i feel a bit stupid asking this, but i'm young and new so don't blame me... but what is the difference between a key with a mixolydian in and a major or minor?
Hi Scottyboy.
Another way of looking at it using Crisanias example is as a D major scale with its tonal centre on A.
There are Greek names for all the other modes starting on a different note of the diatonic (just means its made up of 2 types of interval the Semi tone and the Tone) scale.
Here is a further explanation,http://www.elvenminstrel.com/tolkien/modes.htm
And if you
My word, its been so long since i did music theory, i cant remember any of this stuff. I'd never seen "mixolydian" till i started looking at tunes on this site. I always assumed it was because the first part of the tune was in the minor and the second part was in the major - like a "mix" of keys. or vice versa. clearly not....
LOL John -- scottyboy, there's a very simple list at http://www.slowplayers.org/SCTLS/modes.htm, courtesy of our own Sensei Harmon. It doesn't explain the whole "scales with minor thirds" or whatever, but gives a practical way of figuring out what mode a tune is in.
Crysania is correct, Mike.Vass is wrong, and the verdict's still out on the rabbits...but it seems to me that mode doesn't really matter that much (despite all the modal discussion on this site) unless you are trying to arrange harmonic accompanyments, to which some cry foul, or playing improvised jazz solos (eek!). You have to learn the piece, and you're either correct or your not whatever mode the piece is in.
Well, mode tends to matter to *me* (although not so much that I've gotten off my fanny and learned that chart myself), because when you play with a lot of beginner accompanists and don't know anything about modes yourself, you're just asking for trouble if you let them pick. ;)
Really, someday I'm going to learn this stuff, I really am. Right after this next tune.
I think the reason modes come up so much as this site is twofold. First, we occasionally have discussions by backers, and they like to know what mode they're in. And Second, you have to have at least a basic understanding of modes to pick the most appropriate one when submitting abcs for a tune.
I used the J word when posting a tune recently,and now Zena's used the F word.The mixolydian mode is simply a major scale with a flat(lowered by a semitone) seventh note.
The mixolydian mode is a scale built on the 5th note of a major scale.
Example #1
Dmaj: D E F# G A B C#
Tonic or "1 chord" is Dmaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Gmaj, dominant or "5 chord" is Amaj
(A is the 5th scale tone)
Amix: A B C# D E F# G
Tonic or "1 chord" is Amaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Dmaj, dominant or "5 chord" (is not the 5th but rather built on the 7th tone) is Gmaj
Notice that both scales share the F# and C#
Example #2
Gmaj: G A B C D E F#
Tonic or "1 chord" is Gmaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Cmaj, dominant or "5 chord" is Dmaj
(D is the 5th scale tone)
Dmix: D E F# G A B C
Tonic or "1 chord" is Dmaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Gmaj, dominant or "5 chord" (is not the 5th but rather built on the 7th tone) is Cmaj
Notice both scales share the F#
The Dominate chord or tone has the strongest pull to resolve back to the tonic or root note of the scale. In a major scale the 5th tone functions this way, but in the mixolydian mode the 7th tone has the same function. This is why in Dmaj an "A chord" would be the dominate, but in Dmix the "C chord" is the dominate. In a major scale the 7th tone is a C# and if you built a chord starting with that tone using D scale tones the result would be a diminished chord.
To conclude: The difference between the Major and mixolydian modes is a variation on the 7th tone resulting in a gravitational shift on the dominate tone.
Next: Dorian mode (I'll save this for a different thread)
Good thought there, David, but rather than 'indecisive' (since the interval of the 3rd and 7th is actually sharped or naturaled quite decisively in most tunes, even where the same note is sharped *and* naturaled), how 'bout calling it a 'variable' 3rd and 7th? Or 'shifting' ?
Point is, though, if you're going to put the tune to paper, to be unambiguous you either have to mark both sharps and naturals as accidentals or designate a key/mode signature and then mark the accidentals relative to that.
The question was, "what is the difference between a key with a mixolydian in and a major or minor?" Not, "What do you call it when the mode keeps shifting?" or, "Why is the C go between C and C# in the same tune?" Had either of those been the question, I would have given a different answer. I explained the mixolydian mode -- that's all.
