I am going to begin posting a selection of synthetic scales for your amusement. These are scales I have not yet seen named in published music texts. The layout is as follows: Name - note distance in semitones - note distance in interval form (m2 = minor 2nd = 1 half step) - raw pitch assignment (whatever appears in a chromatic list) in C - normalized pitch in C. I will leave numeric scale assignment (ie 1 2 3 4 5 6 7) as an exercise for the interested. If I figure out how to post bmp files I will start posting fretboard charts in standard tuning but this will have to do for now. One final note: some synthetic scales do not have a true 5th. This will limit proper resolution, but not eliminate the usefulness. Finally, this group of modes really is one scale being rotated - try the mode exercise of taking any one of these ( C Db E F# G A Bb for example) and move to the next note up using the same pitches to generate the modes yourself ( Db E F# G A Bb C etc.) to see where I got these. I will post more as I have time. Enjoy!

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Synthetic 18 - 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 - m2 M2 m2 M2 m2 m3 M2 - c c# d# e f# g a# c - C Db Eb Fb Gb Abb Bb
s18 mode 2 - 2 1 2 1 3 2 1 - M2 m2 M2 m2 m3 M2 m2 - c d d# f f# a b c - C D Eb F Gb A B
s18 mode 3 - 1 2 1 3 2 1 2 - m2 M2 m2 m3 M2 m2 M2 - c c# d# e g a a# c - C Db Eb Fb G A Bb
s18 mode 4 - 2 1 3 2 1 2 1 - M2 m2 m3 M2 m2 M2 m2 - c d d# f# g# a b c - C D Eb F# G# A B
s18 mode 5 - 1 3 2 1 2 1 2 - m2 m3 M2 m2 M2 m2 M2 - c c# e f# g a a# c - C Db E F# G A Bb
s18 mode 6 - 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 - m3 M2 m2 M2 m2 M2 m2 - c d# f f# g# a b c - C D# E# F# G# A B
s18 mode 7 - 2 1 2 1 2 1 3 - M2 m2 M2 m2 M2 m2 m3 - c d d# f f# g# a c - C D Eb F Gb Ab Bbb

ha ha ha ha ha, you have far to much time on your hands!!!.
I'm gonna go and try some, I'll get back to you with my thoughs.

Here is the second set: I am calling this one 19 while the third in this series will be called Synthetic 17. No, I won't explain yet. This one is less useful than the previous but that will be in the ear of the beholder...

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Synthetic 19 - 1 1 4 1 2 1 2 - m2 m2 M3 m2 M2 m2 M2 - c c# d f# g a a# c - C Db Ebb F# G A Bb
s19 mode 2 - 1 4 1 2 1 2 1 - m2 M3 m2 M2 m2 M2 m2 - c c# f f# g# a b c - C Db E# F# G# A B
s19 mode 3 - 4 1 2 1 2 1 1 - M3 m2 M2 m2 M2 m2 m2 - c e f g g# a# b c - C D## E# F## G# A# B
s19 mode 4 - 1 2 1 2 1 1 4 - m2 M2 m2 M2 m2 m2 M3 - c c# d# e f# g g# c - C Db Eb Fb Gb Abb Bbbb
s19 mode 5 - 2 1 2 1 1 4 1 - M2 m2 M2 m2 m2 M3 m2 - c d d# f f# g b c - C D Eb F Gb Abb B
s19 mode 6 - 1 2 1 1 4 1 2 - m2 M2 m2 m2 M3 m2 M2 - c c# d# e f a a# c - C Db Eb Fb Gbb A Bb
s19 mode 7 - 2 1 1 4 1 2 1 - M2 m2 m2 M3 m2 M2 m2 - c d d# e g# a b c - C D Eb Fb G# A B

a little off topic, I never break strings? how weird is that?.

My coated strings last till they eventually give in, I keep them clean as new all thew time after about 5 months they just give out, I haven't replaced them for ages and I never snap strings, what can i do to improve my string snapping mate?

That will depend on the kind of guitar you play. If you use a standard strat or have the standard gibson style bridge, then working the whammy bar while aggressively picking will do the trick. This will even work with a Bigsby. It is a little harder with the floyd rose setup but dive bombs and rapid retightening while picking hard has produced a lot of breakage, especially of the high "e". If you don't have the "rapid action detuning mechanism" (whammy bar) then switch to really heavy picks in compination with ultralight strings and you will see the "snap, crackle, pop" fairly quickly.
For Hollowbodies and acoustic guitars I prefer alternate tunings. Experiment with a few dozen different ones over the course of a week. After a while metal fatigue (no pun intended here) will set in and the strings will snap even when lowering the pitch. It was this kind of experimentation that earned me my moniker. I was testing hundreds of different tunings and I learned not to face the guitar towards ANYBODY when the strings were older. You can even just keep tightening them until they go "pop"! THis can happen even when you think the strings can handle "just a semitone further..."
Of course, you can delay the process by using the best strings, settling them in carefully, and keeping them clean. But we don't want to do THAT now, do we?

