Question:
How exactly do you make a peice sound more modal?
I try to make some of what I play sound more modal, but I dont succeed the way I want. Its just a couple of passing phrases, and then It goes back to the standard major or minor key-progressions that Im playing in. I cant seem to nail down any one progression that sounds like what Im aiming for.
Any advice yall could give here?
Answer:
Write in a mode. Change modes mid-way through (ex. Verse in C Dorian, Chorus in C Lydian). Change keys.
Learn more theory.
The real question is, though: What are you looking for? When I hear the word modal, I think Chant. I assume you don't want to sound like that. Also, I presume you're not looking for Jazz modality, either, because that's another form of modal music that comes to mind. Perhaps Satch-style modality?
Answer:
I do have a slight interest in blues, and jazz, but I really just want to add a different flavor to all the music I play. And to add a darker heavier feel to some of the metal peices I come up with.
Answer:
Originally Posted by demon_hunter I do have a slight interest in blues, and jazz, but I really just want to add a different flavor to all the music I play. And to add a darker heavier feel to some of the metal peices I come up with. Darker heavier. Write in Phrygian. Maybe Locrian. Not as common, but it can work, I think. Start investigating minor modes. Unfortunately, I don't know much of anything about the minor modes, so you'd probably have to do some Googleing or maybe Nate or someone can stop by and impart some wisdom?
Answer:
Listen to them and try to better impart them into your brain. I think the reason you're lapsing into just using standard minor/major is because those are more stuck in your brain than the other scales. If you catch yourself moving to the normal minor key when you don't want to, just go back into whatever mode you were using until you stop "accidentally" changing modes.
I write a lot of songs where the key shifts all the time...
Answer:
thanx guys.
Yeah, my pastor had mentioned something the other day about the phrygian mode being somewhat darker sounding. Ill deffinately look into that. I might go in a few minutes and tap out some patterns on the piano real quick (i knew I shoulda brought my guitar up to the church today.).
Answer:
Originally Posted by Rainer. I think the reason you're lapsing into just using standard minor/major is because those are more stuck in your brain than the other scales. If you catch yourself moving to the normal minor key when you don't want to, just go back into whatever mode you were using until you stop "accidentally" changing modes.
It could also be because you're thinking of modes the wrong way.
Remember that modes are not alterations of major and minor scales. Dorian, for example, is not a minor scale with a "sharp six." Mixolydian is not a major scale with a "flat seven." That is how they may sound, but it's not what they are. Modes are rearrangements, if you will, of the notes of a major or minor scale (actually, historically speaking, modes are completely separate and unrelated patterns of whole and half-steps, and major / minor scales are rearrangements of the modes... but, for our purposes...). Dorian is any major scale played starting on the second scale degree instead of the first. Mixolydian is any major scale played starting on the fifth scale degree instead of the first. If you think "Ok.. I'm playing in C major, but I'm starting and ending on D" when you want to write in D dorian, you'll have less of a tendency to try playing standard D minor chord progressions.
I think the best thing to do would be to learn the individual patterns / natures of each of the modes (in the same way that you learn major / minor), but that is difficult (something I myself have not completely done yet), and this "rearrangement" method is much more accurate than the "altered scale" method.
In His love,
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by demon_hunter thanx guys.
Yeah, my pastor had mentioned something the other day about the phrygian mode being somewhat darker sounding. Ill deffinately look into that. I might go in a few minutes and tap out some patterns on the piano real quick (i knew I shoulda brought my guitar up to the church today.).
Phrygian mode sounds "darker" because it's 3rd interval is minor (1 and a half steps from 1st to 3rd note) and the 2nd interval is flat (half step from 1st to 2nd note).
Some folks who grow up in eastern Europe/western Asia would not say that Phrygian mode sounds "dark"...they'd say it sounds "normal".
Many of us associate Pentatonics to "blues" but folks in India and China would say that they sound "happy" and "pleasant".
Ok, all that to say I teach my students modes and how to apply them in their most simplistic environment: over chord progressions in 1 key not using substitutions.
Example: in the key of C major using a progression of I - IV - V - VI minor - II minor and back to I, you'd play the following chords/modes:
C major/C Ionian
F major/F Lydian
G major/G Mixolydian
A minor/A Aeolian
D minor/D Dorian
C major/C Ionian
It's ALL C major scale but the attention to each of the chords is emphasised by playing the respective mode over them, lingering on the root notes of the different chords/modes.
