Minor keys - do they really exist?

[V|J]

While Dorian, Lydian and Phrygian modes do offer symmetric tetrachords (i.e., patterns of whole and half steps), they did not lend themselves as effectively to the functional harmonic structures that characterized later Western music. The tonic-dominant relationships that became central to Western tonal music were less straightforward in these modes.

Harmonic practices, including the use of triads and functional harmony, favored the major and natural minor scales. The Ionian mode, with its strong tonic-dominant relationships, became is foundation for tonal music.

The shift towards Ionian and Aeolian modes in Western music was a gradual process influenced by historical, theoretical, and aesthetic factors.

Theorists in the Renaissance began to formalize the concepts of tonality, emphasizing the importance of the tonic and dominant relationships, which are most clearly defined in the Ionian and Aeolian modes.

While Dorian and Phrygian modes were part of the musical lexicon, they did not fulfill the evolving needs of Western music in terms of harmony and expressiveness in the way that the major and natural minor scales did.

The result was the establishment of a tonal system that prioritized these two modes, shaping the direction of Western music for centuries to come.

Yeah, makes sense about major/minor in terms of tension and resolution.

And thank you so much for the chord functions.
I’m going to save a copy and put it to practice in the next few days. See what the chords sound like in different functions.

 

[mbenigni]

Modes definitely have tonalities, and you can construct majour or minour
chords out of them---as with any scale.

OK, there’s British, and then there’s British, and then there’s this madness.

 

[mbenigni]

But if we're venturing to the E7 rather than the Em7 when playing in Am aren't we technically departing from the "rules" of the key so to speak?

I get the impression right here that you're trying to apply modal theory and chord number theory to the blues. That way lies madness - ask me how I know.

No because Am can be aeolian, melodic, harmonic minor.
So E7 resides in A harmonic and A melodic.

This is very helpful, thanks.

I think part of the problem is that I get hung up thinking in terms of notes of the relative pentatonic scales, and assume the rest are verboten. (Theoretically. Obviously blue notes like the b5 are essential...)

The other part of the problem is that the blues are batshit crazy. Everybody and their brother will tell you what to play over any given chord in a blues progression, but (almost?) no one can tell you why.

 

[mbenigni]

Right, but I’ve never heard someone say “this song is in the key of of F# locrian”

The reasons you seldom hear "this song is in F# locrian" have been explored pretty well above: tastes/ aesthetics as shaped throughout history, and effective function of relative chords. (Obviously these two things are interrelated.) You might hear a player say that a specific lick is F# Locrian. Though, it's likely he/she is not being strictly accurate in terms of context. (In pop music, context usually = the key center the bass line is implying.)

As a guitarist, I use the other modes as informal descriptors a lot - more like a mnemonic to get me to the right position on the fretboard, and thinking in terms of a given "shape". Like if my brain recalls, "this solo is in B Phrygian", that means get to the 7th fret, and be thinking in terms of that 1 m2 m3 line between B, C, and D. In most cases, you wouldn't say "the song is in B Phrygian for these 8 bars", since the bass, etc. are still informing the listener that we're in e.g. Em (or perhaps G).

 

[Sascha Franck]

The other part of the problem is that the blues are batshit crazy. Everybody and their brother will tell you what to play over any given chord in a blues progression, but (almost?) no one can tell you why.

This is because:
- There are no strict "rules" anywhere in music, even less so in blues (pretty much all "rules" are basically an educational tool, so people are on the same page).
- People try to squeeze a genre that historically was "just played" (respectively sung) into a harmonic scheme. Heck, the western influence on the blues would even be that they tried to superimpose the most common western/classical chord progressions (some combinations of I, IV and V chords). Which, as we can see, works only so-so-ishly.
- People try to make up "rules" so they can sell you books and videos.

