How many scales are there?

[hannah_k]

:S How many scales are there? At first I thought there was only one, but then I watched the DVD and I realised that there were more.

Hannah (Age 9) xxx

 

[Bobby G]

Hi Hannah. There are loads of scales, but Pete's video will tell you which ones you need to get started.

You will only need one or two scales to start off with, you'll find a lot of tunes are made up of notes from only one scale. Twinkle Twinkle is one of those tunes, so you are already on your way to knowing a scale.

Have fun, Bob

 

[hannah_k]

Thanks 🙂

 

[Linky Lee]

well there are absolutely loads. But they can be reduced easily.

12 chromatics
12 majors
12 harmonic minor
12 melodic minor
12 pentatonic
12 whole tone (can be simplified too 2)
12 minor blues
12 major blues
a 7 modes of every one of the above scales listed
then loads and loads of more scales all minimally used, all special to certain types of music and all very strange altered scales.
Most people don't know half of the scales above. I think I'm only about 2/3 of the way through. Though once you've got the basics then the rest become easy. There are patterns that apply to all scales, as that's what they are. a pattern of scales.

If you learn the patterns, you have 7 in total - major minor blues etc.
Then you just apply the pattern to the different notes.

for example a major pattern is 'T T S T T T S'
this means there is a tone gap between the 1st and 2nd notes, again between the 2nd and 3rd notes and a semi-tone between the 3rd and 4th notes, and so on.

If you apply this to C to get the C major scale you get
- CDEFGAB(C)

I guess this is the scale you learnt.

If you can get used to the 12 semi-tones we have in western music then learn one of these patterns you have learnt 12 scales by learning 1 pattern. Then it's just a matter of playing them to get the fingers to remember the pattern.

Scales aren't as bad as they seem. You have plenty of time being only 9. It's great to start young!

 

[oliver_bentley]

lol - she's only 9 Lee! 😛

Hannah, there are lots of scales yes, but you don't need to worry about most of them yet, a good teacher (or Pete's DVD) will gradually introduce them to you as you progress. Don't worry about there being loads, as the more you play pieces in different keys you'll slowly learn different scales.

Probably C, G, F and D majors and perhaps A, and D minors is a good aim for your first year of playing - if you start enjoying learning them and want to do more thats great. (though not many people start enjoying scale practice until they become obsesives like myself, and others on this forum)

All the best. Lee's right - starting young is the best way - ask most of the guys on here, they'll tell you they wished they'd started as young as you.

Have a happy saxophoning new year, Oli

 

[mfox]

linky, a little too much info.. shes 9 years old..let her enjoy playing her favorite tunes first...
need a book called fun with scales H..

 

[Greywolf]

Hannah,
There are lots of scales, but don't worry about them all. There are some important ones to learn first.

The best scales to learn first are the major scales

C 0 sharps
G 1 sharp
D 2 sharps
A 3 sharps
E 4 sharps
B 5 sharps
F 1 flat


I suggest you learn to play the D(2 sharps) and G (1 sharp) scales first.

The C scale isn't a good one to start on because you either have to start with all your fingers on, including the little finger of your right hand which can be quite difficult or you have to play one octave higher which can also be a bit difficult for a beginner.

D is a good one to start on because you start with your three left fingers and your three right hand fingers.

 

[Linky Lee]

oops sorry. I thought I'd put in enough of - 'you can simplify by' - 'you don't need now' etc. Thought it might be nice to know the vast world of music theory.

Sorry Hannah!

 

[Bobby G]

On a more general note, it's sometimes difficult to know at what level, or how to pitch things to a young'un. For instance, with my grandson Tom, who is nearly 9, you don't need to make any allowances about his comprehesion or vocabulary, but with others it could be different.

Let us know if we are confusing you Hannah 🙂

Cheers, Bob

 

[mr__myles]

12 Chromatic scales? I didn't know that. Is it the same scale starting on a different note? And what are the two simplified scales?

 

[Simon]

Well at 35 I'm confused by Linky Lee's list of scales to know 😱.

You don't need them to play music, being able to play them doesn't make you a better musician (anymore than reciting the alphabet or saying syllables makes you a good at writing speeches) - in fact I'd suggest that the only people who need scales are those sitting exams and/or those not using their ears. Probably both.

Music scale theory to me is this: an attempt to conceptualise melody by applying a bunch of generalisations in an arbitrary fashion that when practised by themselves, create a confusing range of contexts they're suppose to work in - eg harmony - become so numerous and mutated just to fit the given pulse - eg rhythm - and are more 'physical technique' than music.

So my point - "play tunes by ear" should apply to everyone, regardless of your age. Play your favourite tunes on saxophone Hannah - and learn as many tunes as you can by ear! 🙂

Simon

Bobby G wrote:
On a more general note, it's sometimes difficult to know at what level, or how to pitch things to a young'un. For instance, with my grandson Tom, who is nearly 9, you don't need to make any allowances about his comprehesion or vocabulary, but with others it could be different.