The notes stay the same; they're all C major w/ no sharps and no flats. But the intervals of the scales change in regards to the root-to-octave scale.
Does that make any sense?
Answer:
Originally Posted by gtrdave Does that make any sense?
No.
Once you divorce yourself from the idea that a mode has any character at all and realize that the major scale contains all of the naturally occurring modes, you're free.
I disagree wholeheartedly with the concept of playing in a mode, and forever will.
Learn the major scale, the relative minor and then the altered minor scales and you have 99% of the meat of theory and comp down. Guitarists, as far as modern musicians go, are the only group that consistently chooses to confuse itself by dwelling on modality.
To the original poster:
Your confusion noted from your question is honest and heartfelt by guitar players the world over. The reason that "playing modally" is so confusing for you is that the definition is clouded by those who wish to appropriate another name for the flavors already present in the major scale. If you are soloing over a chord progression using either the major scale or the natural minor, you ARE playing modally. You might not be able to impress your friends by firing off the name of the mode you suspect yourself to be playing in, but that's secondary.
If you'd ever like a good read that will clear much of this up, try digging up anything and everything you can find refferring to "The Well Tempered Clavier" by JS Bach.
"Each part consists of twenty-four preludes and fugues, one prelude and one fugue in each of the twelve major and minor keys."
No modes. 12 major, 12 minor, no nonsense.
And he was J.S. Bach.
Answer:
Originally Posted by PacerX Once you divorce yourself from the idea that a mode has any character at all and realize that the major scale contains all of the naturally occurring modes, you're free.
I disagree wholeheartedly with the concept of playing in a mode, and forever will.
The major and minor scales are modes.
You've probably never actually played in a true mode, which is why you don't understand it.
Go learn the song "What Wondrous Love Is This" from www.liturgicalguitarist.com. It is truly in the Dorian mode, and it will show you quite clearly the difference between minor and Dorian, for example. You can't peg What Wondrous Love into either a major or minor key, because it's not in either... it's in a Dorian key.
Learn the major scale, the relative minor and then the altered minor scales and you have 99% of the meat of theory and comp down. Guitarists, as far as modern musicians go, are the only group that consistently chooses to confuse itself by dwelling on modality.
Not to mention almost all pre-baroque repertoire musicians, and many romantic repertoire guys.
Your confusion noted from your question is honest and heartfelt by guitar players the world over. The reason that "playing modally" is so confusing for you is that the definition is clouded by those who wish to appropriate another name for the flavors already present in the major scale. If you are soloing over a chord progression using either the major scale or the natural minor, you ARE playing modally. You might not be able to impress your friends by firing off the name of the mode you suspect yourself to be playing in, but that's secondary.
Modes are much more than fodder for crafting solos. They are keys, in the exact same way that "major" and "minor" are.

If you'd ever like a good read that will clear much of this up, try digging up anything and everything you can find refferring to "The Well Tempered Clavier" by JS Bach.
"Each part consists of twenty-four preludes and fugues, one prelude and one fugue in each of the twelve major and minor keys."
No modes. 12 major, 12 minor, no nonsense.
And he was J.S. Bach.
His purpose for writing the WTC was not to provide a layout of all the possible scale / key forms in music, but, rather, to show that his favored tuning system provided a way to play reasonably well in all the most common keys.
In His love,
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by gtrdave Ok, all that to say I teach my students modes and how to apply them in their most simplistic environment: over chord progressions in 1 key not using substitutions.
Example: in the key of C major using a progression of I - IV - V - VI minor - II minor and back to I, you'd play the following chords/modes:
C major/C Ionian
F major/F Lydian
G major/G Mixolydian
A minor/A Aeolian
D minor/D Dorian
C major/C Ionian
It's ALL C major scale but the attention to each of the chords is emphasised by playing the respective mode over them, lingering on the root notes of the different chords/modes.
The notes stay the same; they're all C major w/ no sharps and no flats. But the intervals of the scales change in regards to the root-to-octave scale.
Does that make any sense?
No, it doesn't... but for a different reason than Pacer gave.
When you're in the key of C major, you play the C major scale... period. There's absolutely no reason to rack your brain trying to think "Ok, the chord for this measure is Am, so I should play A Aeolian." No, that's not modal playing at all... that's simply playing appropriately in the key of C major.
