Hows does your brain work

[Phantasmagoria]

Re: Hows does your brain work

Honestly, they dont feel like it. Its too much work and the payoff is too far down the road. Fact is, everybody HAS TO KNOW some theory. They may not say it, but they do. Watching Phantasmagoria play over the jam track, hes on the 13th fret because he is tuned half step down. Thats frickin theory, isnt it? Some people think they will lose their creativity because they know theory. That also is a load of dung

Dude..you must've skipped over my previous post. I have had a lot of theory drummed into my skull when I learned classical violin as a kid. I would say that over the years I've retained the basics & tried like hell to forget the rest (pretty successfully too :laugh2.

As for the tuning down a half-step/13th fret thing ..anyone without a tin ear would do the same automatically. When I'm saying I don't need theory, I'm not saying I will just flail around the fretboard letting my fingers fall where they may. I think everyone, myself included would agree there no musical value to that. What I'm saying is if you follow your ear it's a way quicker/more efficient method to practically apply theory (without perhaps even knowing you're doing it)...in the end you can't get great vibrato from a book, you can't know when you're over or under-bending a note, thats all your ear & theory has no substitute. Which is why the real egg-head dorks who spend their free time debating points of musical theory & getting all worked up about them instead of playing their instruments, either don't at all or horrendously bend notes & their vibrato is painful to listen to. In the end that's what makes a s.hitty sounding guitarist no matter how incredibly complex & theoretically sound his chops may be.

BB king never felt the urge to learn theory because he played just fine without it. In fact he sounded downright incredible. The guy was a Mississippi (how the **** do you spell that :laugh2 bluesman..it was in his soul and that's all he wanted to play..not bossa nova, not reggae, not metal..so yeah being 'one dimensional' as a guitarist was obviously not a problem.

 

[Phantasmagoria]

Re: Hows does your brain work

You probably know more theory than anybody in this conversation LOL You're a good player, those arpeggios didnt sound great by an accident

They did :lmao:

I pray a lot.

 

[dpaterson]

Re: Hows does your brain work

Hi.

I monitor this thread daily. And thank you all. There's sure a lot of good stuff here and I'm soaking it up. Just how much is useful in practice (as opposed to in theory) I know not at this time.

Just one thing I'd like to comment on at this time though:

I don't think that people "pride" themselves in not knowing theory. I don't anyway (but it's way too late for me in my music career to go and revisit stuff that I learned in, oh, what must have been years prior to 1984). And music theory isn't the easiest of things to grasp or master (well: I suppose it depends on who you are of course). And I do think it also depends largely on what your end goals are. In my case: it's simply to cover very specific stuff as accurately as is humanly possible with possibly a bit of original stuff along the way. It doesn't really help me to know what key the songs are in or what scale is being used to solo in. Even more to the point: as I've mentioned I'm working on my contribution for that Solo Contest. I could not tell you what I'm playing. I just know what sounds "off" and what doesn't. I'm pretty sure when I'm done that the stuff could be tabulated and then I could see "oh so that's the scale and the mode" (or whatever). But how does that change what I'm trying to accomplish (or have already accomplished, by that stage, by having submitted my contribution)??? Maybe more to the point: I've composed stuff, and play stuff, on my keyboard (no longer have a piano). Now there I know what key I'm playing in, what chords, and whatever else. But it still makes no difference to the end result. I just know if an arpeggio, as an example, "fits" with what I'm doing or doesn't. Now I know there are a lot of "I's" (as in "me's") in this post. I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet here at all i.e. I'm pretty much willing to wager that there are more people around here that have this "workflow" (for want of a better word) than those that use music theory for.........

Now this was supposed to be a short comment but while I was typing the above it sort of just occurred to me:

If I (anyone) was 100% proficient in all of the theory: what would I (anyone) use it for??? Going to all that trouble just to be able to communicate to other members of a band seems like a huge overkill not??? The more I think about it while I'm typing this: the more I'm actually wondering what the point was of years of being forced to study theory and write exams all those years ago actually. As I sit here now I can think of but one possible application and that would be to score stuff for orchestra (and probably a classical orchestra at that). Didn't those "dudes of old" like Bach, Beethoven, whoever write the stuff out of their heads and only then play (and I would imagine make "edits" at that point)??? See there I can see the merit.

