How many scales are there?

[Simon]

Wow - this thread seems to be drawing out some interesting points. Nice ideas Tris and great to hear from a guitarist's point of view, especially the 'fear based' angle. A real obstacle to performing. For me, the mental block of scale theory created alot of this.

Martin - if you 'know where you are in a scale', you've already assumed a whole bunch of other notes that go along with that note you're playing. Premeditated, so to speak. And if you're a theory buff, you've probably mapped out the entire tune with 'this scale goes here' post its. Tried it, didn't work, better off learning tunes and copying recordings by ear.


"Start with Pythagoras and work your way to Schoenberg." Weren't these guys mathematicians? Heheh. You're kidding me, right? I'm not a crusty academic who owns a lute, just a hobby sax player who at one time studied at a music college. Music ain't maths. As soon as they start releasing CDs of Band in a Box type generated music, I'll reconsider. Or perhaps this is why alot of sax players nowadays sound like Trane digital patterns they study, cos they think it is?


Converting a tune to numbers... man o man. That is pure old school Berklee. The whole scale/chord theory thing. It's only an 'ear thing' in that your ears happen to be around at the time. You've just labelled pitches with a number. Whether you're aware of this or not but if you play numbers you don't need to listen at all. Why not play the phonebook as a scale degree exercise? Make '0' a rest and before you know it, you're playing scales to the 9th!

Here's another example of the scale theory verbage:

I know 4 minor scale sounds. The first 5 notes of each are exactly the same. The variations between them are semitones in the 6th and 7th degrees. As a 'scale theory' player I could devote vast tracts of time running these in 12 keys, through various patterns and starting on each note. I could try this with the band I play in, but they'd lose interest pretty quickly.

As an ear player I could try these different sounds out over a sequencer or play along, listening to the overall groove of the music, trying articulations and rhythms and listening to what happens. I would then try these ideas out with a band on say 'Blue Bossa' or 'Invitation', tunes with extended minor sounding harmonies. Mistakes will be made, notes will clash, some rhythms and lines might go over time. But I'll develop my own personal preference of notes and ideas, which I'll try to remember and transfer to other tunes with similar harmonies.

So tell me, which one sounds like an uninspiring mission to you?
Should also point out I reckon that music should be a social activity. If it ain't you're just practising until the next gig.

Hannah, now try 'On when the saints', starting on 3 fingers down G.

Simon

Martin wrote:

If you know where you are in the scale and how it relates to the key you're in you can do what you want in any other key if you are competent in all 12.
That's the whole point.
Having the facility to 'say' what you 'hear'.
The tune that goes :1 6 5 6 1 6 5 6 1 6 5 6 3 2 1 is the same in all 12.
It's an ear thing.

Theory is a set of terms describing what is known,not just what might be.
Start with Pythagoras and work your way to Schoenberg.

And then maybe String Theory.8)

The dominance of harmony in Western music is a direct consequence of equal temper,without which we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Sorry Hannah.
Your thread's been overloaded!

:erm:

 

[martin_br]

Pythagoras was the one who gave us the diatonic major scale and it's modes.
Music is very mathematical.
All the intervals are ratios.
1:2 is an octave
3:2 is a 5th
5:4 is a maj 3rd
etc

Down to Pythagoras.
The first application of the scientific method.
All even number harmonics are octaves of an earlier odd one.
All odd number harmonics are new notes.
That's why the progression V I is so strong,or indeed I IV.

You seem to be expressing the idea that ignorance is bliss.
I know that it is electromagnetic force that stops me dissappearing through the ground but it doesn't stop me being able to walk properly on it.

Bach is wonderfully intricate aural mathematics.
If you prefer a mystical approach,fine.But don't be surprised if those of us who don't express our disagreement.

The idea of thinking in terms of degrees of the scale is nothing like the Berklee approach.
And who said anything about running scales over changes?

You are making ridiculous assumptions and absurd extrapolations.

String Theory ,btw,is a cosmological continuation of the Pythagorean idea of Harmony of the Spheres,whereby the vibrational modes of subatomic particles determine the sort of particle it is.
In 11 dimensions.

The word harmony is derived from theGreek for pleasing to the ear' and tone from tonos meaning a stretching (of a string).
You only hear tonality because of the patterns created by alternating tonal gaps, as in tone,tone, semitone.
In wholly chromatic or whole tone music there is no tonal centre because of this lack of pattern

The ear is evolved to detect these patterns having sympathetic resonating chambers tuned to both natural and equal tempered systems.

