VAI.COM

The Official Steve Vai Website Message Boards.
It is currently Wed Oct 22, 2014 4:40 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:23 pm 
Offline
Member
Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2005 5:43 am
Posts: 1508
Location: Brittany, France.
Bloody hell...guitarman...professional musician..living in Monaco, with perfect english, an obvious rich and long musical education, enjoying many genres of music...possibly very famous...what is it that attracted you to these boards....?
:D

Monaco: You must be aware of Philippe Geluck's famous joke :

"Billionaires are getting frigthened in Monaco, because of more and more millionaires moving in"!


Now to get back on topic, I once again agree with you(!) as this all"sudden reinvention of the wheel" contains (to my ignorant eyes) nothing radically new.


:peace


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Sep 02, 2008 12:44 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
lydian2000 wrote:
Bloody hell...guitarman...professional musician..living in Monaco, with perfect english, an obvious rich and long musical education, enjoying many genres of music...possibly very famous...what is it that attracted you to these boards....?
:D

Monaco: You must be aware of Philippe Geluck's famous joke :

"Billionaires are getting frigthened in Monaco, because of more and more millionaires moving in"!


Now to get back on topic, I once again agree with you(!) as this all"sudden reinvention of the wheel" contains (to my ignorant eyes) nothing radically new.


:peace



hahaha

bilingual - English and French - more towards French, but this is an English-speaking forum, so English it is :)

Well, on a forum such as this, one finds dedicated and hard-working musicians - to play Vai, dedication is needed.

These are the best kind of musicians - curious and hard-working ones ;)

I think my posts may help a little.


I'm in the middle of a project just now, but have some days off - hence some posts. After the end of this week, it'll be back to work until christmas.

You probably won't know me - unless you are familiar with French movies. However, my friend done the soundtrack for a movie called 'Frontiere(s)' that is going down well in other parts of Europe.

And yes - if you remember me talking about Xenakis - he added a Xenakis 'quote' into the music - listen to the strings near the start of the movie :)


But my problem with posting my own music is that this is a Vai forum - and so it should be. My (or anyone else's) music doesn't matter - but what can make a difference is the information provided on such forums.




Yes - back on topic - I hope Stringbreaker doesn't take offence to my post - but as someone who is 'well read', he should be aware that most of the scales he is writing are modes of other scales - not common scales, but scales that exist nonetheless.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Notes on modes
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 10:29 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:40 pm
Posts: 94
GuitarmanK1972

R #2 3 #4 5 #6 7 is the sixth mode of the hungarian minor scaale as I understand it. In C this would be C D# E F# G A# B so translating this to D gives D E# F# G# A B# C# not D E F G# A B# C# as you list. I got my description of the Hungarian minor scale from my music theory books, and the one with the listing most familiar to the players here should be the Guitar Grimoire. Where did your listing come from? I have access to libraries here in NZ and I should be able to look at your sources fairly quickly, at least until my books are shipped over.

Next, there are no modes to "create" - there are 462 possibilities for 7 note scales and when you group them into modes you get 66 groups. Granted if you change the root note you get a new scale but the pattern remains the same. Which is the point, is it not? The possibilities are large, but they are finite.

You also do not address the actual question of mine you quoted. I assume from the nature of your comment that you are not going to address the issue of degree functionality. Sigh.

Finally, my "Difficult and contrived" format is based on other research I am doing for alternate tunings for the guitar. What you are seeing here is math, and at a fairly low level. I do it this way so anyone can reproduce my work if they have a real challenge. For example, I submitted my list of all possible alternate tunings to a university graduate level music department and they examined and approved my list as a class project under the professors supervision. I have no problem with anyone challenging my results: anyone can make mistakes. I just prefer that you back it up with a source so I know where the challenge comes from. OK?

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


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 2:42 pm 
Offline
Newcomer

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 5
guitarmanK1982 wrote:
Stringbreaker wrote:
I have some difficulty regarding any of the scales in this set as being directly useful: so it is probably a prime candidate for exploration. Especially to one of my big theoretical questions: does a double flatted fifth lose its function in scales such as the first mode here? While these scales are largely a theoretical exercise, the ear does hold sway: is a fifth always a fifth, even when the scale puts it is a different place? Is there a general rule on this kind of behavior? I haven't seen it yet and I am fairly well read. Anyone?



Stringbreaker - i'm familiar with almost all of these scales, since many exercises on music theory/composition courses involve trying to create your own modes and write music for them.

