Re: Modsi GamblaOn May 1, 7:30 pm, "Lumpy" <lu...@digitalcartography . com > wrote:
> MikeA wrote:
> > Gambale compared C-Ionian to C-Dorian
> > and the light went on over my head...
>
> Elaborate please? I've read some of Frank's
> stuff and it's not particularly easy to
> understand, for me at least.
>
> > Your question helped me notice that in my post I did what I dinged
> > Serna for, made a statement without explaining the 'why' behind it.
> > mea culpa. Thanks, I appreciate the subtle hint to examine my own
> > post...
>
> I wasn't trying to cheese you or anything.
> I'm honestly curious about Gambo's explaination.
> I'm not really a huge fan of his playing,
> but he's pretty famous for thinking in modes.
>
> Lumpy
>
> In Your Ears for 40 Years
> w w w .LumpyMusic . com
Many of the explanations of modes seem to me to describe a mode in a
way that implies that, by definition, the mode is defined by the
starting and ending note. i.e. G Ionian is G to G and A dorian is A to
A of the G major scale etc through the modes. Rather than holding the
scale constant and comparing the modes, Gambo held the starting note
constant, progressed through the modes and examined the resulting
change in scales. C-Dorian has F# rather than the F-nat of C-Ionian.
That approach to the explanation, always starting on the same note,
emphasized to me the role the scale plays in defining the mode.
It's possible that had Gambo's approach been the one I saw first that
I wouldn't have understood it either until I saw it in contrast with
what I think is the more conventional approach to explaining modes.
I've not seen enough of Frank's stuff to know whether I'll find it
generally more or less understandable for me than other approaches.
I hope that was coherent. I've been up for 20 hours and the grey
matter seems to be more sluggish than usual.