One other curved ball here and that's technology i.e. it's not been that long since we've had technology such as that we have today e.g. software that can actually compose music and present you with different variations or options of a phrase for example. Or determine the key of an audio file and spit out the chords (hell: with Melodyne you get the individual notes if you know what you're doing). Now if you were writing such software: then there's no question that you'd have to be proficient in music theory. But to compose your own "hits" or play in a rock or metal band??? Not so sure.

Not sure if this falls squarely into the "theory" category: but being able to READ sheet music already written and composed COULD be of some benefit but again depending on your application. I mean to say: if you want to go out and buy some huge songbooks and just sit down and play the songs or if you play in an orchestra with dozens of other musicians well then I don't think it's optional. But think about this: even in the orchestra situation does it matter what scale is being played or used and what mode??? Surely you are just following the sheet music in front of you (which, if you think about it, is no different from watching a YouTube video or guitar tutor video i.e. the videos are substitutes for the sheet music).

Note: I'm not attempting to be controversial here at all and am keen to get other takes on this (if necessary i.e. if this has not already been covered). It's just that in my typing this post: it's actually caused me to wonder just how important music theory is where it's applicable.

And I actually need to get on with my stuff......... (LOL!!!).

 

[Gtrjunior]

Hows does your brain work

Hi.

I monitor this thread daily. And thank you all. There's sure a lot of good stuff here and I'm soaking it up. Just how much is useful in practice (as opposed to in theory) I know not at this time.

Just one thing I'd like to comment on at this time though:

I don't think that people "pride" themselves in not knowing theory. I don't anyway (but it's way too late for me in my music career to go and revisit stuff that I learned in, oh, what must have been years prior to 1984). And music theory isn't the easiest of things to grasp or master (well: I suppose it depends on who you are of course). And I do think it also depends largely on what your end goals are. In my case: it's simply to cover very specific stuff as accurately as is humanly possible with possibly a bit of original stuff along the way. It doesn't really help me to know what key the songs are in or what scale is being used to solo in. Even more to the point: as I've mentioned I'm working on my contribution for that Solo Contest. I could not tell you what I'm playing. I just know what sounds "off" and what doesn't. I'm pretty sure when I'm done that the stuff could be tabulated and then I could see "oh so that's the scale and the mode" (or whatever). But how does that change what I'm trying to accomplish (or have already accomplished, by that stage, by having submitted my contribution)??? Maybe more to the point: I've composed stuff, and play stuff, on my keyboard (no longer have a piano). Now there I know what key I'm playing in, what chords, and whatever else. But it still makes no difference to the end result. I just know if an arpeggio, as an example, "fits" with what I'm doing or doesn't. Now I know there are a lot of "I's" (as in "me's") in this post. I'm not trying to blow my own trumpet here at all i.e. I'm pretty much willing to wager that there are more people around here that have this "workflow" (for want of a better word) than those that use music theory for.........

Now this was supposed to be a short comment but while I was typing the above it sort of just occurred to me:

If I (anyone) was 100% proficient in all of the theory: what would I (anyone) use it for??? Going to all that trouble just to be able to communicate to other members of a band seems like a huge overkill not??? The more I think about it while I'm typing this: the more I'm actually wondering what the point was of years of being forced to study theory and write exams all those years ago actually. As I sit here now I can think of but one possible application and that would be to score stuff for orchestra (and probably a classical orchestra at that). Didn't those "dudes of old" like Bach, Beethoven, whoever write the stuff out of their heads and only then play (and I would imagine make "edits" at that point)??? See there I can see the merit.

One other curved ball here and that's technology i.e. it's not been that long since we've had technology such as that we have today e.g. software that can actually compose music and present you with different variations or options of a phrase for example. Or determine the key of an audio file and spit out the chords (hell: with Melodyne you get the individual notes if you know what you're doing). Now if you were writing such software: then there's no question that you'd have to be proficient in music theory. But to compose your own "hits" or play in a rock or metal band??? Not so sure.