Let us know if we are confusing you Hannah 🙂

Cheers, Bob

 

[Linky Lee]

I didn't say being able to play them makes you a better musician.

Scales have their place in learning how to play.

They get your fingers moving and most people find that they can begin to improvise if they know a Dmajor scale when someone tells them to play in D.

Yes you can do this by ear. Many people do, but this is theory. A different aspect, another approach, it can only aid your understanding. Also playing scales helps you ear learn the sound patterns of scales and intervals. This is a theoretical way to understand and be able to communicate to others what you ears are hearing.

I also didn't say ' these are the scales to know'

As I've already said and apologised for, I was merely giving some information on the vastness of the subject.

On another point, most young children in the UK learning an instrument will be having lessons through a local music authority and will be encouraged to take exams.

I believe if you can study and get to grips with anything that is music related it will help you in your playing somewhere, somehow, somewhen.

Mr.Myles - yes 12 chromatic scales, one for each note. And the simplified versions I meant only for the whole tone scales as the notes repeat themselves. C E F# G# A# or C# D# F G A B
that covers all twelve semi-tones.

 

[tris]

Hi every body!

Whoa this is all a bit confusing is isn't it Hannah?

In music you need two things to do what you want to do.

1: Be able to play your instrument

That is it.

It comes down to being able to play the notes you want to play when you want to play them.

Sounds simple enough doesn't it? In fact, it is!

When I practice my saxophone I think about the 2 things I just mentioned.

1: How does this improve the way I can play the saxophone?

Music theory is nothing but a naming system for any of the sounds we might like to play. By learning a lot of theory you are learning all these different sounds.

The idea is to give a name to a particular sound so that when we hear it we can recognise it and play it.

So, music theory is just a way to help you learn different sounds.

But there is a different way?

YES!!! (Hooray)

Simon mentioned this and it is working out your favourite songs by listening and trying to repeat what you hear. (It is OK to make mistakes!!! they are as much a part of it as getting it right!)

I agree with Simon 100%

When I was 19 years old I had been playing the guitar for 6 years just by using my ears. I could not even read or write music. I started to play with a few guys who were studying music at university. They new all these names, major this, minor that, altered dominant. Arrhhh!!!(It did not matter to me that they thought I was a great player anyway.)

I felt really out of my depth and inferior so I took it upon myself to learn as much music theory as possible. I did and it really had not that much benefit at all expect knowing a lot of new names for the things I already knew. To be honest I found it much harder to learn all the names than the actual playing music. In fact my playing got worse, not better!

The truth is good musicians always have a good ear. You can use theory to help you train your ear but you are ultimately not going to use it as you are supposed to forget all the theory you know after you have learnt it all so you can play properly. It all does sound a bit silly.

 

[Simon]

Learning to play by scale/chord theory can be very confusing and ultimately (as my teachers pointed out), a bit redundant given the 'exceptions'.

Gotta remember that the present day Berklee style scale/chord theory approach hasn't been around for that long, and prior to the mid-20th century, pro players learnt to play by ear, dropping the needle on a record player and copying the style / licks and articulations of their heroes.

Another point to consider with the ear approach is that if you improvise (and on sax it's likely), playing to what you have pre-heard is far less stressful than getting on the bandstand and thinking (which is what happened to me throughout my time at jazz school) - consequence: your music making is alot more natural and spontaneous than trying to make the theory happen.

Making mistakes and learning by playing rather than 'theoreticising' is the way to go, especially if you're 9 years old like Hannah.
Jamey Aebersold himself at his summer jazz work shops pushes this now more and more, and this guy knows hundreds of tunes, their melodies, progressions and reharmonisations.

Simon

Linky_Lee wrote:
I didn't say being able to play them makes you a better musician.

Scales have their place in learning how to play.

They get your fingers moving and most people find that they can begin to improvise if they know a Dmajor scale when someone tells them to play in D.

Yes you can do this by ear. Many people do, but this is theory. A different aspect, another approach, it can only aid your understanding. Also playing scales helps you ear learn the sound patterns of scales and intervals. This is a theoretical way to understand and be able to communicate to others what you ears are hearing.

I also didn't say ' these are the scales to know'

As I've already said and apologised for, I was merely giving some information on the vastness of the subject.

On another point, most young children in the UK learning an instrument will be having lessons through a local music authority and will be encouraged to take exams.

I believe if you can study and get to grips with anything that is music related it will help you in your playing somewhere, somehow, somewhen.

Mr.Myles - yes 12 chromatic scales, one for each note. And the simplified versions I meant only for the whole tone scales as the notes repeat themselves. C E F# G# A# or C# D# F G A B
that covers all twelve semi-tones.

 

[tris]

APPLASUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Thank you Simon!

MORE APPLASUSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I had this new years resolution that I have not externalised until now.

All my music books have been packed away this afternoon. I have decided that for me the BEST and infact the ONLY place to really learn about music is by either playing or listening. I guess I have all the answers that I will ever need in my record collection.