Modes should be thought of (after being thought of as rearrangements of major scales as I explained earlier, and, probably, eventually in preference to that thought pattern) as distinct scales / keys with identities all their own, in exactly the same way that major and minor are distinct from each other. D Dorian is related to C Major in exactly the same manner that A Minor is (they are all relatives of each other, in other words), and when you start to think about modes you should think about them in such a manner. Eventually, though, you need to realize that you can only get so far with this "relative" key style of thinking. You need to eventually break apart A Minor and C Major, and, in the same way, you need to break apart D Dorian and C Major. Once you start viewing modes (of which major and minor are a part anyway) as distinct from major and minor keys, you'll be well on your way.
In His love,
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by MJ_Avalanche Change modes mid-way through (ex. Verse in C Dorian, Chorus in C Lydian).
This is quite effective. I can even think of an example from popular P&W music: "You're Worthy Of My Praise." The verse of the song is in G Mixolydian, and the chorus is clearly in G Ionian (i.e. Major). I'd love to find some more worship songs like this.
In His love,
Nate
Answer:
Originally Posted by Nate The major and minor scales are modes.
More correctly, they are keys.
Note that the modes don't get that distinction. They do not have a named key signature.
Throw 3 flats up on a staff and ask someone who can read what key the piece is in sometime. You're invariably going to get Eb Major for an answer.
Originally Posted by Nate You've probably never actually played in a true mode, which is why you don't understand it.
Every time I play, I'm playing in all of the naturally occurring modes of a given scale because I choose not to accept a nonsensical distinction.
Any key has all of the naturally occurring modes.
Where I decide to center myself for tension or resolution is irrelevant. It is still in one of the 24 keys Bach named, any other distinction you'd like to attach is secondary to establishing that fact.
The musicians who are accompanying me could care less. If they read, and they do, they'll immediatly check the key signature and start banging away.
Now, if I as a composer decide to concentrate in a certain area of the key besides the tonic for tension and resolution, it does not change the key signature...
It merely exploits a tonality THAT ALREADY EXISTS with the key signature in question.
Originally Posted by Nate Go learn the song "What Wondrous Love Is This" from www.liturgicalguitarist.com. It is truly in the Dorian mode, and it will show you quite clearly the difference between minor and Dorian, for example. You can't peg What Wondrous Love into either a major or minor key, because it's not in either... it's in a Dorian key.
The KEY is C major - oddly enough, not an accidental to be found throughout the entire piece.
Because the piece happens to start and end or use Dm often (even resolving to it) is irrelevant.
Now, given the idea that for some reason I would want to play a solo over this piece by ear (it might have potential, btw...) at the first three chords, I know the key signature (D minor, C major and E minor can only exist together without accidentals in the key of C Major).
The idea that this is a Dorian "key" is both confusing and wrong. Since Bach, there have only been 24 KEYS... and 12 of them are arguable... "modes" are not "keys" because they are not individually distinguishable by a set of rules in notation.
The true key singnature, however, is immutable without accidentals until a key change is executed - which is why key changes, and not modal changes, are provided with a specific notation set within sheet music.
Consider this:
Say I'm playing in C major and center on Dm for part of the piece...
Is there any notational distinction that indicates it?
No. You can claim that I changed modes, but there is no provision for notating it.
What if I then decide to move to G major, within the key of C major... is there a notational distinction then?
No. You can again claim that I changed modes, but there is no provision for notating it, and I NEVER, through the entire rigamarole, changed KEYS.
What if I wish to go from the KEY of C major to the KEY of A major... is there a notational distinction then?
Yes. That IS a key change, and can be notated as such.
Originally Posted by Nate Modes are much more than fodder for crafting solos. They are keys, in the exact same way that "major" and "minor" are.
I disagree. There are no distinctions in sheet music for modes on the staff...
There are, however, discrete key signatures - and every musician who can read learns them.

Originally Posted by Nate His purpose for writing the WTC was not to provide a layout of all the possible scale / key forms in music, but, rather, to show that his favored tuning system provided a way to play reasonably well in all the most common keys.
In His love,
Nate
Intent is a little difficult to determine, since he's dead... and has been that way for a long time...
But the proof is in the pudding.
24 keys, that I can happen to treat any way I want, but only 24.
If your hypothesis were true, then would not the modes warrant their own special notation??? Odd that they don't have one, isn't it???
Answer:
Originally Posted by Nate Modes should be thought of (after being thought of as rearrangements of major scales as I explained earlier, and, probably, eventually in preference to that thought pattern) as distinct scales / keys with identities all their own...
That is precisely where we disagree.
