why the blues scale?

[iconic]

....which is basically a minor pentatonic scale with an added flat 5th is used in blues when the usual 1,4,5 tunes use major chords?


When i play to a 12 bar blues tune and over the 1,4,5 i use major chord tones and drop a flat 7th to spice things up....


....unless the use of the blues scale isnt for tunes based on 1,4,5 progression!

No doubt an obvious answer to this that i dont know!

Edited December 6, 2013 by iconic

[Annoying Twit]

Different scales sound different, so a solo can be spiced up by changing the scale used. So, switching from the major to the blues scale adds variation, e.g. if soloing over a single chord loop. More variation that Mixolydian, as you've been using.

I find the flatted 5th works quite well in some bass riffs. Over the last week I've been experimenting with using it as an emphasised note, not just a passing note, and that gives a very different feel to riffs, and gets out of the problem of too many pentatonic riffs sounding too similar.

[jimbobothy]

mmmmm, to had into the mix is it a b5 or a #4 lol!

[ambient]

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1386349265' post='2299179']
....which is basically a minor pentatonic scale with an added flat 5th is used in blues when the usual 1,4,5 tunes use major chords?


When i play to a 12 bar blues tune and over the 1,4,5 i use major chord tones and drop a flat 7th to spice things up....


....unless the use of the blues scale isnt for tunes based on 1,4,5 progression!

No doubt an obvious answer to this that i dont know!
[/quote]

The V isn't major, it's a dominant 7 chord.

[iconic]

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1386353436' post='2299262']


The V isn't major, it's a dominant 7 chord.
[/quote]


i thought the 5th was simply called a major....unless its because the chord includes the 7th as the 3rd of said chord...which it does....i may of answered my own question?

Even so its not got a flat 3rd so still a major...isn't it?

Edited December 6, 2013 by iconic

[JapanAxe]

Nothing wrong with playing major scale notes to a 12-bar, but it will come out sounding a bit country.

[ambient]

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1386358596' post='2299350']
i thought the 5th was simply called a major....unless its because the chord includes the 7th as the 3rd of said chord...which it does....i may of answered my own question?

Even so its not got a flat 3rd so still a major...isn't it?
[/quote]

It's got a major 3rd but a flat 7, so it's called a dominant 7 chord. The triad (3 note chord) is major, so that may be where your confusion stems from.

Harmonised into chords the major scale produces the following - I major, II minor, III minor, IV major, V dominant 7, VI minor, VII m7b5.

Edited December 6, 2013 by ambient

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='ambient' timestamp='1386360528' post='2299389']
Harmonised into chords the major scale produces the following - I major, II minor, III minor, IV major, V dominant 7, VI minor, VII m7b5.
[/quote]

Your mixing 3 and 4 note chords.

3 note: I major, II minor, III minor, IV major, V major, VI minor, VII diminished

4 note: I major 7th, minor 7th, minor 7th, IV major 7th, V (dominant) 7, VI minor 7th, VII m7b5

[ambient]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1386362107' post='2299407']
Your mixing 3 and 4 note chords.

3 note: I major, II minor, III minor, IV major, V major, VI minor, VII diminished

4 note: I major 7th, minor 7th, minor 7th, IV major 7th, V (dominant) 7, VI minor 7th, VII m7b5
[/quote]

That's what I said, see my original post , that's why I said dominant 7 for the V. I wasn't talking about triads.

Edited December 6, 2013 by ambient

[iconic]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1386362107' post='2299407']


Your mixing 3 and 4 note chords.

3 note: I major, II minor, III minor, IV major, V major, VI minor, VII diminished

4 note: I major 7th, minor 7th, minor 7th, IV major 7th, V (dominant) 7, VI minor 7th, VII m7b5
[/quote]

Thats cleared that up

I have played blues with 6ths and b7s too thinking about it. The blues scale sounds great too and as the above said more bluesy 'n less good ole boy....but still like to know why playing a minor over a major works so well...if that makes sense?

Edited December 6, 2013 by iconic

[dlloyd]

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1386349265' post='2299179']
....which is basically a minor pentatonic scale with an added flat 5th is used in blues when the usual 1,4,5 tunes use major chords?


When i play to a 12 bar blues tune and over the 1,4,5 i use major chord tones and drop a flat 7th to spice things up....


....unless the use of the blues scale isnt for tunes based on 1,4,5 progression!

No doubt an obvious answer to this that i dont know!
[/quote]

Are you asking about the use of the minor third over a major third? Don't worry about it... think of it as a #9 rather than a minor third.

Think of the "Hendrix chord"... E7#9.