Not sure if this falls squarely into the "theory" category: but being able to READ sheet music already written and composed COULD be of some benefit but again depending on your application. I mean to say: if you want to go out and buy some huge songbooks and just sit down and play the songs or if you play in an orchestra with dozens of other musicians well then I don't think it's optional. But think about this: even in the orchestra situation does it matter what scale is being played or used and what mode??? Surely you are just following the sheet music in front of you (which, if you think about it, is no different from watching a YouTube video or guitar tutor video i.e. the videos are substitutes for the sheet music).

Note: I'm not attempting to be controversial here at all and am keen to get other takes on this (if necessary i.e. if this has not already been covered). It's just that in my typing this post: it's actually caused me to wonder just how important music theory is where it's applicable.

And I actually need to get on with my stuff......... (LOL!!!).

You’re under thinking it. People don’t learn music theory so they can communicate cover tunes to others. Or so they can learn other people’s songs per se.
an ex. Of why you would want to learn theory is the solo contest...while you (anyone) might be plodding away trying to figure out what works for that arrangement, a small amount of theory knowledge would tell you that the clean and first half of the rock parts is straight up E Aeolian. Then when it changes to G Major it becomes G Ionian.
BUT....those are relative keys. For simplicity sake the entire solo could be played in 12th position E Aeolian. When it changes to G you have to adjust your “landing” notes to chord tones from G progression.
That’s the rock player typical approach.
A jazz guy would likely change scales (or arpeggios) with each passing chord, which is much more difficult to do.

 

[Jacew]

Re: Hows does your brain work

Stringed, fretted instruments are easy to play for the fact you can go really far just by instinctive knowledge of where each note from the key is. From there you just move along the relative notation across the progression.

With piano you can't escape the theory because you can't play modes and transpose things off-handedly. You need to know exactly the scales and modes and their relation to each other as well as relation of major and minor chords and notes. It's easier from theoretical viewpoint, but much harder to play "by ear" or "feel"

What I mean is that when you play from G you know how sixth from there, or some off key note will sound and how it relates other notes, because you can visualize it on the fretboard. You don't need to know exactly what the note actually is.

 

[dpaterson]

Re: Hows does your brain work

You’re under thinking it.

Maybe. Tell ya what: when I'm done with my masterpiece I'll transcribe the (my) guitar part and YOU can tell ME what I'm playing!!! LOL!!! We may both be surprised at my capabilities!!! LOL!!!

Stringed, fretted instruments are easy to play for the fact you can go really far just by instinctive knowledge of where each note from the key is. From there you just move along the relative notation across the progression.

With piano you can't escape the theory because you can't play modes and transpose things off-handedly. You need to know exactly the scales and modes and their relation to each other as well as relation of major and minor chords and notes. It's easier from theoretical viewpoint, but much harder to play "by ear" or "feel"

What I mean is that when you play from G you know how sixth from there, or some off key note will sound and how it relates other notes, because you can visualize it on the fretboard. You don't need to know exactly what the note actually is.

Stringed, fretted instruments are easy to play for the fact you can go really far just by instinctive knowledge of where each note from the key is. From there you just move along the relative notation across the progression.

With piano you can't escape the theory because you can't play modes and transpose things off-handedly. You need to know exactly the scales and modes and their relation to each other as well as relation of major and minor chords and notes. It's easier from theoretical viewpoint, but much harder to play "by ear" or "feel"

What I mean is that when you play from G you know how sixth from there, or some off key note will sound and how it relates other notes, because you can visualize it on the fretboard. You don't need to know exactly what the note actually is.

I love it when people say "easy to play" in reference to stringed instruments (guitar in particular). Yeh right. But actually very true but only IF you've been playing them for a long while and are very familiar with them.

Exactly the same applies to the piano i.e. you say it's harder to play "by ear" or "feel". I disagree but thousands would agree. Difference being I'm very familiar with the piano.

So by a process of deduction this could all boil down to nothing more than exactly how proficient you are on a particular instrument. Maybe the theory plays a big role when learning to play a particular type of instrument. But once you've got it down maybe it then doesn't play that big of a role anymore because you "instinctively" (very good word for this actually) know where the next chord progression or scale note is/could be/should be. And by a further process of deduction this comes down to practice. And at that point we're back to the thread topic!!! LOL!!!