A key contains within it the tonality of every naturally occurring mode. They are inseperable, and one (a mode) is a subset within the other (the KEY).
Minor gets a special distinction because the natural minor is often altered at the 7th (harmonic minor) or 6th and 7th (melodic minor).
Answer:
Originally Posted by PacerX More correctly, they are keys.
No. Historically speaking, they were modes (scales) first. The concept of key is a LATE development. Major and minor scales developed FROM the original "church modes" as an extension of that system, and the concept of key signatures / keys was added much later.
Note that the modes don't get that distinction. They do not have a named key signature.
Yes, they do. No sharps and no flats is D Dorian (as well as C Ionian, A Aeolian, etc, etc). My example of "What Wondrous Love Is This" is typically performed / notated in D Dorian. You could try to argue with me that it's actually in D minor (the first and final chords are D minor chords), but the key signature says otherwise. It's not in C major, it's not in A minor, but it has no sharps or flats.
Throw 3 flats up on a staff and ask someone who can read what key the piece is in sometime. You're invariably going to get Eb Major for an answer.
There's no telling what key a piece is in simply from the key signature (even if you only consider major / minor keys). The key signature goes hand in hand with whatever is written on the staff to determine the key (if the chord progression fits a major-key model, it'll be Eb major... but if you've got a bunch of G7 chords showing up, it's clearly C minor; similarly, if you have a slew of G7b5-C7-Fm cadences with the key signature of three flats, that's a dead giveaway that you're in some type of F Dorian key / world).
Every time I play, I'm playing in all of the naturally occurring modes of a given scale because I choose not to accept a nonsensical distinction.
No, you're not. The modes are not simply collections of notes, but DIRECTIONS of travel through those notes. C major and A minor have the same notes, but it is the motion from E to A or from G to C near critical cadence points that determines the key. It is exactly the same with all the other modes.
Any key has all of the naturally occurring modes.
No. A key is based on one mode. C major is based on the C major scale / mode.
Where I decide to center myself for tension or resolution is irrelevant.
NO! That's everything!
The musicians who are accompanying me could care less. If they read, and they do, they'll immediatly check the key signature and start banging away.
Now, if I as a composer decide to concentrate in a certain area of the key besides the tonic for tension and resolution, it does not change the key signature...
It merely exploits a tonality THAT ALREADY EXISTS with the key signature in question.
You're confusing key signatures and keys. You already know that the key signature of 3 sharps, for example, can define the key of A major OR the key of F# minor; how much more of a stretch is it really to understand that it can also define the keys of B Dorian, C# Phrygian, etc, etc?
The KEY is C major - oddly enough, not an accidental to be found throughout the entire piece.
Because the piece happens to start and end or use Dm often (even resolving to it) is irrelevant.
NO! That's everything. Your concept of a key is seriously messed up. A "key" is all about tension and resolution and the way that the chords in a key relate to another. This is why theory teachers make such a huge deal out of using the correct Roman numerals in harmonic analysis of a piece. If you had a piece of music in the key of A minor and labelled a C chord as "I," you'd fail; it should be labelled as "III" to show its relation to the tonic (the final resting place of the piece; ALL about resolution) of the key. In "What Wondrous Love Is This," the D minor chord IS THE TONIC (there is no disputing this fact). All other chords should be considered in relation to that tonic, and those relationships define the key.
Say I'm playing in C major and center on Dm for part of the piece...
Is there any notational distinction that indicates it?
No. You can claim that I changed modes, but there is no provision for notating it.
The fact that you would notate a Dm chord instead of a C chord doesn't cut it?
Intent is a little difficult to determine, since he's dead... and has been that way for a long time...
But the proof is in the pudding.
24 keys, that I can happen to treat any way I want, but only 24.
Bach was writing music (mostly for the church) in a time where significant change in accepted musical style was taking place. The church gradually grew away from the so-called "church modes" (which all church music until this time was written in) and actually came to view some of them (Phrygian in particular, IIRC) as "evil" or "irreverent." Bach wrote in the keys that were accepted and used at his time. Later composers (and earlier composers) used different keys and tonalities because the accepted style of their own time was different than Bach's. Debussy has quite a few instances of very strange keys or tonalities, many are modal, some are non-western.
If your hypothesis were true, then would not the modes warrant their own special notation??? Odd that they don't have one, isn't it???
Why do major and minor keys share key signatures then if it is only the key signature that defines the key?
In His love,
Nate