As an example, you will find the infamous "blues scale" pretty much everywhere. Most often described as a minor pentatonic with an additional b5. And that's what folks are using ever since it got described for the first time. Which is why blues often sounds generic. But when you actually go back to some really old blues stuff, you will hardly ever hear the blues scale in full glory (sometimes not at all). What you will however often hear is the use of the major 6th instead of the 7th. Likely because it's a lot easier to sing when you add a note between fifth and root. As an example: Over an A7, the line E-G-A is tougher to sing for most people than "E-F#-A". Also, the F# will suit each of the 3 chords in a blues in A. 13th of A7 (just fine), 3rd of a D7, 9th of an E7 (just fine), so you can use it repeatedly.
You will as well not hear *the* bluesiest note ever (namely the b5) that often (unless it's full stop drama). And why would you? Doesn't fit in any harmonization anyway (still in A: b5 for an A7, b9 for a D9, j7 for an E7, all downright horrible as chord notes).

So, correct, people can't tell you the "why"s. And yet they try.

 

[Sascha Franck]

The reasons you seldom hear "this song is in F# locrian" have been explored pretty well above: tastes/ aesthetics as shaped throughout history, and effective function of relative chords.

Fwiw, I remember someone @TOP to post a harmonically functional song that was indeed in locrian. I forgot which one it was and I also forgot who it was posting it (one of the Jons, nice guy, very decent acoustic player and pretty knowledgeable when it comes to music history). I was pretty much floored because I didn't think anything like that would exist. Maybe I really need to look things up so I can perhaps re-vise it.

Anyhow, IMO, in general, there's just 4 modes that can be used in a functional context (aka along something else but a single bass drone with a chord on top): Ionian, aeolian, dorian and mixolydian. These can all be established within moving chord progressions, the other three hardly ever can.
Sure, there's some seemingly phrygian stuff, but very often you may notice people to shift back to aeolian on the I chord. For example: "Emin, F" could be described as a phrygian progression, but it's not unlikely people may still use, say, an F# over the Emin, so it's rather two modes you're moving between.
Lydian is pretty nice here and there, but once you slap in another chord, IME our hearing will shift things pretty much instantly (the bass needs to move, too). For instance, a plain Fmaj7 can easily be treated as lydian, but play a progression such as "Fmaj7, G7" and your ear will very likely assume it's either G mixolydian or an unresolved IV-V movement in C.
Locrian is just too weak, we need the perfect 5th for stability (but see above, perhaps there's exceptions).

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

This is because:
- There are no strict "rules" anywhere in music, even less so in blues (pretty much all "rules" are basically an educational tool, so people are on the same page).
- People try to squeeze a genre that historically was "just played" (respectively sung) into a harmonic scheme. Heck, the western influence on the blues would even be that they tried to superimpose the most common western/classical chord progressions (some combinations of I, IV and V chords). Which, as we can see, works only so-so-ishly.
- People try to make up "rules" so they can sell you books and videos.

As an example, you will find the infamous "blues scale" pretty much everywhere. Most often described as a minor pentatonic with an additional b5. And that's what folks are using ever since it got described for the first time. Which is why blues often sounds generic. But when you actually go back to some really old blues stuff, you will hardly ever hear the blues scale in full glory (sometimes not at all). What you will however often hear is the use of the major 6th instead of the 7th. Likely because it's a lot easier to sing when you add a note between fifth and root. As an example: Over an A7, the line E-G-A is tougher to sing for most people than "E-F#-A". Also, the F# will suit each of the 3 chords in a blues in A. 13th of A7 (just fine), 3rd of a D7, 9th of an E7 (just fine), so you can use it repeatedly.
You will as well not hear *the* bluesiest note ever (namely the b5) that often (unless it's full stop drama). And why would you? Doesn't fit in any harmonization anyway (still in A: b5 for an A7, b9 for a D9, j7 for an E7, all downright horrible as chord notes).

So, correct, people can't tell you the "why"s. And yet they try.

Well and then there is the intonation...
9 ♭3 ♭5 ♭7 all get slightly sharped.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Fwiw, I remember someone @TOP to post a harmonically functional song that was indeed in locrian. I forgot which one it was and I also forgot who it was posting it (one of the Jons, nice guy, very decent acoustic player and pretty knowledgeable when it comes to music history). I was pretty much floored because I didn't think anything like that would exist. Maybe I really need to look things up so I can perhaps re-vise it.