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Hows does your brain work

You’re under thinking it. People don’t learn music theory so they can communicate cover tunes to others. Or so they can learn other people’s songs per se.
an ex. Of why you would want to learn theory is the solo contest...while you (anyone) might be plodding away trying to figure out what works for that arrangement, a small amount of theory knowledge would tell you that the clean and first half of the rock parts is straight up E Aeolian. Then when it changes to G Major it becomes G Ionian.
BUT....those are relative keys. For simplicity sake the entire solo could be played in 12th position E Aeolian. When it changes to G you have to adjust your “landing” notes to chord tones from G progression.
That’s the rock player typical approach.
A jazz guy would likely change scales (or arpeggios) with each passing chord, which is much more difficult to do.

I'm always searching for an easier way to do stuff, which has led to a combination approach of the two in my soloing practice lately.

- First figure out a pentatonic scale that will sound OK over the chords (sometimes one one chord won't work, so you've got to switch to another pentatonic scale when that chord comes up).

- Then figure out the chords that you're playing over, and where the 1-3-5 (and maybe 7th) of each chord are on the fretboard.

- Then mix the two together . . . target mostly the chord tones as each chord is playing, adding in the pentatonic notes for colour (straight arpeggios will get old fast).

- Since every guitar player knows a ton of pentatonic licks, if you get a little lost in the progression then lean on the pentatonic scale since you know it'll sound OK over everything and can act as filler until you remember where you were and can start finding the chord tones again.

- Try to start your phrases slightly before the chord that you're targeting starts, as this seems to sound better (less mechanical/robotic).


This ends up giving you something that will sound right over any progression you're playing, and you end up playing modes that fit the progression without needing to take the time to learn modes.

So, for the solo contest I was mostly thinking arpeggios, with E min pentatonic as my backup (as it works over all the chords in the tune) . . . but because I was targeting the chord tones, it sounds like I'm using E Aeolian over the first couple bits and G Ionian over the second bit.


Now that I can kinda do the above, I'm trying to practice:
- adding in more tones based on the chords being played (particularly 9ths and 14ths)
- improving my ability to follow chords in faster progressions
- finding better phrasing for pentatonic + arpeggio licks,
- finding long arpeggio patterns that help me escape from being trapped in 4-5 fret box patterns
- replacing my pentatonic + arpeggios with an applicable mode + arpeggios



Theory is a gigantic subject to study . . . you have to break it into little tiny bite sized bits to digest it to be able to start to apply it, and you need to apply it for it to be of any benefit.

For me the theory odyssey has gone something like:
- One Minor pentatonic box pattern
- All 5 minor pentatonic box patterns
- Connecting minor pentatonic box patterns
- Building chords (1-3-5, 1-b3-5, etc.)
- Playing chords in different ways on the neck
- Arpeggios for those chords
- Minor (aeolian) scale - 1 position
- Minor (aeolian) scale - 5 positions
- Mix the minor scale with minor pentatonic licks
- Major pentatonic licks
- Major (Ionian) scale - 5 positions
- Dorian mode licks
- Targeting chord tones while playing over a progression
- Playing a couple Jazz standards / learning all those weird chords that are never seen in rock tunes . . . m6, maj7, m7b5
- Trying to solo over jazz standards
- Giving up on jazz in despair
- Practicing arpeggios even more
- Kinda figuring out shortcuts to bang out a jazzyish solo
- Realizing that rock stuff is a bit more my level at the moment
- etc.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Hows does your brain work

I'm always searching for an easier way to do stuff, which has led to a combination approach of the two in my soloing practice lately.

- First figure out a pentatonic scale that will sound OK over the chords (sometimes one one chord won't work, so you've got to switch to another pentatonic scale when that chord comes up).

- Then figure out the chords that you're playing over, and where the 1-3-5 (and maybe 7th) of each chord are on the fretboard.

- Then mix the two together . . . target mostly the chord tones as each chord is playing, adding in the pentatonic notes for colour (straight arpeggios will get old fast).