I can imagine a trad key sig system that would include the sharps and naturals of the same note, so that a 'wandering' tune (careful, we're using up the thesaurus) in "D major/mixolydian" might have a key sig that would show F sharp, c nat, and c sharp.
Oh I thought that was all we were doing, tossing modes around over a virtual pint. Naw, I wouldn't seriously consider a new system of key/mode signatures for this music. As we agree, it's really only of interest to those backers with a bent for understanding what they're hearing, and those of us who, for whatever warped reason, feel compelled to put notes to the page now and then.
David, I also agree on being conscious of what pitch you hit in rolls on fiddle. I too tend to use f nats on g rolls (say) on the e string when playing in G mix or F maj (say), and the like. It took a while to get used to rolls with the index and middle fingers splayed apart a bit, but it works. As for double cut rolls, mine are naughty and sloppy enough as is, thank you.
But...wha...I thought..Oh ..well,
Every tune contains every note in it's weave, it's just how we tease the potential fibres out of 'em and warp them to our own designs that makes the difference.
Scotty boy. If your not overwhelmed, I am. Do you feel enlightened or snowed? Theory may be practical but building character sucks. Maybe that's why I feel so low.
Well, you can always try what I do -- if I don't understand what the heck someone is talking about, then I'll basically set it mentally into the category of "things I'm not ready to learn yet" and nod rather blankly like I semi-understand what they're saying...and then resolve to come back to it some day in the future when I'm not struggling to simply remember tunes and how to get a roll out of my fingers.
i feel a bit stupid asking this, but i'm young and new so don't blame me... but what is the difference between a key with a mixolydian in and a major or minor?
Whistle Bare, I feel your pain. Bear in mind you don't need to know music theory to play this music well. And modes aren't the best place to start learning music theory, if your so inclined. There are lots of good books (and classes) out there that will get you into the basics, if you're interested. And tho not a necessity, understanding music theory *is* helpful and interesting, even (maybe especially) applied to a trad music like the jigs and reels.
There is a psychological feel to the modes. The mixolydian mode, which has the flattened 7th, tends to have a slightly more minor key feel to it than a true major key. The lydian mode, on the other hand, which has a sharpened 4th (so, in effect, two leading notes), tends to sound more agressively major than a major key.
Quite some time ago I did a fairly thorough analysis of this aspect of the modes, but I don't remember what the thread was. Anyone out there remember? Zina?
Trevor
Trevor, I think you're on the right track for getting to Scottyboy and Whistle Bare's core question here. But how universal is the psychology of modes? From "most major to most minor," I would rank the four most common Irish trad modes this way:
major
mixolydian
dorian
minor
I wonder if other people hear dorian as more major than mixolydian?
I agree that knowledge of the modes is just a handy device for talking about shapes of tunes. The downside is that people get too hooked into the definitions of the trees and start to lose sight of the forest.
Some days I'd argue that Irish music is essentially mode-less, it's just that lots of tunes tend towards a set of scale degrees, and statistically most of them are going to match some existing mode or scale. That doesn't necessarily imply that the modes arise from some natural law, or that they apply to all tunes, or that they even exist.
What I hear is that good players (I'm thinking specifically of Tommy Peoples and Tommy Potts, but there are any number of others) use the existing framework of the tune/mode as a jumping-off point, and that's about all it is. From there, they let the landscape of the tune, and their artistry, pull the various notes in different rhythmic and pitch directions, producing something that is unique to the player and the moment. Somehow they do this without losing the "essence" of the tune, whatever that is.
The interesting thing is that if you compare what Tommy (take your pick...) is playing with a written version, the notes can be fairly -- and in some cases drastically -- different. But you wouldn't have noticed if you didn't take the time to make the comparison, and there was never any doubt in anyone's mind what the specific tune was.
Or take Matt Molloy, who can take a fairly standard version of something (his version of The Templehouse was the first one I noticed) and make it sound like something you've never heard before, yet sticking pretty much to the standard notes. How does that work?