Music is an aural art after all.

 

[Greywolf]

Yeah Simon and Tris, couldn't agree more
BUT

I have had this conversation several times with good Muscians. the last time was with Mike Hall at the Burnley Summer School last year.

In a workshop he was saying very much the same thing, 'don't get hung up on scales' ' don't agonize too much about the theory' etc.

The trouble is, this is always said most convincingly by musicians who have forgotten more than I will ever know and whose scales and theory are so embedded in their psyche that they are no longer even conscious that they know it.

My reaction to that always tends to be something along the lines of....'that's easy for you to say'.

Mike Hall. Now there's a guy. I have seen him often at the RNCM in Manchester but never heard him play and have thought in my head 'I wonder how good he is' Then at the final concert last August he took a solo on 'Spain' by Chick Corea.

OMG It was the most awesome thing I have heard. It made the hairs on the back of neck stand up.

I willnow before the world humbly apologise for

...have thought in my head 'I wonder how good he is' ...

Doh. Crass or what.

 

[Bobby G]

Hoorah and cheers for all the posts over the last 24 hours. Theory is good, and very interesting to someone like me, who has an interest in the maths side of music, but for me, primarily it's always been about using my ears. I learned guitar totally by ear and experimentation after getting a book with the chord shapes, similarly I am learning I am learning sax having learned the fingerings and embouchure out of a book.

I don't have a problem with people who are very into scales/theory/harmony etc, it definitely has its place but the most important thing is to get playing and enjoy it, then start on the scales if you need to, once your ears have accustomed themselves to the relationships between notes. Music is a journey of discovery, so ask questions of your teacher, other players etc.

Somewhere in the middle of all this is the point about ability to read music - I don't, basically - but mostly it would seem to be a good thing to do. It depends what you want to do, musically; for pop/rock I never really found it necessary although I could see where it might have been useful. However, for jazz it's very useful, as I've found what I can do is more limited as a non-reader. For orchestral playing I'd say it's essential. But again, being able to read music doesn't necessarily imply the need to know all the theory, just the ability to read the notes and directions on the page.

Cheers, Bob

 

[tris]

Reading notation is a good thing to have under your belt for ceratain professioanl situations.Reading notation is a good thing to have under your belt for certain professional situations. Ie you are asked to pay something you have not heard. Plus it is nice to be able to access certain pieces of music that hive not been recorded in audio.


These days we have LP's, tapes, CDs, DVD,s, Dictaphones, MP3, MP4 etc. We can hear the thing; we do not have to look at a printed representation (set of instructions) which is a tricky abstract concept to get your head around.

I am sure you can see where I am taking this! Have we in this day and age evolved past the need to have written music? In my opinion YES!

So for the general mental health of all musicians should we lobby parliament to ban music theory and notation?

Seriously, look at Louis Armstrong, he has more trouble with reading than I get from my two year old son! I don't believe it really held him back Look at the crazy stuff Joe Pass did with Oscar Peterson they were able to do that due to great ears!

IF YOU CAN TALK YOU CAN PLAY. It is that simple.


It has been found that there is a genetic link with regards to language and development of speak.

In lay terms you inherit a tonne of information, learned and recorded genetically over thousands of years with regards to the production of speech.

This also apply to music.

Makes you think doesn't it!

 

[Bobby G]

What you're proposing tris is a return to the oral tradition of folk music where tunes, songs etc are passed down through the generations, added to, developed, embellished, simplified, forgotten, remembered, re-invented, and generally played around with. Sounds good to me.

I think I've mentioned this before, but Charles Mingus used to teach his bands tunes by playing their parts on piano, then letting the other players play them as they heard them. I don't doubt Mingus had a lot of musical knowledge to be able to compose some of his more complex tunes, but the hollerin', bluesy stuff could well have been done without a note being written down. I imagine it suited Eric Dolphy down to the ground. I would love to be playing music in that way.

No band I've ever played in had written music, even though some of it was quite complex in a kind of guitars bass & drums version of Van der Graaf style - this is not inverted snobbery, just saying it can be done. My ear was always sufficiently developed to know what sounded right as opposed to what was correct.

Cheers, Bob

 

[Linky Lee]

I personally still find that I need notation.

I am getting better at remembering tunes, licks etc.
I hope this is due to my recent undertaking of studying standards over and over again.

Though I cannot work out music from ear. well I can but not to an extent that is needed. Twinkle twinkle little star wouldn't be too hard to work out now. But I failed miserably with moose the mooche.

I transcribed a copy of moose the mooche myself and although it was similar, there were a few notes here and there, that were all over the place. I checked it against the Charlie Parker Omnibook and about 80% of it was correct.

I also like to compose a lot. But I can't imagine different parts in my head. It's like trying to sing yourself a chord. This I cannot do and resort to notating out a melody, harmonising it, and then filling in parts as I go.

Have I got a problem here that I 'need' to overcome to progress as a musician to get me to that next level. Or am I ok trundling on with my shameful oral skills? I am trying to better them though!