- Since every guitar player knows a ton of pentatonic licks, if you get a little lost in the progression then lean on the pentatonic scale since you know it'll sound OK over everything and can act as filler until you remember where you were and can start finding the chord tones again.

- Try to start your phrases slightly before the chord that you're targeting starts, as this seems to sound better (less mechanical/robotic).


This ends up giving you something that will sound right over any progression you're playing, and you end up playing modes that fit the progression without needing to take the time to learn modes.

So, for the solo contest I was mostly thinking arpeggios, with E min pentatonic as my backup (as it works over all the chords in the tune) . . . but because I was targeting the chord tones, it sounds like I'm using E Aeolian over the first couple bits and G Ionian over the second bit.


Now that I can kinda do the above, I'm trying to practice:
- adding in more tones based on the chords being played (particularly 9ths and 14ths)
- improving my ability to follow chords in faster progressions
- finding better phrasing for pentatonic + arpeggio licks,
- finding long arpeggio patterns that help me escape from being trapped in 4-5 fret box patterns
- replacing my pentatonic + arpeggios with an applicable mode + arpeggios



Theory is a gigantic subject to study . . . you have to break it into little tiny bite sized bits to digest it to be able to start to apply it, and you need to apply it for it to be of any benefit.

For me the theory odyssey has gone something like:
- One Minor pentatonic box pattern
- All 5 minor pentatonic box patterns
- Connecting minor pentatonic box patterns
- Building chords (1-3-5, 1-b3-5, etc.)
- Playing chords in different ways on the neck
- Arpeggios for those chords
- Minor (aeolian) scale - 1 position
- Minor (aeolian) scale - 5 positions
- Mix the minor scale with minor pentatonic licks
- Major pentatonic licks
- Major (Ionian) scale - 5 positions
- Dorian mode licks
- Targeting chord tones while playing over a progression
- Playing a couple Jazz standards / learning all those weird chords that are never seen in rock tunes . . . m6, maj7, m7b5
- Trying to solo over jazz standards
- Giving up on jazz in despair
- Practicing arpeggios even more
- Kinda figuring out shortcuts to bang out a jazzyish solo
- Realizing that rock stuff is a bit more my level at the moment
- etc.

You should check out the CAGED system. It’s a concept that is very similar to what you’ve laid out here.
I’ve been working on it for a while now and I can honestly say my knowledge of the fretboard, chord tones, and generally what to play over certain changes has grown in ways I can’t even describe. It really is an amazing system.

 

[Gransen]

Re: Hows does your brain work

You should check out the CAGED system. It’s a concept that is very similar to what you’ve laid out here.
I’ve been working on it for a while now and I can honestly say my knowledge of the fretboard, chord tones, and generally what to play over certain changes has grown in ways I can’t even describe. It really is an amazing system.

I think that you're right, and I've been avoiding the CAGED system. (The last time I tried learning the CAGED system, I ended up writing a song during the video instead of paying attention. I call it "Caged." It sounds nice...!!!)

With me not knowing the CAGED system, but understanding the basic concept, AND having a really good understanding of scales and chords, I'm going to say that with you starting out on scales and chords, it then made the CAGED system more like picking up on a new but very similar language...AND ONE THAT MADE SENSE. But when you start with the CAGED system without knowing scales and chords, then scales start looking too "sterile" when it's time to learn them.

I hear time and time again from people saying that CAGED was holding them back, and that they had to learn the scales. But then I hear people like you saying that the scales weren't "holding you back," but instead simply not opening up new doors. That's just what I've been hearing.

Question: "If you were a guitar teacher, would you start your students on chords and scales, and then move onto the CAGED system; or would it be the other way around...???"

 

[Mincer]

Re: Hows does your brain work

As a guitar teacher, I understand the CAGED system, but I think there are simply more effective ways to teach. I tend to come up with a plan that is specific to each student's ways of learning and goals. I like how the CAGED system is presented, but it is also a little 'in the box' for me.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Hows does your brain work

As a guitar teacher, I understand the CAGED system, but I think there are simply more effective ways to teach. I tend to come up with a plan that is specific to each student's ways of learning and goals. I like how the CAGED system is presented, but it is also a little 'in the box' for me.