That's it. I just need to quote Greenwiggle, and I'm out of here:
"Every tune contains every note in it's weave, it's just how we tease the potential fibres out..."
Thanks also Will. Over the years I had forgotten who first said to me that what you leave out is just as important as what you put in, but I have never forgotten to pass it on.
Cheers and have a good weekend all. Some of us in Sydney is having a monster session this Saturday night-I'll be drinking of you all and fill you in on Monday!
Ooo, there's a good subject to go off on...who first told you that the notes you leave out are just as important as the ones you leave in? For me, it was Shannon Heaton.
mixolydian....??
mixolydian....??
i feel a bit stupid asking this, but i'm young and new so don't blame me... but what is the difference between a key with a mixolydian in and a major or minor?
e.g. A major and Amixolydian????
# Posted on February 23rd 2004 by scottyboy
Re: mixolydian....??
The basic gist is that Mixolydian is like the major scale, with the lowered 7th scale degree.
So to compare A major and A Mixolydian:
A B C# D E F# G# A
A B C# D E F# G A
So A mixolydian would have a G natural, rather than the G# of A major.
~Crysania
# Posted on February 23rd 2004 by Crysania
Re: mixolydian....??
Hi Scottyboy.
Another way of looking at it using Crisanias example is as a D major scale with its tonal centre on A.
There are Greek names for all the other modes starting on a different note of the diatonic (just means its made up of 2 types of interval the Semi tone and the Tone) scale.
Here is a further explanation,http://www.elvenminstrel.com/tolkien/modes.htm
And if you
# Posted on February 23rd 2004 by Pied Piper
Re: mixolydian....??
My word, its been so long since i did music theory, i cant remember any of this stuff. I'd never seen "mixolydian" till i started looking at tunes on this site. I always assumed it was because the first part of the tune was in the minor and the second part was in the major - like a "mix" of keys. or vice versa. clearly not....
# Posted on February 23rd 2004 by aye
Re: mixolydian....??
I used to think that it was a disease rabbits caught but thanks for telling me.
:>))
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Johnny Jay
Re: mixolydian....??
LOL John -- scottyboy, there's a very simple list at http://www.slowplayers.org/SCTLS/modes.htm, courtesy of our own Sensei Harmon. It doesn't explain the whole "scales with minor thirds" or whatever, but gives a practical way of figuring out what mode a tune is in.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: mixolydian....??
Crysania is correct, Mike.Vass is wrong, and the verdict's still out on the rabbits...but it seems to me that mode doesn't really matter that much (despite all the modal discussion on this site) unless you are trying to arrange harmonic accompanyments, to which some cry foul, or playing improvised jazz solos (eek!). You have to learn the piece, and you're either correct or your not whatever mode the piece is in.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by markwilson
Re: mixolydian....??
Well, mode tends to matter to *me* (although not so much that I've gotten off my fanny and learned that chart myself), because when you play with a lot of beginner accompanists and don't know anything about modes yourself, you're just asking for trouble if you let them pick. ;)
Really, someday I'm going to learn this stuff, I really am. Right after this next tune.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: mixolydian....??
Zina, you shocked me with that remark until I remembered you were using the "American" meaning. :>))
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Johnny Jay
Re: mixolydian....??
ROFL -- John, ooooops, I'd totally forgotten all about that one...hehehe...Jeremy, can we switch that out to "rump" or something, please? LOL
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: mixolydian....??
I think the reason modes come up so much as this site is twofold. First, we occasionally have discussions by backers, and they like to know what mode they're in. And Second, you have to have at least a basic understanding of modes to pick the most appropriate one when submitting abcs for a tune.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
I used the J word when posting a tune recently,and now Zena's used the F word.The mixolydian mode is simply a major scale with a flat(lowered by a semitone) seventh note.
# Posted on March 1st 2003 by dafydd
Re: mixolydian....??
The mixolydian mode is a scale built on the 5th note of a major scale.