Your thinking of the scales is wrong e.g. your 'synthetic 9' scale, which you have as C C# D E F G# A - this is just one of the hungarian minor modes, only starting on C. If you were to start on D, you would have the mode beginning on the tonic:

D E F G# A C C# D (R 2 b3 #4 5 #6 7 R)

PS - it should be B#, not C (D E F G# A B# C# D). This makes it make far more sense, as we are now using each letter of the alphabet - which is standard form in scale writing (7-note scales, I mean).

So, it is just a modal form of one of the hungarian minor scales (the 6th mode). The b3 and #4 are idiosyncratic of the eastern European 'sound', and can be found in Romanian/Hungarian/Moldovan music etc etc .


I don't want to spoil your fun by explaining them all to you (this is why i'm not telling you which hungarian minor scale it is from ;)), and where they come from (plus I don't have the time for that), but sorry kid - there is nothing new here - all you are doing is making them look new and exciting by presenting them in a rather difficult and contrived format.



However, I commend you for your diligence, and your enthusiasm towards music theory.

But you aren't going to contribute anything to music theory by walking this path, as it has all already been covered - many, many times.


Is it possible to be any more condescending ??


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:22 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2005 10:11 am
Posts: 129
Location: In the woods, Pennsylvania
Stringbreaker wrote:
The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...


With all due respect:
About your mantra, kind sir, what would be step #2?

Continue playing on the other five strings?
Replacing the broken string?
Exclaiming (to no one in particular), "OMFG! I just broke a string!"

There must be intermediate steps before you get to all them there numbers.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Notes on modes
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 3:59 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
Stringbreaker wrote:
GuitarmanK1972

R #2 3 #4 5 #6 7 is the sixth mode of the hungarian minor scaale as I understand it. In C this would be C D# E F# G A# B so translating this to D gives D E# F# G# A B# C# not D E F G# A B# C# as you list. I got my description of the Hungarian minor scale from my music theory books, and the one with the listing most familiar to the players here should be the Guitar Grimoire. Where did your listing come from? I have access to libraries here in NZ and I should be able to look at your sources fairly quickly, at least until my books are shipped over.


My listing comes from no 'guitar grimoire' books, but rather, years of experience as a composer, working in many different styles of music with many composers - composers from different cultural and ethnic backgrounds. Perhaps you have heard of the late Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan? Do you want a comprehensive list of everyone i've ever been exposed to who has taught me something? I can hardly remember this myself.

RE the books - I can't remember - I read them at uni a long long time ago. And it also depends which languages you speak. Lots of them were in Russian, and most of the others were in French. Do you speak any of these languages?

Anyway - what difference does it make - the info I have given you is correct - i'm not going to provide you with a list of books in order for you to cross-reference my quotes.

I beileve the result would be another list! What is your obsession with lists?!!




Stringbreaker wrote:
Next, there are no modes to "create" - there are 462 possibilities for 7 note scales and when you group them into modes you get 66 groups. Granted if you change the root note you get a new scale but the pattern remains the same. Which is the point, is it not? The possibilities are large, but they are finite.


Isn't this what I was addressing?? Didn't I say that your scales are modes of other scales?

If so, then why are you listing all the modes from all scales?





Stringbreaker wrote:
You also do not address the actual question of mine you quoted. I assume from the nature of your comment that you are not going to address the issue of degree functionality. Sigh.


I don't appreciate the 'sigh' comment, as if i'm in some way not up to the challenge. I think you'll find that every one of my posts provides information - all of them - including the previous ones addressed to yourself. If this makes you feel threatened, then you shouldn't try to challenge the man. You should learn from the information i'm providing here.

RE the comment - give me an example, and i'll explain it to you. Give me a few, and i'll explain the differences between them.






Stringbreaker wrote:
Finally, my "Difficult and contrived" format is based on other research I am doing for alternate tunings for the guitar. What you are seeing here is math, and at a fairly low level. I do it this way so anyone can reproduce my work if they have a real challenge. For example, I submitted my list of all possible alternate tunings to a university graduate level music department and they examined and approved my list as a class project under the professors supervision. I have no problem with anyone challenging my results: anyone can make mistakes. I just prefer that you back it up with a source so I know where the challenge comes from. OK?

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


Who are the professors, and what is the uni? I'll probably know them.



Finally - this is no challenge - I don't see any form of challenge - I see someone who doesn't really understand what they are doing, and i'm helping them. In order for there to be a challenge, people need to be evenly matched.

Please don't get rude again, as i'm trying to help you.



You are agreeing that your 'synthetic' scales actually are scales already in common usage, so what is the point of this thread? That you have discovered them for yourself for the first time?