For me, I struggled for years to play anything modally. I understood how all of the scales connected but I couldn’t make the various modal sounds.
UNTIL, I began studying CAGED. I had a previous teacher that felt like you do. And he wouldn’t teach me CAGED.
The current teacher I have now feels different. And I must say, for me CAGED is the best thing to ever happen to my playing. And I’ve just scratched the surface.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Hows does your brain work

I think that you're right, and I've been avoiding the CAGED system. (The last time I tried learning the CAGED system, I ended up writing a song during the video instead of paying attention. I call it "Caged." It sounds nice...!!!)

With me not knowing the CAGED system, but understanding the basic concept, AND having a really good understanding of scales and chords, I'm going to say that with you starting out on scales and chords, it then made the CAGED system more like picking up on a new but very similar language...AND ONE THAT MADE SENSE. But when you start with the CAGED system without knowing scales and chords, then scales start looking too "sterile" when it's time to learn them.

I hear time and time again from people saying that CAGED was holding them back, and that they had to learn the scales. But then I hear people like you saying that the scales weren't "holding you back," but instead simply not opening up new doors. That's just what I've been hearing.

Question: "If you were a guitar teacher, would you start your students on chords and scales, and then move onto the CAGED system; or would it be the other way around...???"

So, CAGED is probably a little different than what you’ve learned so far.
There are 5 chord shapes, 5 scales and 5 arpeggios. They fit into a pattern that repeats itself. And you adjust where you play each scale to be able to play in whatever given mode you need.

It gets much deeper than that though

I’d suggest learning the octave shapes and chords first. Practice that until you can do it without thinking about it to much. Then add in the scales.

 

[GuitarStv]

Re: Hows does your brain work

I did the CAGED thing initially, when learning pentatonics and maj/minor scales. It's great for that initial phase where you just have to memorize ****.

But the way I think about mixing pentatonics and arpeggios now, I find that it doesn't really work with the caged system. I'm not really thinking of positions most of the time but am really focusing on notes and arpeggios that can come out of those notes. The pentatonic stuff is just filler so that the chord tones don't get so boring. I'm very rarely using the C position arpeggio over the C position pentatonic scale.

Also, I dunno if it's just me . . . CAGED really tends to make you want to play in a small chunk of the fretboard. It always felt more like memorizing patterns over a static background than understanding note choices over a moving progression . . . so I learned a lot from it, but found it hard to apply that knowledge. But I could have totally been doing stuff wrong too.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Hows does your brain work

I did the CAGED thing initially, when learning pentatonics and maj/minor scales. It's great for that initial phase where you just have to memorize ****.

But the way I think about mixing pentatonics and arpeggios now, I find that it doesn't really work with the caged system. I'm not really thinking of positions most of the time but am really focusing on notes and arpeggios that can come out of those notes. The pentatonic stuff is just filler so that the chord tones don't get so boring. I'm very rarely using the C position arpeggio over the C position pentatonic scale.

Also, I dunno if it's just me . . . CAGED really tends to make you want to play in a small chunk of the fretboard. It always felt more like memorizing patterns over a static background than understanding note choices over a moving progression . . . so I learned a lot from it, but found it hard to apply that knowledge. But I could have totally been doing stuff wrong too.

I feel like CAGED has opened up the fretboard in ways I couldn’t have done it before.
I will say that if I tried teaching it to myself there’s no way I would be getting as much out of it as I am. It’s nice when you’ve got somebody kind of guiding you down the path.

 

[Gransen]

Re: Hows does your brain work

I understood how all of the scales connected but I couldn’t make the various modal sounds.

Okay, you just used a jargon term that gets my A.D.D. going when I start listening to the explanation, and quite honestly just get lost. Most of the time it's because of "the jargon behind the jargon," and then I'm done. They talk waaaaaaay too technical when they're talking about "modal sounds."

I get the concept, "This interval sounds good here." Then they're like, "Okay, you have to understand that the minor 6th of the dominate root's flatted 3rd...," isn't actually a thing, and neither is anything else that you could say to me at that point.