You could write a PhD thesis on the use of blue notes, the use of b5 and #9 alt7 dominants to add tension, the #9/b3 ambiguity as a vehicle to imply emotion, etc. and probably trace its history back to field hollers and work songs, but blues isn't something that particularly benefits from over-analysis.

[JapanAxe]

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1386363836' post='2299436']
The blues scale sounds great too and as the above said more bluesy 'n less good ole boy....but still like to know why playing a minor over a major works so well...if that makes sense?
[/quote]
Most of the blues scale can be thought of as 'borrowed' from the parallel minor. A lot of rock is based on that concept.

[iconic]

Great points guys, thanks for the help

[Guest bassman7755]

[quote name='iconic' timestamp='1386363836' post='2299436']
....but still like to know why playing a minor over a major works so well...if that makes sense?
[/quote]

Its works because your used to hearing other people do it in the same context - its a defining idiom of blues music. Music is actually just as much about what your accustomed to hearing people do in a given situation than it is about abstract theory.

Edited December 6, 2013 by bassman7755

[jakenewmanbass]

It stems from the voice... 'blue' notes are actually between semitones, so bending on the guitar is a natural way to achieve them.
On tempered instruments like piano and to a certain extent bass (as we tend to bend less) we play both major and minor third in quick succession to give the illusion of the note in between.
Try it, play C then Eb slide to E... then C again
Most blues will take major, dominant or minor sounds.
The dominant chords over which many blues sequences are played will handle a variety of notes that don't belong to the parent scale because they are in their nature less settled than major and some minor chords, they are traveling chords, there is a tension suggesting movement created by the relationship between the 3rd and the 7th wanting to resolve (up and down respectively), which is why you can play dominant chords ad infinitum; they will always lead you to another one or back to the one from which you came...

Edited December 8, 2013 by jakenewmanbass

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1386371090' post='2299535']
Its works because your used to hearing other people do it in the same context - its a defining idiom of blues music. Music is actually just as much about what your accustomed to hearing people do in a given situation than it is about abstract theory.
[/quote]
In a nice way, I'm not sure I agree wholeheartedly with your last statement, there are forces at work in the harmonic series that dictate certain satisfactions, like landing on a major chord after a dominant which has a natural conclusion.
This is brought about by physics and the physical world. I do appreciate that there are cultural variations that will allow for differing perceptions (eg a Gamelan is actually in tune whereas tempered instruments are not, but the respective cultures will hear their own as in tune) however one of the reasons that music is a universal language is because there are forces at play which chime with the human understanding of the physical world, with regional variations, an accent, if you like.
Which leads me on to one of my theories about authenticity; some of the best musicians I've come across are often very good impersonators, they get inflections right, but a native will always spot someone who is not a local, which makes me wonder how we as musicians sound to the peoples of origin of the music their culture has developed, that others imitate, like blues for example

Edited December 8, 2013 by jakenewmanbass

[EssentialTension]

[quote name='jakenewmanbass' timestamp='1386498416' post='2300616']
It stems from the voice... 'blue' notes are actually between semitones, so bending on the guitar is a natural way to achieve them.
On tempered instruments like piano and to a certain extent bass (as we tend to bend less) we play both major and minor third in quick succession to give the illusion of the note in between.
Try it, play C then Eb slide to E... then C again
Most blues will take major, dominant or minor sounds.
The dominant chords over which many blues sequences are played will handle a variety of notes that don't belong to the parent scale because they are in their nature less settled than major and some minor chords, they are traveling chords, there is a tension suggesting movement created by the relationship between the 3rd and the 7th wanting to resolve (up and down respectively), which is why you can play dominant chords ad infinitum; they will always lead you to another one or back to the one from which you came...
[/quote]
I'm guessing this is an explanation of why, in my experience, when I play fretless or upright, hitting the 'correct' intonation seems to to be much more important on some notes than others, e.g. the octave needs to be correct, and the fifth, but the third can be out and just sound spicy.

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='EssentialTension' timestamp='1386499663' post='2300648']
I'm guessing this is an explanation of why, in my experience, when I play fretless or upright, hitting the 'correct' intonation seems to to be much more important on some notes than others, e.g. the octave needs to be correct, and the fifth, but the third can be out and just sound spicy.
[/quote]
Well you're into the realms of microtones now, there is a definite difference between Db and C# when context is considered, eg C# when played as a third of A Major has a brighter feel than Db as a root of it's own key. Classical string players are finely tuned to these differences.
But broadly in answer to your question... Yes!