Do you want me to embarass you by listing where each and every single one of your scales comes from? All it will show is your own lack of knowledge with regards to scales/modes already in existence - and in use, I should add. It isn't my fault you didn't realise that your scale already belonged to the hungarian minor family. You should have known this yourself - and if you do know the sources of your scales, you should point them out.


Yes, your format is difficult and contrived. I've already had to explain to you about correct scale writing (e.g. B# instead of C in the example I quoted) - and this is a basic thing. A very basic thing indeed. I really think you need to learn the basics before you try to do something of any significance at all.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:03 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
Is it possible to be any more condescending ??


I wasn't being condescending at all. I was providing information, and correcting errors.

I really don't understand this attitude - when someone is shown that something is wrong, they should learn from it, rather than taking offence, and going on the defensive.

Lose your ego - it will get in the way. You should be thankful of the opportunity to actually learn something that will be of use to you, rather than trying to defend someone who is more than capable of defending theirselves. If you have anything of use to add on this thread, then add it, rather than inserting a childish opinion that only acts to get in the way of the exchange of correct, accurate, and useful information.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Notes on modes
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 4:08 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
Stringbreaker wrote:
GuitarmanK1972

R #2 3 #4 5 #6 7 is the sixth mode of the hungarian minor scaale as I understand it. In C this would be C D# E F# G A# B so translating this to D gives D E# F# G# A B# C# not D E F G# A B# C# as you list.


PS if you took the time to read my post, you would have realised that I said 'one of' the Hungarian minor scales, and not the actual scale known as the 'hungarian minor' scale.

Once again, please read carefully, and do your research before accusing someone of being wrong.

There is far more than just the one Hungarian minor scale. I'm sorry you only know the one - but this doesn't in any way mean that I was in some way mistaken.


If you wish to reply to me again, please at least take the time to read my posts, rather than an impassioned response which shows that you haven't read in any detail what I have wrote.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The fifth group...
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 5:28 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
Stringbreaker wrote:
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


The above set should be begun on the second mode. This would give us C Db E F G A B

-which is known as the Suryakantum mode from the Melakarta scales of Karnatak music.


Like I said, all your scales have been used.

Read this - http://ecmc.rochester.edu/rdm/pdflib/mela.pdf

And please don't question my authority again.




And listen to this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fm4piOe_wH4

-it uses one of the scales listed.



I'm not going to write any more on this topic directly. I suggest you do your research first before trying to 'enlighten' us with your discoveries. You obviously didn't research your subject matter very well.


PS this is only a few posts I have made on this subject (Like I said, I don't have too much time to reply), so please don't try to justify yourself by attacking me. Just accept that you were lacking in knowledge in this instance. It saves the embarassment.



The pursuit of research is the beginning of wisdom...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 03, 2008 11:59 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Tue Aug 05, 2008 2:55 am
Posts: 75
budt wrote:
Stringbreaker wrote:
The breaking of strings is the beginning of wisdom...


With all due respect:
About your mantra, kind sir, what would be step #2?

Continue playing on the other five strings?
Replacing the broken string?
Exclaiming (to no one in particular), "OMFG! I just broke a string!"

There must be intermediate steps before you get to all them there numbers.


Hence the famous guitar koan : "What is the noise of a whammy being operated when all strings have broken?".

It's the springs, in fact.

OKay, I'm getting out of the way, now.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:36 am 
Offline
Newcomer

Joined: Sun Feb 24, 2008 1:39 pm
Posts: 5
guitarmanK1982 wrote:
TheCentralScrutinizer wrote:
Is it possible to be any more condescending ??


I wasn't being condescending at all. I was providing information, and correcting errors.

I really don't understand this attitude - when someone is shown that something is wrong, they should learn from it, rather than taking offence, and going on the defensive.

Lose your ego - it will get in the way. You should be thankful of the opportunity to actually learn something that will be of use to you, rather than trying to defend someone who is more than capable of defending theirselves. If you have anything of use to add on this thread, then add it, rather than inserting a childish opinion that only acts to get in the way of the exchange of correct, accurate, and useful information.


childish opinion ?? Fact actually.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 2:26 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:40 pm
Posts: 94
guitarmanK1982 wrote:
And please don't question my authority again.

...

so please don't try to justify yourself by attacking me. Just accept that you were lacking in knowledge in this instance. It saves the embarassment.


Must you?

Eric Cartman is the one I remember best for saying "Respect my authority!" That is, until now...

We have to accept that your selection of scales is definitive? Should references to the indian tradition be used exclusively in reference to western music? What you seem to want are "mea culpas" here, not to provide workable information.

You mentioned you would not write more on the topic. I am guessing that you will not entertain us with more of your wisdom? OK, fine.