Example #1
Dmaj: D E F# G A B C#
Tonic or "1 chord" is Dmaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Gmaj, dominant or "5 chord" is Amaj
(A is the 5th scale tone)
Amix: A B C# D E F# G
Tonic or "1 chord" is Amaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Dmaj, dominant or "5 chord" (is not the 5th but rather built on the 7th tone) is Gmaj
Notice that both scales share the F# and C#
Example #2
Gmaj: G A B C D E F#
Tonic or "1 chord" is Gmaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Cmaj, dominant or "5 chord" is Dmaj
(D is the 5th scale tone)
Dmix: D E F# G A B C
Tonic or "1 chord" is Dmaj, sub-dominate or "4 chord" is Gmaj, dominant or "5 chord" (is not the 5th but rather built on the 7th tone) is Cmaj
Notice both scales share the F#
The Dominate chord or tone has the strongest pull to resolve back to the tonic or root note of the scale. In a major scale the 5th tone functions this way, but in the mixolydian mode the 7th tone has the same function. This is why in Dmaj an "A chord" would be the dominate, but in Dmix the "C chord" is the dominate. In a major scale the 7th tone is a C# and if you built a chord starting with that tone using D scale tones the result would be a diminished chord.
To conclude: The difference between the Major and mixolydian modes is a variation on the 7th tone resulting in a gravitational shift on the dominate tone.
Next: Dorian mode (I'll save this for a different thread)
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Phantom Button
Re: mixolydian....??
Good thought there, David, but rather than 'indecisive' (since the interval of the 3rd and 7th is actually sharped or naturaled quite decisively in most tunes, even where the same note is sharped *and* naturaled), how 'bout calling it a 'variable' 3rd and 7th? Or 'shifting' ?
Point is, though, if you're going to put the tune to paper, to be unambiguous you either have to mark both sharps and naturals as accidentals or designate a key/mode signature and then mark the accidentals relative to that.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
"but don't bind yourself to the rigid terms of the terms."
Spot on.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
The question was, "what is the difference between a key with a mixolydian in and a major or minor?" Not, "What do you call it when the mode keeps shifting?" or, "Why is the C go between C and C# in the same tune?" Had either of those been the question, I would have given a different answer. I explained the mixolydian mode -- that's all.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Phantom Button
Re: mixolydian....??
I can imagine a trad key sig system that would include the sharps and naturals of the same note, so that a 'wandering' tune (careful, we're using up the thesaurus) in "D major/mixolydian" might have a key sig that would show F sharp, c nat, and c sharp.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
I usually just try to figure out what the predominant mode is and then add the altered notes where they occur. If I can't figure out what
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Phantom Button
Re: mixolydian....??
Oh I thought that was all we were doing, tossing modes around over a virtual pint. Naw, I wouldn't seriously consider a new system of key/mode signatures for this music. As we agree, it's really only of interest to those backers with a bent for understanding what they're hearing, and those of us who, for whatever warped reason, feel compelled to put notes to the page now and then.
David, I also agree on being conscious of what pitch you hit in rolls on fiddle. I too tend to use f nats on g rolls (say) on the e string when playing in G mix or F maj (say), and the like. It took a while to get used to rolls with the index and middle fingers splayed apart a bit, but it works. As for double cut rolls, mine are naughty and sloppy enough as is, thank you.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
But...wha...I thought..Oh ..well,
Every tune contains every note in it's weave, it's just how we tease the potential fibres out of 'em and warp them to our own designs that makes the difference.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Greenwiggle
Re: mixolydian....??
Okay, but often it's the notes you leave out that make the biggest difference....
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
Scotty boy. If your not overwhelmed, I am. Do you feel enlightened or snowed? Theory may be practical but building character sucks. Maybe that's why I feel so low.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by wvwhistler
Re: mixolydian....??
Well, you can always try what I do -- if I don't understand what the heck someone is talking about, then I'll basically set it mentally into the category of "things I'm not ready to learn yet" and nod rather blankly like I semi-understand what they're saying...and then resolve to come back to it some day in the future when I'm not struggling to simply remember tunes and how to get a roll out of my fingers.
# Posted on February 24th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: mixolydian....??
i feel a bit stupid asking this, but i'm young and new so don't blame me... but what is the difference between a key with a mixolydian in and a major or minor?
e.g. A major and Amixolydian????
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by showaddydadito
Re: mixolydian....??
