Fun with synthetic scales

[guitarmanK1982]

The guitar is a western instrument.

This quote alone demonstrates your lack of knowledge on your subject matter.

I'm not going to embarrass you by going into this - but please do your research before spouting nonsense that could be taken on board by others reading this thread.

Misinformation is dangerous.

[notavirtuoso]

So, just to make sure I'm understanding everything, a synthetic scale is one that is played on nylon strings only? Or is it only on a non wood guitar? I'm so confused. I'll just stick with normal scales the way mother nature intended.

[Pif]

So, just to make sure I'm understanding everything, a synthetic scale is one that is played on nylon strings only? Or is it only on a non wood guitar? I'm so confused. I'll just stick with normal scales the way mother nature intended.

You idiot, it depends how they're made. Long ago, each scale was handmade, wrapped in a leaf and shipped. Now it's all manufactured for the sake of "cost-effectiveness", and with the chemical cocktail they spray them with, you can actual become sick with some of them.

I for one am extremely suspicious of where the notes I play come from. If it's a bit too foreign, thanks but no thanks.

[notavirtuoso]

I knew I was all mixed up about this, thanks. I've noticed that when I play with my teeth, sometimes certain notes taste funny so I guess that's why. It's a good thing Steve knows what he's doing when he does that, being pretty knowledgeable about theory and stuff as I'm convinced that's what killed Hendrix. He just wasn't aware of the danger in some of those notes.

[Pif]

I knew I was all mixed up about this, thanks. I've noticed that when I play with my teeth, sometimes certain notes taste funny so I guess that's why. It's a good thing Steve knows what he's doing when he does that, being pretty knowledgeable about theory and stuff as I'm convinced that's what killed Hendrix. He just wasn't aware of the danger in some of those notes.

In fact, he was just flossing. A clever way to cram a day's activities into a rock star busy schedule.

[lydian2000]

I knew I was all mixed up about this, thanks. I've noticed that when I play with my teeth, sometimes certain notes taste funny so I guess that's why. It's a good thing Steve knows what he's doing when he does that, being pretty knowledgeable about theory and stuff as I'm convinced that's what killed Hendrix. He just wasn't aware of the danger in some of those notes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v5cWWV0KNDg

Essential. My favourite part is at 5.50.

[Stringbreaker]

OK

I guess it is fair to say that I went off for no good reason. I got upset when he said I was wasting my time posting my notes. I apologize for going off. I am not well equipped for a flame war, so I will back off.

GuitarmanK1982 has taken issue with the term "western" to refer to the implied origin of the ancestors of the guitar. Maybe there is some justice in this from a global musicological perspective, but I use terms based on a more limited perspective. I thought I was posting to readers who play electric guitars and whose theory books are found at local music stores and online, not at universities.

He has also taken issue with the fact that I applied any name to scales that he is not aware of. The true name of a scale is the sequence of notes itself. The names he is presenting is hardly common knowledge and I should not have my chops busted because I did not attend the same university he did. Come on, a guy who calls himself Stringbreaker is supposed to be some kind of university professor?

I made an examination of all of the interval patterns involved in seven note scales, applied the names I knew to the ones I recognized, and applied a label to the rest. The label "synthetic" seems also to be a point of contention here. All I meant by the name was that I had not seen the references he is using. Not having a PHd in music I would think this would be understandable. Obviously it is not. Would it have been more acceptable to call a mode group "Unknown" or "I haven't found this yet so please don't yell at me" instead of "Synthetic"? Sheesh.

He seems to think that by posting information here that I am in some way damaging the readers. I guess I will need to stop posting material on scales to avoid being attacked by real scholars. It's so dangerous...

He calls me delusional because I implied that I would not have time to immediately examine the material the threw down on Karnatik scales. Back where I come from, there is a bumper sticker which reads "real musicians have day jobs". If I am implying that I won't have time the reason is that I am not independently wealthy. I am a regular Joe who plays guitar, reads music books after the children are put to bed, and can take weeks to get to something when there are household chores and repairs to do.

If music is supposed to only be the study of the rich, then I do not belong here and the topic should indeed be left to GuitarmanK1982. It's all yours. Do what you like with it. Have fun.

I'm done. I am leaving this thread, although I started it for the purpose of offering what I'd found out and hoping to learn more in the friendly context of Steve Vai fans. This chap has decided to not be friendly and that the order of the day is to paint me a fool for talking about scales. The thread is his now, and I hope you enjoy the quality of the information he will provide.