I am offering information that I have not found in books of western music. I have in fact seen works on the indian tradition of scales before. I consider this a separate branch from the tree I am following which goes back to Bach and focuses on western music. I accept the validity of indian music - I enjoy it. I do not consider a tradition known for microtonal tunings relevant to western guitar. I know where I am focused, at least.

Commend me for my diligence? You damn me with faint praise and you know it.

Your dig on research is undeserved. Your post as I mentioned takes a world tradition developed in isolation from the western tradition and you use it to proclaim my ignorance. "Thank you - I did not know that scales developed in a tradition which has nothing to do with either the guitar OR with western european music could be used." Is that what you wanted to hear?

Enough of this: back to scales for the guitar, thank you. This is not the appropriate forum for sitar music unless it is being used by guitarists. If any of you are in fact doing so, talk to me. I can and do change my mind if I hear sense. Unlike Eric Cartman...


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 8:01 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
Stringbreaker - in your first post, you wrote:

Stringbreaker wrote:
These are scales I have not yet seen named in published music texts.


You didn't mention anything about the necessity of these scales being used in a Western musical context.

Are you just making up your own rules as you go along?!




I gave you a source, and the names of many of your scales, yet this still isn't good enough?!!


So, if one of the scales you 'invented' (or presented to us, or whatever you want to say) is known to be a non-Western scale, does this mean you have the right to claim it as your own, and give it a Western name, since, in your eyes, it hasn't been used in a Western context?

The scales have names - they exist - they have all been done before - as I have already said.



PS I think you'll find the information I have provided in this thread is far more 'workable' than the information you have provided in this thread. Just ask those who have read the thread, and they'll tell you what is the most 'workable' and readable.

PPS you have a long way to go if the 'tree' you are following only goes back to Bach.



It amuses me that since I have shown the source of your scales, you instantly dismiss it, and even go to the extent of saying that my words belong on a sitar forum!! The modes you are 'discovering' are of an Eastern origin!! My words are an explanation of 'your' scales!

My oh my - see what I mean about a refusal to learn or listen?!



You still haven't given me examples in order to get an explanation on the issue of the 5th degree.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 10:29 am 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 1:40 pm
Posts: 94
I don't own scales, and Bo Diddly proved that owning a musical idea is pointless.

When I find scales I hang a label on one until I find a better one. Until I have the time to review the paper you linked, I will stick to my names. I call them synthetic because that is how I generated them. I have not filed for ownership and the idea that they are somehow "mine" is a rude joke.

When I have tme I will indeed post examples of such scales, like C c# d e f g g# c (or C Db Ebb Fb Gbb Abb Bbbb C) and maybe a real discussion can happen on the topic and not some fellow jumping up and down about how some guitar student is not following his rules. Don't you have anything better to do?

I'm tired of this. The time of Bach is the time of the establishment of the equal tempered scale, which is the first era where scale questions such as mine could be presented in the west. The guitar is a western instrument - you think it unfair that I would have such a bias? Whatever.

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


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 04, 2008 12:56 pm 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 7:04 pm
Posts: 202
Location: La Condamine, Monaco
Stringbreaker wrote:
When I find scales I hang a label on one until I find a better one. Until I have the time to review the paper you linked, I will stick to my names.



This says it all, really.

You asked for examples - I gave you them - but now you 'may not have the time' to 'review' the paper?

See what I mean about ignorance?


Call your synthetic scales 'Jeff' if you wish. But they do have names. If you choose to ignore them, then this is your decision.

This is equivalent to a beginner sitting at the piano, playing all the white keys, and deciding to give that particular combination of notes his own name. Do you realise how ridiculous this is?

Some people would call this delusional.





PS read the 'Maestro' thread (if you have time to review it) - i'm well aware of Bach and equal-tempered tuning. I actually did a PhD on Bach - I welcome the challenge, since you seem to be trying to undermine me.

Hoiwever, Bach isn't the beginning of harmony - especially not modal harmony.

Modal harmony was, in fact, for more prominent before the music of Bach.

The music of the late Renaissance/early Baroque was the beginnings of standard classical harmony - this doesn't mean it is the beginnings of modal harmony, or harmony per se.





You should have realised from my posts that I was trying to help you - yet you went on the defensive with my first post to you, and replied in a rude and condescending manner to an honest and very valid post. I was trying to help reach some conclusions on what seemed like a never-ending and pointless thread.


I've provided relevant and valid information for all to see in this thread - choosing to ignore it is showing that you are unwilling to listen to anyone's opinion - even that of a university music department.

This says more on the subject than I can.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 77 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Yahoo [Bot] and 5 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group