Whistle Bare, I feel your pain. Bear in mind you don't need to know music theory to play this music well. And modes aren't the best place to start learning music theory, if your so inclined. There are lots of good books (and classes) out there that will get you into the basics, if you're interested. And tho not a necessity, understanding music theory *is* helpful and interesting, even (maybe especially) applied to a trad music like the jigs and reels.
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian....??
There is a psychological feel to the modes. The mixolydian mode, which has the flattened 7th, tends to have a slightly more minor key feel to it than a true major key. The lydian mode, on the other hand, which has a sharpened 4th (so, in effect, two leading notes), tends to sound more agressively major than a major key.
Quite some time ago I did a fairly thorough analysis of this aspect of the modes, but I don't remember what the thread was. Anyone out there remember? Zina?
Trevor
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by Trevor Jennings
Re: mixolydian....??
Trevor, I think you're on the right track for getting to Scottyboy and Whistle Bare's core question here. But how universal is the psychology of modes? From "most major to most minor," I would rank the four most common Irish trad modes this way:
major
mixolydian
dorian
minor
I wonder if other people hear dorian as more major than mixolydian?
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by Will Harmon
Re: mixolydian mood - My 0.02
I agree that knowledge of the modes is just a handy device for talking about shapes of tunes. The downside is that people get too hooked into the definitions of the trees and start to lose sight of the forest.
Some days I'd argue that Irish music is essentially mode-less, it's just that lots of tunes tend towards a set of scale degrees, and statistically most of them are going to match some existing mode or scale. That doesn't necessarily imply that the modes arise from some natural law, or that they apply to all tunes, or that they even exist.
What I hear is that good players (I'm thinking specifically of Tommy Peoples and Tommy Potts, but there are any number of others) use the existing framework of the tune/mode as a jumping-off point, and that's about all it is. From there, they let the landscape of the tune, and their artistry, pull the various notes in different rhythmic and pitch directions, producing something that is unique to the player and the moment. Somehow they do this without losing the "essence" of the tune, whatever that is.
The interesting thing is that if you compare what Tommy (take your pick...) is playing with a written version, the notes can be fairly -- and in some cases drastically -- different. But you wouldn't have noticed if you didn't take the time to make the comparison, and there was never any doubt in anyone's mind what the specific tune was.
Or take Matt Molloy, who can take a fairly standard version of something (his version of The Templehouse was the first one I noticed) and make it sound like something you've never heard before, yet sticking pretty much to the standard notes. How does that work?
That's it. I just need to quote Greenwiggle, and I'm out of here:
"Every tune contains every note in it's weave, it's just how we tease the potential fibres out..."
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by Gzeg
Re: mixolydian....??
Er...this one, Trev? http://thesession.org/discussions/display.php/1103? Or maybe one of the other ones?
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: mixolydian....??
Thanks Zina! That's the one, in particular my posting of November 27, 2002.
Trevor
# Posted on February 25th 2004 by Trevor Jennings
Re: mixolydian....??
Wow, first time cited yee-hahhh! Thanks Gzeg!
and fill you in on Monday!
Thanks also Will. Over the years I had forgotten who first said to me that what you leave out is just as important as what you put in, but I have never forgotten to pass it on.
Cheers and have a good weekend all. Some of us in Sydney is having a monster session this Saturday night-I'll be drinking of you all
# Posted on February 26th 2004 by Greenwiggle
Re: mixolydian....??
Ooo, there's a good subject to go off on...who first told you that the notes you leave out are just as important as the ones you leave in? For me, it was Shannon Heaton.
# Posted on February 26th 2004 by Zina Lee
Re: mixolydian....??
Hm, for me I think it was Martin Hayes at Willie Week '96, but I might have heard it before then and just not remembered...
# Posted on February 26th 2004 by HighlandSun
Re: mixolydian....??
"I wonder if other people hear dorian as more major than mixolydian?"
Here's one perception of this question:
The Modes in Order of Descending Brightness
< major (bright) | minor (dark) >
Lydian Ionian Mixolydian | Dorian Aeolian Phrygian Locrian
# Posted on February 29th 2004 by SteveM