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

[guitarmanK1982]

GuitarmanK1982 has taken issue with the term "western" to refer to the implied origin of the ancestors of the guitar. Maybe there is some justice in this from a global musicological perspective, but I use terms based on a more limited perspective. I thought I was posting to readers who play electric guitars and whose theory books are found at local music stores and online, not at universities.

If you have read any books at all on the history and evolution of the guitar, you would know about its' origins.

I'm glad you admit your perspective is limited.

Any book on the history of the guitar will at least mention the Moors' invasion of Spain.

By these comments, I doubt if you have ever read even one book on the history of the guitar.



I think you'll find the readers here aren't as close-minded as what you imagine. Heck, some of us even own an acoustic guitar

If I was a reader, I would be offended at the above comment regarding what constitutes who posts on this forum. You shouldn't think in as narrow minded terms with regards to individuals on this forum.



I'm sorry for you that the fact that someone who posts on this forum knows what they are talking about has shown that you are terribly lacking in theoretical knowledge. If you didn't get hostile, I wouldn't have either.



RE your probelm with the double flattened fifths etc - i'll still help you with this. Just get over yourself and accept that you weren't very well researched in the area you were posting about!!

When trying to contribute something to a field - which you must be doing, by getting in touch with universities etc - you should be fully researched in that field. This isn't rude - it is a basic rule of research. And you didn't do your research.

I have pointed you in the correct direction, yet you don't seem very interested in it.

He has also taken issue with the fact that I applied any name to scales that he is not aware of. The true name of a scale is the sequence of notes itself. The names he is presenting is hardly common knowledge and I should not have my chops busted because I did not attend the same university he did. Come on, a guy who calls himself Stringbreaker is supposed to be some kind of university professor?

No - you are meant to listen and learn from someone who does actually know what they are talking about.

And the above statement by yourself is such a fallacy it is unbelievable. You think that because you personally don't know the name of some of the scales that this constitutes 'hardly common knowledge'? In my field, mostly everyone knows these kind of things.

Once again, this is presumptuous, and is an insult to the others here.


PS what scales am I personally 'not aware of'??


PPS I also said in my first post to you that I commended you for your research. I was trying to help you. I was hoping you would realise that you research was in no way exhaustive, but you took offence.

I made an examination of all of the interval patterns involved in seven note scales, applied the names I knew to the ones I recognized, and applied a label to the rest. The label "synthetic" seems also to be a point of contention here. All I meant by the name was that I had not seen the references he is using. Not having a PHd in music I would think this would be understandable. Obviously it is not. Would it have been more acceptable to call a mode group "Unknown" or "I haven't found this yet so please don't yell at me" instead of "Synthetic"? Sheesh.

No - you should have researched your field fully before trying to, as I previously said, 'enlighten' us all with your kowledge.

I wouldn't learn a few words in a foreign language then try to create a full structure for what constitutes creating words in that particular language.

I think you're offended because someone has shown that you were ill-researched, and didn't really know what you were talking about.

He seems to think that by posting information here that I am in some way damaging the readers. I guess I will need to stop posting material on scales to avoid being attacked by real scholars. It's so dangerous....

False information is dangerous - especially on a forum where the readers actually like to learn something.


If you notice, I only post in the 'general' section, or in the 'techniques/music theory' section, since topics come up that I can actually help with, and provide good information on.

I would never comment in one of the sections such as Vai's gear, since others here know far more about that than me.

Whereas you are providing false and inaccurate information presented in a poor manner.



I know my strengths and my weaknesses. Sometimes I read other's posts, and learn from them. Others perhaps read my posts, and learn from them.

Your view seems, well, arrogant.

He calls me delusional because I implied that I would not have time to immediately examine the material the threw down on Karnatik scales. Back where I come from, there is a bumper sticker which reads "real musicians have day jobs". If I am implying that I won't have time the reason is that I am not independently wealthy. I am a regular Joe who plays guitar, reads music books after the children are put to bed, and can take weeks to get to something when there are household chores and repairs to do.

I am a professional musician, and i'm providing information - so you could do worse than learning from it, since the field you like to study in your spare time is the very field I am active in as a professional.

If music is supposed to only be the study of the rich, then I do not belong here and the topic should indeed be left to GuitarmanK1982. It's all yours. Do what you like with it. Have fun.