The equal tempered system is based on all semi tones being the same ratio distance from its immediate neighbour,that is 1:1.05946309437...(twelfth root of 2).

If I can speak reasonably eloquent English.does this prevent me from speaking emotively and/or swearing like a trooper?
Of course not.
Similarly a thorough knowledge and understanding of how and why things are as they are is no barrier to being a passionate and musically minded performer.

You won't hear any Berklee scale running in my playing cos I have never agreed with that whole approach,and their analytical stuff is even worse.

Your approach is much more likely to lead to tried and tested phrases and articulations without ever understanding what you're doing.
You obviously don't understand what the numbers I was referring to were about as the gibberish you write as a rebuttal is utter nonsense.

If I were able to I could show you in a couple of minutes face to face but if you don't get the simple example of the previous post its probably a waste of effort trying to persue what is an aural concept through the visual medium we are limited to here.

Perhaps in a parallel univers...

As it used to say on big 4 pint cans of Boddingtons:

Keep cool and upright.
8)

 

[Linky Lee]

No there's a man who can speak my languages.
Maths and English 😛

I agree with what you are saying. Understanding the theory of why two certain notes will be considered pleasing in a certain context does not make you play in a certain way (only using notes of a scales you deem appropriate for that situation).

Also I believe the opposite is true. Learning by ear and memorising licks will not make you play in a better manner (which is what this debate is boiling down too).

I think to be a good musician you have to have balance and consistency. You should be able to hear that what you are playing is in tune and sounds ok over chord progressions. You should be able to understand why this as well, so that you can communicate with others.

The main reason why we have theory and equal temperament, is so that we can play with other people, on other instruments in different keys.
If you tell someone you're playing a lick with an accent on the Gb over a C7 that isn't going to be helpful for them unless they can transpose very quickly, and often at sight or by ear. If you could explain it to them that you are emphasising the tri-tone of chord I7 (C7) that goes in, makes sense and they can apply that without having to do ridiculous mumbo jumbo to work out what you are trying to get them to understand.

If you combine the two of them, you can cater for everyone, and you can have two approaches to the same thing.

You may have a preference to one of them, you may find one naturally easier than the other, but there is no doubt in my mind that neither is more valuable than the other.

If you take my personal case, I have been trained classically (not Berklee style). I have been taught through patterns (scales) and classical harmony. By this I mean TTSTTTS is a major scale. With this knowledge I can now imply major harmony in any key.

Scales and modes are all basic patterns. What they function as in a song is harmony. The major scale provides the 'major' feel to the music commonly found in pop songs.
Minor or Aeolian mode is a different expression, it generally expresses sorrow.

This is what I call tonality.

My weak area is my aural recognition of this tonality as my aural recognition of intervals is weak.
I am currently working towards bettering this so that I can mix these two different approaches together, so that I can move away from thinking 'major tonality' for this expression. And start hearing what tonality I should be using because of the expression I want to portray to the listener and the chord progression.

I always find that anticipating the chord before it arrives makes for a more tasteful choice of tonality and makes the transition smoother and therefore more expressive and meaningful.
Especially with modulation, if you start implying the new tonality over the original one, when the new tonality arrives it feels welcome, safe and secure, yet fresh and new. Exactly what a modulation should give. Development.

I believe balance is the key.

Also if you check out Martin's link (thanks) and apply it to the saxophone you'll find that neither theory or your ears will be doing it for you. I believe you cannot be in this state unless you have both sides of it. Aural and Theory. It's like Beckham was in the zone, but only for taking free kicks.

 

[martin_br]

If you tell someone you're playing a lick with an accent on the Gb over a C7 that isn't going to be helpful for them unless they can transpose very quickly, and often at sight or by ear. If you could explain it to them that you are emphasising the tri-tone of chord I7 (C7) that goes in, makes sense and they can apply that without having to do ridiculous mumbo jumbo to work out what you are trying to get them to understand

For a start.I wouldn't tell them that as I probably wouldn't even be aware of it.in the same sense as I woudn't be aware of having used the subjunctive rather than the conditional when in the middle of a conversation.