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Interesting, I must say, the second I switched from a Floyd rose to my strat with fulcrum tr em the string breakage more or less stopped instantly.

I stopped using the floyd rose for different reasons, but I too have almost eliminated string breakage. However, I always see a broken string as a wake up call to pay closer attention to what I have been doing. The period of reflection offered by a broken string (except on stage) is too valuable to waste in a busy life. Please note that I do not ADVOCATE breaking strings except when a learning experience is involved. My take is that what I have learned when it happens naturally is the valuable part of the experience. Going from rapid expressive play to a complete stop is very refreshing to the mind, if sometimes a bit unpleasant. Much like reviewing ones life...

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

A little cooler than the last one. That is, at least I will not have to use triple sharps or flats to describe the pitches in normalized format. Seriously, is a triple flatted 5th even viable in terms of scale functionality?

Are there any real authorities on the subject I could speak with on this and related matters? I haven't managed a discussion with a really advanced musician on the topic yet and I have tried contacting quite a few. I can't get past the flappers for the famous ones and I can't find any of the others thus far. As for local authorities a local music teacher says my material is too advanced for most of his students. Sigh.

I was advised to write beginner's books but I have a problem with that: there are already too many of them. Even if I did a really good one, how would anyone know with fifty-leven of them out there? My work is based on what I want to see: in depth material on chords, scales and tunings. Is there a market for really advanced work out there? And how would anyone know if it was provided?

Enough of my complaining. On with the scales. If anyone other than me benefits from them that will have to be enough.

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Synthetic 17 - 1 1 3 2 2 1 2 - m2 m2 m3 M2 M2 m2 M2 - c c# d f g a a# c - C Db Ebb F G A Bb
s17 mode 2 - 1 3 2 2 1 2 1 - m2 m3 M2 M2 m2 M2 m2 - c c# e f# g# a b c - C Db E F# G# A B
s17 mode 3 - 3 2 2 1 2 1 1 - m3 M2 M2 m2 M2 m2 m2 - c d# f g g# a# b c - C D# E# F## G# A# B
s17 mode 4 - 2 2 1 2 1 1 3 - M2 M2 m2 M2 m2 m2 m3 - c d e f g g# a c - C D E F G Ab Bbb
s17 mode 5 - 2 1 2 1 1 3 2 - M2 m2 M2 m2 m2 m3 M2 - c d d# f f# g a# c - C D Eb F Gb Abb Bb
s17 mode 6 - 1 2 1 1 3 2 2 - m2 M2 m2 m2 m3 M2 M2 - c c# d# e f g# a# c - C Db Eb Fb Gbb Ab Bb
s17 mode 7 - 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 - M2 m2 m2 m3 M2 M2 m2 - c d d# e g a b c - C D Eb Fb G A B

If I may ask a question...why do you call these scales synthetic scales...all thought we don`t use them all too much and by viewing this material and trying it out I find refreshing ideas,I still don`t get the point of categorizing them...we have 12 notes in todays system and each combination of those makes certain"scales"
Why categorize them?
What defines a "scale" anyway?
Why just not take any combinations of notes and combine them by will,ears and feelings?

I call them synthetic scales because the music texts I first saw describing them used the phrase. It may be to distinguish them from the scale forms arising from the major scale (which arises due to the behavior of the natural harmonic sequence - which is too big a topic to discuss here).

Your observation of taking any of the 12 notes and combining them according to feeling is fine for solo performance - and reflects a point of view held in part by the "serial" classical musicians working from the turn of the last century (roughly).

However, communicating which combination of notes you happen to feel like playing in to your fellow musicians is the devil hiding in that philosophy. Jazz theory has been wrestling with the problem of structured improvisation for a lo-o-o-ng time now. Naming the scales is all about communication, not the process of playing the music.

As for what defines a scale, it is a selection of certain notes from a chromatic sequence. Much of what we use is due to experimentation that happened long before theory was there to describe what the musicians were doing. And the first scales used sounded good. This was empirical observation, not math.

Remember, theory was developed to describe what musicians were doing. Some musicians would develop and use theories to help them when they didn't understand what they were doing and needed to move on. Musicians will almost never choose a theoretical idea and create music around it, unless they were academics or theoretically inclined. Too much of what is theoretically acceptable just plain sounds bad.

As for why I am categorizing them, in my own musical training (too much of which was alone) I would stump even advanced teachers with my questions and I was unable to afford to go to a real musical university. So, when I came up with (I thought) simple question like "what is the difference between the scales musicians like to use and all the rest" I decided that, lacking answers, to describe them all and sort them into modal groups so that I would know when I was dealing with something I had seen before. In various music books (regarding only the 7 note scales) I found fourteen known variants and their associated modes. This made 98 "normal" scales, even though this includes nastiness like the modes of the enigmatic scale which has little usage in classical music and less in popular music. However there are a total of 462 possible 7 note scales, or 66 modal groups. Subtracting 14 from 66 leaves 52 possibilities (364 total scales). I am suspecting that at least one of them may have some real use.