It is nothing to do with being rich. You are trying to divide the peope here reading this by making me seem somewhat 'isolated' from what constitutes everyone else on this forum.

What constitutes everyone on this forum is a love for music, and a respect for what music is.

I'd personally be more offended at your presumptuous comments made earlier in this thread.




And if you must know, I wasn't born rich, and I work with people from all walks of life. The only time I have commented on what I do is if someone asks me, or if someone questions me regarding it.

[notavirtuoso]

...The only time I have commented on what I do is if someone asks me, or if someone questions me regarding it.

I actually have a serious question for you regarding your work but it's really off topic for this thread so I'm hoping you might answer is in this one. The thread is asking about people's creative processes with songwriting in general, but I'd like to hear your thoughts as your situation is quite a bit different than most here. Also, I'm interested specifically in how you like or feel about writing for someone else's vision and if you approach that differently than when you are writing something for yourself.

[Hypnus9]

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?

Well, at the very least, a 5,6,7 or 8 tone scale serves as a skeleton to work with as not only a melodic foundation for our improvising and composing, but a harmonic one, as well. And, it also gives us melodic organization, which helps our musical endeavors to be more well thought out. The harmonic structure must be acknowledged well before our melodies have true substance. An odd chromatic tone thrown in gives extra spice and flavor, but, as with food, one can over-season their playing to the point that it is perhaps too emotive, to unpredictable and too wreckless, and can possibly leave a bad taste, so to speak in the listener's mouth.
You might say that organization might sterilize ones playing, but I offer that efficient tonal organization prepares for more logical improvisation and composition. However, on the other hand, there is always room, after having learned these processes of tonal organization to veer from the proverbial "beaten path" and go for a greater emotional content moreso than what could, perhaps be merely sterile and clinical playing. Both worlds, if you will, must be wed for one to be truly unique, not that we ever want our playing to be sterile and clinical, but rather, we want our playing to be expressive. Therefore, I guess we could coin a saying that goes, "Let's get it together and just cut loose!"

[guitarmanK1982]

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.

Stringbreaker - since i'm not an evil guy, i'll provide you with the answer to your question


The topic isn't advanced - this is covered at around grade 5 theory. This is perhaps why the advanced musicians didn't get back to you - i'm sure this very issue is covered in the 'AB guide to music theory' books.



The standard nomenclature for an interval such as F# - Cb would be a doubly diminished 5th.

This originates from the Godfrey-Weber book - 'Godfrey-Weber's general music teacher'. Just search google for 'godfrey weber music' and it should come up as a fully readable e-book (which I suggest you read).

Of course, other systems are used, but this is generally considered the 'standard' way of naming such an interval.




Here is an article regarding intervals - specifically, look at the section on chromatic intervals: http://www.dolmetsch.com/musictheory12.htm




But I have something for you to ponder, since some of your other definitions seem lacking. I'll write it in the next post.[/b]

[guitarmanK1982]

- And my problem is specifically this:

As for what defines a scale, it is a selection of certain notes from a chromatic sequence.

Couldn't this also be classed as the definition of a chord?!! I could take a 'selection of certain notes from a chromatic sequence' - C E G - there you go, I have a chord.


You forgot the 'fixed intervallic sequential structure' part in your definition. Kind of important, i'd say. You also didn't mention if the notes are played simultaneously, individually, etc etc.


This is what I have an issue with in this thread - you are trying to educate people with regards to such things, yet your own definitions are vague.



Anyway - i'm away until December now - so read up and learn, before posting poor terms

As I said, I commend you for your work ethic, and your enthusiams (hence i'm helping you just now), but you really do need to learn the basics. It'll do you a great deal of good.

And please don't take offence to that comment


PS you did learn from Steve Vai fans, and no - no-one was painting you as a fool. Your basic knowledge of definitions etc was lacking - that is all. You were insisting on trying to make me look bad when I was in fact trying to help you - I did say about ego getting in the way! Anyway, I hope you'll learn a few things from this thread - definitions, new Indian scales (and yes, they are valid), new books to read, plus taking advice/info from someone at face value.

[Hypnus9]

Nicolas Slonimsky's Thesaurus of Scales and Melodic Patterns and George Russell's Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization. I think you might enjoy these.

[viz]

This deserves a bump!

[precario]

Yes it does !

I was around when they posted this, but really didn't remember it at all !

Great info here and great soap opera material too !