More specifically it's a flat 5 in that tonality which I know produces the sound I want. (Very blues thing)

Retrospective analysis will give a different picture at various levels.
But it's still just a b5 of a minor blues which creates dissonance which resolves.

And sounds cool.
If you do it right.

This is beginning to get like describing the chemical processes required to digest an apple.
Which luckily our genes know.

Had a few now btw.
Hic..


And this is the beginners' forum?
Whoa!

 

[Rogerb]

Whoa, indeed !

It's gonna be difficult, IMO, for people to remain 'cool', if they are being accused of writing "gibberish" and "nonsense", especially, as you seem to imply in the 'Beginners' section 🙁

I'm not a moderator, but I *am* a beginner, and I'd respectfully ask you 'old hands' to take such esoteric discussions to a more appropriate place... thanks, guys 🙂

Most of what has been written in these long posts is complete 'gibberish', to *me*, and I suspect, to most 'beginners' 😱

 

[Pete Thomas]

Thanks for that Roger, I try to keep the forum as unmoderated as possible but I've been wondering whether to step in here and point out that this section is for beginners to reply to beginners. Mostly I think its fine for threads to drift off topic. but lets keep this section as it was intended please.

There is indeed some very good and interesting stuff being written here, but it would be good to discuss elsewhere I think. I don't think it's possible to easily move posts withoiut moving the whole thread, so I suggest starting a new thread in the jazz Theory section to continue this discauusion.

And Hannah, thanks for the original question!

 

[hannah_k]

8|..... I'm getting dizzy.....

 

[Bobby G]

hannah k wrote:
8|..... I'm getting dizzy.....

You're getting dizzy!?

This is all your fault Hannah! 😛

I hope your squeaky Twinkle Twinkle is getting better. Playing saxophone is great fun really

Cheers, Bob

 

[Simon]

Yeah, that's a shame you feel I was writing gibberish and nonsense Martin / Lee, although I'm having trouble following your line about Pythagorus, the effects of gravity and equal tempered scales and apples and something called Boddingtons, although I'm sure you know what you mean.

I was trying to explain that for me I have found that learning tunes by ear has become far easier when avoiding consciously drilling scales and patterns. I have found that transcribing solos and playing tunes have proved me with a huge amount of ideas to work on, and at the end of the day I can actually play a tune along with others. I also mentioned that that I find making music with others in a group a better context for memorising and learning tunes than just simply running scales by yourself.

How this relates to Hannah's original question is (and as I closed with at the end of my posts) at the age of 9 sure you can know that there are lots of scales that can start on each note of the 12 note chromatic scale, but really you can play Happy Birthday, When the Saints, Twinkle Twinkle and simple tunes like these for yourself without any scale knowledge, drilling, theory etc at all. And I've found that this also applies for harder tunes when you get older too.

In blissful ignorance,

Simon

PS Hannah, try 'The Simpsons' tune, starting on G. You'll need several notes including Middle D + E and Low C# too but you might be able to figure these out for yourself.

PSS Pete - I think it's time to relocate this thread, although I kinda feel I've tried to answer Hannah's question here.

Rogerb wrote:
Whoa, indeed !

It's gonna be difficult, IMO, for people to remain 'cool', if they are being accused of writing "gibberish" and "nonsense", especially, as you seem to imply in the 'Beginners' section 🙁

I'm not a moderator, but I *am* a beginner, and I'd respectfully ask you 'old hands' to take such esoteric discussions to a more appropriate place... thanks, guys 🙂

Most of what has been written in these long posts is complete 'gibberish', to *me*, and I suspect, to most 'beginners' 😱

 

[bobk]

Even from a beginner's angle there are still some issues about the 'play it by ear' position. The type of thing that some people have done at the end of their messages, which is very helpful, is say things like 'Hannah, try starting 'when the saints' (or whatever) with a G' or 'with the three left hand keys down'. This is great because if she (or I) then tries to play it by ear we don't run into any notes whose fingering we don't know or whose fingering is rather difficult. So, these suggestions will, indeed help us to play by ear, but, in order to make them you surely need to know what key the tune is in if you start it on a G, which notes are in that key etc. etc.

Supplementary question: Does practising scales help you learn the mechanics of getting your fingers to go in the right places more than practising tunes? That is, is there a reason to practise scales independent of anything that music theory or reading music might give you?

cheers,

Bob

 

[hannah_k]

Hello Daddy! 😛

 

[Simon]

And that's the crux of it right there Bob.