Anyhow, IMO, in general, there's just 4 modes that can be used in a functional context (aka along something else but a single bass drone with a chord on top): Ionian, aeolian, dorian and mixolydian. These can all be established within moving chord progressions, the other three hardly ever can.
Sure, there's some seemingly phrygian stuff, but very often you may notice people to shift back to aeolian on the I chord. For example: "Emin, F" could be described as a phrygian progression, but it's not unlikely people may still use, say, an F# over the Emin, so it's rather two modes you're moving between.
Lydian is pretty nice here and there, but once you slap in another chord, IME our hearing will shift things pretty much instantly (the bass needs to move, too). For instance, a plain Fmaj7 can easily be treated as lydian, but play a progression such as "Fmaj7, G7" and your ear will very likely assume it's either G mixolydian or an unresolved IV-V movement in C.
Locrian is just too weak, we need the perfect 5th for stability (but see above, perhaps there's exceptions).

I posted this on TOP a while back.

I can vamp locrian til the cows come home

But admittedly I'd hear it and respond to it like it's a rootless C9

Anyways if we're talking unaltered major's modes you can put them in two groups Ionian and aeolian as Tonic, and Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, and Locrian as Dominant.
Phrygian can go either way depending on situation.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

I get the impression right here that you're trying to apply modal theory and chord number theory to the blues. That way lies madness - ask me how I know.


This is very helpful, thanks.

I think part of the problem is that I get hung up thinking in terms of notes of the relative pentatonic scales, and assume the rest are verboten. (Theoretically. Obviously blue notes like the b5 are essential...)

The other part of the problem is that the blues are batshit crazy. Everybody and their brother will tell you what to play over any given chord in a blues progression, but (almost?) no one can tell you why.

It really depends on genre a Rock guy usually(in it's simplest form) will play the minor pentatonic or Blues scale of the tunes key over all chords.
Whereas Blues guys will play the major Penta or Major Blues scale over the Ⅰ7, and the tune's key's minor or Blues scale over the other chords.
As in Blues in E gets E maj Penta over E7 and Em Penta over A7 and D7

 

[Sascha Franck]

I can vamp locrian til the cows come home

Sure. But that's not a functional chord progression.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Anyways if we're talking unaltered major's modes you can put them in two groups Ionian and aeolian as Tonic, and Dorian, Lydian, Mixolydian, and Locrian as Dominant.

Fwiw, I wouldn't agree on that, simply because at least dorian and mixolydian are often treated as tonics.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Sure. But that's not a functional chord progression.

Well technical anything fir example in Mixolydian when it's functional is just a major thing with borrowed chords.

Because "functional" as in Tonal requires a dominant V.
Modal does not

 

[Sascha Franck]

Because "functional" as in Tonal requires a dominant V.

I guess we're disagreeing here.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

Lots to unpack here. That's the funny thing about the blues - lots of people (especially guitarists) write it off as something simple, when in fact there's a lot going on under the hood. (Mainly by way of ambiguities.) First off, I get hung up on the phrase "of the tune's key". I think when most people talk about a I IV V blues "in A", they mean A(7) as the I, D(7?) and E as the IV and V, respectively. Whereas I'm inclined to say that this is a blues in A minor, since I'd always hear the Aeloian pentatonic scale over that I chord. (Pet peeve was being told to play "in A", jumping into a jam in F# minor pent, and immediately pooping all over the room. )

Anyway, calling this "blues in A" for our example: Yes, most rock guys will play A Aeolian pent over all the chords. Ultimately boring - for both the listener and the player. For years I'd also play that same Aelolian form in other positions that felt "mostly safe", i.e. B Aeolian and E Aeolian. I didn't properly learn all of the other pentatonic forms elsewhere on the neck until more recently than I should care to admit - despite having long since gotten fluent with all of the 7 note patterns (in proper hair metal fashion LOL.) Learning to play (what I'll call) Ionian pent, Dorian pent, etc. really opened things up. All the same notes, but facilitating different phrasing and ornamentation.


This surprises me, particularly the point about leading with major pent on the I. I still tend to be on the Aeolian pent on I, and... well I'm still trying to figure the rest out LOL. Chasing the root notes of the chords and staying in the same position had me trying Phrygian over the IV and Dorian over the V. There's a logic to this... but it sounds like ass LOL.

I'm going to grab a guitar and try E Ionian on I and E Aeolian over IV and V as you suggest above. But wait, I'm already turned around again. Do you mean Em pent over A7 and B7, or do I fundamentally misunderstand which chord is the I in a blues progression?

