you raise the 4th one half step...

So instead of playing:
C D E F G A B

You play:
C D E F# G A B


Similarly, you can play the "C Mixolydian", which is based on the "F Major" scale, over your C Major chord because it also contains the C, E and G notes.

So, you would be playing an "F Major" scale over your "C Major" chord.

So instead of playing:
C D E F G A B C

You would play:
C D E F G A Bb C



...and, you do not actually have to start (or end) on "C"... you can start and end your melodies on whatever note you want. Nothing about this is telling you what note you have to start or end on... nor is it telling you what order of notes you have to play in between.



Whether you know the names or not, you can use these "modes"...

You may have just picked the noted out by ear, or stumbled on them in some other way...

But, just because you do not know the names or do not want to know the names does not mean that they DO NOT HAVE NAMES.

To say some "mode" or "scale" or anything is "obsolete" would mean that nobody plays those things anymore...

But people do still play them... whether or not some kid who walked up to the piano in his living room and started playing "C Lydian" actually knows the name or not, does not change the fact that he is playing it... and "it" has a name... regardless of whether you care what the name is or not.



If somebody asked how to spell a word (this is just a hypothetical, I am not saying you do not know how to spell), you can say to him "spelling is obsolete, just talk... you don't have to spell anything... we can record audio now so there is no reason to spell anything!"

Or maybe you know how to spell a little so when somebody asks "how do you spell cat?", you can say "well, it is that letter that looks like a sideways horseshoe, or it might be the one that looks like when you put your hand like this, then the one that looks like a teepee with a line through it and then the one that looks like a table... and there may be one of those letters that looks like a chair or a wiggly snake."

...well, that is fine if you do not feel the need to know how to spell...

But that does not change the fact that words actually do have proper spellings...

And it does not make "words" obsolete just because you do not care how they are spelled... you are still using them all the time.


Music theory gives people a way to express, in words, a musical idea... it does not tell you what you have to do.




Obviously the person asking the question is interested in modes, since he asked the question in the first place...

Are they "important" because they exist... and they are used all the time... regardless of whether somebody knows they are using them or not.

 

[Rapper's Friend]

I associate the modes with the greeks because that's where modes originate from. Modes we use today are a little different, but even less useful. The greek modes had actual differences in sound. Today's modes are just scales as well; or another way of saying that you're starting/ending on a particular note other than the tonic. That's all they are.

Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity.

-Charles Mingus