Do you need to know what key it's in? I've not found a person yet who has learnt the names of the notes on the sax say for one octave and then after they've heard a part of a tune, couldn't first sing then play that back when told the first note.

I could get s/he to practise the G major scale for an octave, we could label the notes with numbers, I could then tell her the numbers s/he needs.... yawn.

Or say - "lets play 'When the Saints' starting on G..."
they'll make mistakes (which actually means they can pre-hear what the sound should be - so this is a good thing!) and more importantly they DISCOVER they can play the tune by THEMSELVES.

Yes practising scales gives you pre-set finger combinations, but at a more advanced level (I guess) they can actually do you more harm than good (IMHO).

And yes, if the key signature shows one sharp, and there are no accidentals (sharps or flat signs) in the music, then you can be sure that the tune uses notes from the G Major / E Minor scales. However, alot of music doesn't stay in one key (it modulates), or use one key signature (or any key signatures at all).

Yes, you could sightread your way to victory like the Supersax group did when they practised, but these guys memorised their parts / used their ears because of the demands the music made on them. I seriously doubt they were thinking scales / patterns / numbers etc on the bandstand.

<<That is, is there a reason to practise scales independent of anything that music theory or reading music might give you?>>
I'd say no, but I'm sure 'Pythagorus' would disagree...

Simon

bobk wrote:
Even from a beginner's angle there are still some issues about the 'play it by ear' position. The type of thing that some people have done at the end of their messages, which is very helpful, is say things like 'Hannah, try starting 'when the saints' (or whatever) with a G' or 'with the three left hand keys down'. This is great because if she (or I) then tries to play it by ear we don't run into any notes whose fingering we don't know or whose fingering is rather difficult. So, these suggestions will, indeed help us to play by ear, but, in order to make them you surely need to know what key the tune is in if you start it on a G, which notes are in that key etc. etc.

Supplementary question: Does practising scales help you learn the mechanics of getting your fingers to go in the right places more than practising tunes? That is, is there a reason to practise scales independent of anything that music theory or reading music might give you?

cheers,

Bob

 

[Rogerb]

One thing I think that playing up and down, say, the GMajor scale helps with is developing the dexterity required to play smoothly across the 'break' between C & D.

You 'old hands' have possibly forgotten how tricky that is for us 'newbies' 😀

 

[bobk]

Yep! I find myself making broken police car noises doing C-D-C-D... or B-D-B-D... etc. to try and get that transition working a bit better.

 

[Simon]

That's probably not so much a dexterity thing though Roger as more of a 'getting the airstream' working for you so the Mid D pops out relatively in tune, as 'going over the break' isn't easy.

Also, when you play C-D do you hear it as part of the G major scale and as the first two notes of say the C major scale? Ear training and playing 'by ear' encourages (for me) hearing these in different situations - it's not easy to do this, and finger flapping scale exercises, whilst you're correct in that they technically get you playing those sounds, doesn't really help you to hear them as a 'standalone interval' also found in (I think) 4 other major scales (such as C major) as well!

Simon

Rogerb wrote:
One thing I think that playing up and down, say, the GMajor scale helps with is developing the dexterity required to play smoothly across the 'break' between C & D.

You 'old hands' have possibly forgotten how tricky that is for us 'newbies' 😀

 

[Bobby G]

Yep, I sometimes still have to take a run up at getting over the break, even after 3 years :whistle:

I do like to know what key a piece is in if I am playing with other people, just from the point of view of getting my head round it, and there will be some almost 'pre-arranged' finger-patterns (also sometimes called 'licks' I believe 8) ) but these come more from improvising or tune-playing than practising a lot of scales.

As I've said in other posts, my practise 'regime' is sloppy to say the least! I do sometimes play a few scales, or arpeggios to get the fingers going, or do some long notes, but mostly I just play. I may not be 'that good', but I think I'm 'good enough' to play in a fair amount of musical situations, and I'm quite happy with how I play and where it's going (not that I want to sound complacent of course); I still have plateaus like most people, make big advances every now and again etc. But, I have no illusions about becoming a pro or a serious student of music, I'm just playing for enjoyment and to jam or gig with others. Which is exactly what I'm doing, and I totally love it Next step, some unsuspecting band is going to avail itself of my abilities

Cheers, Bob