When you say Aeolian Penta I presume you mean a c D e g?
Well as I said in the intial post genre dependant.

But fwiw am Penta or better yet a blues scale
1 ♭3 4 ♭5 5 ♭7
Relate it to A7
It makes theoretically no sense.
Because you got an A-7 1 ♭3 5 ♭7
Plus the 11 ♭5 and ♭3/♯9

The ♭3 over the 3 is Blues period.
Beatles abused the shit out of it.

Now let's look at major blues scale
1 2 ♭3 3 5 6
Realted to that A7 way more inside. Sidenote same as F♯ blues scale.

.now we go to the IV chord and that 3 of the key is a no go but if we go to the Blues scale we get realatrd to the from our nite pool

A c D e g a
5 ♭7 1 9 11
Perfectly consonant. And so on.

Plus there's the phrasing trump's note choice.

Free online lesson?

 

[Gothi]

A “functional chord progression”? Never heard of such a thing, but I have done more than a few functional analyses of chord progressions. It is a theoretical perspective arising particularly in the tonal era and not a question about whether a chord progression “functions” (or is dysfunctional, ha ha). I can analyse in other languages as well, chromatism or species counterpoint if it is part writing rather than chord instruments, but none is about values and level of musical functionality, that is completely relative to the listener and era in question.

And yes. They went completely lead-tone mad in the tonal era, so they went for the major dominant to get the half step lead from the dominant’s third to the tonic of the mode as if this was the best (and sometimes only) way to end a piece of music. The alteration could happen on the fly, e.g on end measures only and did not need to be global to the piece. Other forms of modal interchangement could happen on the fly as well, lending progressions from one mode while being in another.

 

[woody]

Let's not forget that this whole western music tradition thing kinda evolved, with weird wigged dudes throwing temper tantrums ("But what If I don't WANT to play in G major? I want to play in F# major!") and shooting shit ("Dude! Let's call it a hemi-demi-semi quaver!" "Great, bro! Now what if I put a tritone in this chord?")
The "Western music" system has had a couple of total make-over over the millenia.
Some stuck, some not. (see below.)

I guess it's helpful not to get too anal about the "rules".
I do think that learning and knowing theory is helpful, though.

 

[Sascha Franck]

If you want a

They went completely lead-tone mad in the tonal era, so they went for the major dominant to get the half step lead from the dominant’s third to the tonic of the mode as if this was the best (and sometimes only) way to end a piece of music.

Historically, this doesn't seem to be true. The "rules" were made up after the fact (as it happens very often). From all we know, people were using the lead tone intuitively when singing. Pretty much for very similar reasons we also have the MM ascending scale.

 

[Gothi]

If you want a


Historically, this doesn't seem to be true. The "rules" were made up after the fact (as it happens very often). From all we know, people were using the lead tone intuitively when singing. Pretty much for very similar reasons we also have the MM ascending scale.

Eveything happens after the fact in music theory. These trends were never stated as rules like in species counterpont. It was just how music developed, no one prescribed it. Theory came afterwards. J.J. Fux who wrote one of the most famous works on composition, Gradus Ad Parnassum from 1725, long into Baroque era, developed species counterpoint from renaissance polyphony about two centuries before. He was fan of Palestrina. When he published it, they were already breaking his rules in common practise. And so it goes. In modern times we may find more “thinked” music but at their time it was more bound to commen practise than theoretical experiments as such.

 

[Ed DeGenaro]

If you want a


Historically, this doesn't seem to be true. The "rules" were made up after the fact (as it happens very often). From all we know, people were using the lead tone intuitively when singing. Pretty much for very similar reasons we also have the MM ascending scale.

Well historically it started with a Dorian tetrachord.
D c b a (since the Greeks did it in reverse)
Then they added a mirror image d e f g
And thus the outward radiating symmetry became Dorian.

So it was a while until Ionian which came after Dorian became the parent scale.

And once they started harmonies of a 5th I'm fairly certain they flatted the 7.
But on that part I'm guessing.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Well historically it started with a Dorian tetrachord.
D c b a (since the Greeks did it in reverse)
Then they added a mirror image d e f g
And thus the outward radiating symmetry became Dorian.

Any sources for that?