[flyfisher]

[quote name='dlloyd' timestamp='1386364682' post='2299451']
You could write a PhD thesis on the use of blue notes, the use of b5 and #9 alt7 dominants to add tension, the #9/b3 ambiguity as a vehicle to imply emotion, etc. and probably trace its history back to field hollers and work songs, but blues isn't something that particularly benefits from over-analysis.
[/quote]

One thing that has always intruigued me about music is the chicken-egg thing. All this pentatonic, mixolydian, major minor stuff pretty much goes over my head, yet I can play a blues jam pretty well just from what I've learned by hearing over the years.

Presumably it was (playing) music that came first rather than someone sitting down and 'inventing' musical theory from scratch?

So is all musical theory just a way of wrting down and explaining what already sounds good to our ears? After all, there are countless examples of great music created by people with little or no musical theory, so why it it generally treated as essential for any 'serious' musician?

[Dad3353]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1386527728' post='2301100']...why it it generally treated as essential for any 'serious' musician?[/quote]

It could be seen as no more 'essential' than literacy in general. One can do very well in life without any formal grammatical knowledge, or even without reading. It's debatable whether one has more 'knowledge' with or without those assets, though. Even more so if one reads a foreign language (or indeed, several...). Those with at least a smattering of 'dead' languages find advantage, too. Why should music be different..? Essential..? No; patently not. Commode..? Most certainly, in many circumstances.
IMO.

PS: Definition of 'serious', please..?

Edited December 8, 2013 by Dad3353

[jakenewmanbass]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1386527728' post='2301100']
One thing that has always intruigued me about music is the chicken-egg thing. All this pentatonic, mixolydian, major minor stuff pretty much goes over my head, yet I can play a blues jam pretty well just from what I've learned by hearing over the years.

Presumably it was (playing) music that came first rather than someone sitting down and 'inventing' musical theory from scratch?

So is all musical theory just a way of wrting down and explaining what already sounds good to our ears? After all, there are countless examples of great music created by people with little or no musical theory, so why it it generally treated as essential for any 'serious' musician?
[/quote]
The sounds came first so learning them with your ears is an important way to absorb them, explaining to each other in theoretical terms is useful for speed, just language innit.

[Bloodaxe]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1386527728' post='2301100']
One thing that has always intruigued me about music is the chicken-egg thing. All this pentatonic, mixolydian, major minor stuff pretty much goes over my head, yet I can play a blues jam pretty well just from what I've learned by hearing over the years.

Presumably it was (playing) music that came first rather than someone sitting down and 'inventing' musical theory from scratch?

So is all musical theory just a way of wrting down and explaining what already sounds good to our ears? After all, there are countless examples of great music created by people with little or no musical theory, so why it it generally treated as essential for any 'serious' musician?[/quote]

IMO the 'essential' aspect of theory is that it permits [i]very[/i] rapid & efficient transmission of ideas. If you were doing a show dep gig or session work f'rinstance, then a lack of theoretical knowledge would likely result in your 'phone never ringing again. For originals/covers/pub jams etc. then it's less of a necessity.

As to your other points, it rather looks as though we're hard-wired to some extent:—

[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ne6tB2KiZuk[/media]

P.

[flyfisher]

Yes, the communication thing makes sense, especially in a professional environment. Also, I guess we all need to know a bit of theory, even if only to tune our instruments and knowing a few chord shapes, but an awful lot can be done by just sitting around and following others.

[quote name='Dad3353' timestamp='1386528140' post='2301104']
PS: Definition of 'serious', please..?
[/quote]

TBH, I wasn't sure myself, hence the use of quote marks.

[3below]

[quote name='bassman7755' timestamp='1386371090' post='2299535']
Its works because your used to hearing other people do it in the same context - its a defining idiom of blues music. Music is actually just as much about what your accustomed to hearing people do in a given situation than it is about abstract theory.
[/quote]

As above. It works because it sounds right to our ears. At this point we get into the debate - did we make music theory to fit what we hear or was the theory in place and we found it. That is not my take by the way, it is the debate of Popper, Kuhn, Dewey et al in Science.

Edited December 8, 2013 by 3below

[dlloyd]

[quote name='flyfisher' timestamp='1386527728' post='2301100']So is all musical theory just a way of wrting down and explaining what already sounds good to our ears?[/quote]

In some respects, yes. But also what 'should' sound good (and offer options that you might not have thought of previously), what will sound bad, etc...

I have major doubts about some of the received wisdom we have of early blues musicians being entirely ignorant of music theory. A lot of these guys, for instance Lonnie Johnson, were able to play equally well in a number of styles, whatever would pay the bills. They could read music and most likely could understand a fair bit of theory. BB King, in interviews, often talks in theoretical terms... but that doesn't fit with the notion of blues as a savage/primitive music.