So there's why. I hope I didn't lose you with all the blah-blah...

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

The fourth group to be posted. On this one try modes 5 and 7, which have the real 5th. Maybe I will start another thread with all of the known groups of scales I have found, if anybody's interested.

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Synthetic 16 - 1 1 3 1 3 1 2 - m2 m2 m3 m2 m3 m2 M2 - c c# d f f# a a# c - C Db Ebb F Gb A Bb
s16 mode 2 - 1 3 1 3 1 2 1 - m2 m3 m2 m3 m2 M2 m2 - c c# e f g# a b c - C Db E F G# A B
s16 mode 3 - 3 1 3 1 2 1 1 - m3 m2 m3 m2 M2 m2 m2 - c d# e g g# a# b c - C D# E F## G# A# B
s16 mode 4 1 3 1 2 1 1 3 - m2 m3 m2 M2 m2 m2 m3 - c c# e f g g# a c - C Db E F G Ab Bbb
s16 mode 5 - 3 1 2 1 1 3 1 - m3 m2 M2 m2 m2 m3 m2 - c d# e f# g g# b c - C D# E F# G Ab B
s16 mode 6 - 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 - m2 M2 m2 m2 m3 m2 m3 - c c# d# e f g# a c - C Db Eb Fb Gbb Ab Bbb
s16 mode 7 - 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 - M2 m2 m2 m3 m2 m3 m2 - c d d# e g g# b c - C D Eb Fb G Ab B

But will anyone use them, that is the question. Several of these have a proper 5th, so they should work fairly well. If anyone has used these before, let me know, esp. if you have seen them is a book...

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Synthetic 15 - 1 1 3 1 2 2 2 - m2 m2 m3 m2 M2 M2 M2 - c c# d f f# g# a# c - C Db Ebb F Gb Ab Bb
s15 mode 2 - 1 3 1 2 2 2 1 - m2 m3 m2 M2 M2 M2 m2 - c c# e f g a b c - C Db E F G A B
s15 mode 3 - 3 1 2 2 2 1 1 - m3 m2 M2 M2 M2 m2 m2 - c d# e f# g# a# b c - C D# E F# G# A# B
s15 mode 4 - 1 2 2 2 1 1 3 - m2 M2 M2 M2 m2 m2 m3 - c c# d# f g g# a c - C Db Eb F G Ab Bbb
s15 mode 5 - 2 2 2 1 1 3 1 - M2 M2 M2 m2 m2 m3 m2 - c d e f# g g# b c - C D E F# G Ab B
s15 mode 6 - 2 2 1 1 3 1 2 - M2 M2 m2 m2 m3 m2 M2 - c d e f f# a a# c - C D E F Gb A Bb
s15 mode 7 - 2 1 1 3 1 2 2 - M2 m2 m2 m3 m2 M2 M2 - c d d# e g g# a# c - C D Eb Fb G Ab Bb

These two scales are actually symmetrical diminished scales.
The first one is the "half/whole"
The second one is the "whole/half"

Sean Meredith-Jones
http://www.seanmeredithjones.com

that the symmetrical diminished scales have eight notes in the scale. http://www.outsideshore.com/primer/primer/ms-primer-4-4.html#DiminishedScales Mark Sabatella's site gives an explanation of these, but as near as I can figure they are not the same. I will admit the similarity, however. If you have a reference which indicates these explicitly, I would be delighted to see it. My music texts are, I don't mind admitting, a little on the old side excepting the Guitar Grimoire books.

Note the triple flat in s20 mode 5. We're starting to get a little nasty here. Of course, for those of you who think working with the Locrian mode is nasty, you will have already run screaming. If not, now might be a good time

The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...

Synthetic 20 - 1 1 2 4 1 1 2 - m2 m2 M2 M3 m2 m2 M2 - c c# d e g# a a# c - C Db Ebb Fb G# A Bb
s20 mode 2 - 1 2 4 1 1 2 1 - m2 M2 M3 m2 m2 M2 m2 - c c# d# g g# a b c - C Db Eb F## G# A B
s20 mode 3 - 2 4 1 1 2 1 1 - M2 M3 m2 m2 M2 m2 m2 - c d f# g g# a# b c - C D E## F## G# A# B
s20 mode 4 - 4 1 1 2 1 1 2 - M3 m2 m2 M2 m2 m2 M2 - c e f f# g# a a# c - C D## E# F# G# A Bb
s20 mode 5 - 1 1 2 1 1 2 4 - m2 m2 M2 m2 m2 M2 M3 - c c# d e f f# g# c - C Db Ebb Fb Gbb Abbb Bbbb
s20 mode 6 - 1 2 1 1 2 4 1 - m2 M2 m2 m2 M2 M3 m2 - c c# d# e f g b c - C Db Eb Fb Gbb Abb B
s20 mode 7 - 2 1 1 2 4 1 1 - M2 m2 m2 M2 M3 m2 m2 - c d d# e f# a# b c - C D Eb Fb Gb A# B