Little help...???

 

[Mincer]

Re: Hows does your brain work

Most people who stop learning about modes get stuck here- they can't hear how it sounds different than the major scales they come from. Usually the solution is improvising using good chord progressions...and then you start to hear it.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Hows does your brain work

Okay, you just used a jargon term that gets my A.D.D. going when I start listening to the explanation, and quite honestly just get lost. Most of the time it's because of "the jargon behind the jargon," and then I'm done. They talk waaaaaaay too technical when they're talking about "modal sounds."

I get the concept, "This interval sounds good here." Then they're like, "Okay, you have to understand that the minor 6th of the dominate root's flatted 3rd...," isn't actually a thing, and neither is anything else that you could say to me at that point.

Little help...???

Think of it like this...
Each mode creates a “mood” if you will.
Ionian...is like a sticky sweet major sound. Like the “Happy Birthday” melody.

Mixolydian is like a darker blusier major sound. Off the top of my head I can’t think of an example.

And Lydian has a “dreamy” quality. Joe Satriani uses this mode a lot.

Aeolian is the natural minor scale...I’m sure you’re very familiar with its sound. It’s all over rock music.

Also, I think you had mentioned that you’re familiar with he exotic sound of Phrygian.

And Dorian has a very smooth minor sound. Think Carlos Santana.

Etc....think of a modal sound as the mood you hear in it.

 

[Gtrjunior]

Re: Hows does your brain work

Most people who stop learning about modes get stuck here- they can't hear how it sounds different than the major scales they come from. Usually the solution is improvising using good chord progressions...and then you start to hear it.

Very true. Once you’re able to hear it in context it becomes easier and easier to recognize.
I’m very much still learning all of the sounds.
I’m working on “borrowing” sounds from different modes currently. It’s been challenging to say the least. I’m struggling with it.

 

[Gransen]

Re: Hows does your brain work

Most people who stop learning about modes get stuck here- they can't hear how it sounds different than the major scales they come from. Usually the solution is improvising using good chord progressions...and then you start to hear it.

AND Gtrjunior with...

Think of it like this...
Each mode creates a “mood” if you will.
Ionian...is like a sticky sweet major sound. Like the “Happy Birthday” melody.

Mixolydian is like a darker blusier major sound. Off the top of my head I can’t think of an example.

And Lydian has a “dreamy” quality. Joe Satriani uses this mode a lot.

Etc....think of a modal sound as the mood you hear in it.

Okay, yeah, I'm way up to speed on this one! I was thinking of something else...

My favorite mode for heavy metal is Phrygian. I just love that flatted second. I abuse the living hell out of it...!!! I'll turn the scale into a "key change / modified Locrian" type of deal in order to get the chorus or the bridge just right and keep that flatted second.

For classic rock, it's the pentatonic minor INTERVALS of Aeolian mode on rhythm, and that allows for natural minor intervals as fills on lead, while still "keeping it realz" on rhythm.

HERE'S WHAT I WAS THINKING OF...

I have to be careful with the 2nd interval of Aeolian mode, because there's a tendency for the phrase to want to resolve and setup for a transition to the next phrase when I use it for the final note in a barre. I literally just learned about "dominate of the dominate" during the course of this thread; and knowing the tonal hierarchy (root is #1, the 5th is #2, the 3rd is #3, etc), and knowing that songs tend to resolve on the root...with the 5th being the second most common point to resolve a song at (I've got one oddball that likes doing that when I change the strumming pattern), now I can see how the second can cause "resolution that leads not to an end, but a new beginning."

THIS is what I thought was meant by the term "modal sounds." But I'm thinking more like "complimentary intervals," if that's even the right term.

And yeah, I'll take any advice anyone can give me about THAT topic....but let's not hijack this thread! (Unless someone thinks that this thread was set for "hijack mode" right from the start...that's how my brain works!)

 

[dpaterson]

Re: Hows does your brain work

....but let's not hijack this thread!

You’ll get no complaints from me. And given that I’m the OP you’re good to go not??? LOL!!!

Tell you this much: there’s enough good stuff on this thread to warrant somebody putting it all together in article or eBook form for future reference!!!