Music theory is hard. Its naming conventions make it harder. Scale names are especially confusing. For example, the diatonic modes are named after places in and around ancient Greece. I’m sure that Aristoxenes found these names memorable and meaningful in 300 BC, and maybe medieval European theorists felt that way too, but now they are no help at all. The names “harmonic minor” and “melodic minor” are a little better, because they at least try to describe the scales’ respective functions. But those functions only apply in historical music. It’s routine in current music to make melodies from harmonic minor and harmonies from melodic minor. You can see why people hate music theory.
So, here’s my proposal: let’s rename the scales so that their names give you a better idea of their function and/or cultural context, and to advance the larger goal of decolonizing music theory.
Major scale: A fine name, we can keep it, but if you call it “Ionian mode,” you should stop.
Natural minor: Also an okay name, but please stop saying “Aeolian mode.”
Melodic minor: Some people already call it “Jazz minor” and I propose we make that official.
Harmonic minor: Let’s call it Classical minor. The important use case for this scale is to generate the minor-key V7 chord, so maybe we should call it Dominant minor or Leading Tone minor? I like “Classical minor” better because it’s a nice complement to Jazz minor.
Dorian mode: Let’s rename it Funk Minor. I would also consider So What minor or Chameleon minor. Apparently someone just calls it “the key of James Brown” which is also not bad.
Phrygian mode: Trap minor.
Mixolydian mode: Rock major.
Mixolydian b6: Single Ladies scale. Few people talk about this scale except jazz theorists and Adam Neely, but it’s quite a useful one, and it should be part of the standard theory core.
Lydian mode: Dreams major, in honor of the Lydian-based Fleetwood Mac song, and the film score convention that Lydian mode signifies a dream sequence.
Lydian dominant mode: Simpsons scale. It’s already nicknamed the acoustic scale and the Bartók scale, but neither name has caught on.
Phrygian dominant mode: Hijaz-Nahawand, Hijaz maqam, Ahava Rabah, Freygish, escala Andaluza, Dastgāh-e Homāyoun, Raga Bhairav, Basant Mukhari, or Vakulabharanam, depending on ethnic context.
Locrian mode: Björk minor, in honor of “Army of Me,” the only really well-known piece of music that’s built on it.
Harmonic major: Lord of the Rings scale. This is another scale that’s not part of standard theory pedagogy, but it should be, because it’s so useful for film and game scores when you need an epic feel.
Blues scale: A fine name, but people should understand that the blues scale is different from blue notes. The blues scale is the group of piano-key (12-tone equal temperament) notes you use to play the blues. Blue notes are in between the piano keys.
A proposal to push this idea further:
Second this motion, and would add that we should do the same for chords. So we can say ”you can play superbjörkian over the Jimi Hendrix chord” etc https://t.co/QuW35UltiH
— Niklas Rudbäck nrudback.bsky.social (@NRudback) July 13, 2020
What do you say, music world?
Thanks for the post! What do you think about such apps as http://pianocompanion.info?
I don’t know this app but it looks excellent.
A scale is so much more than just the intervallic relationship between notes; a minor scale conveys something different than the aeolian mode (although the pitches are the same) and yet is something completely different than the Turkish makam Nihavent (which again has the same succession of pitches).
But I like your pragmatic approach, so let’s keep inventing new scales, rather than renaming existing ones!
I realise this is somewhat light hearted, but I think many classical musicians/composers theorists would bridle at melodic minor being a jazz minor. Also it seems a form of new colonisation to take the economic might of hip-hop (albeit a more niche subgroup) and appropriate phrygian mode – where does that leave some Andalusian peasant? And I think Aristoxenus would have been perplexed by our use of the greek names – he was already criticising the use of those terms
I am not actually joking.
“Jazz minor” is a term I’ve already seen in use. Jazz musicians have to use classical terminology all the time, seems like it’s time classical theorists have a turn.
If we’re talking about the music of Andalusian people, we should be using whatever scale terms they prefer.
No, we should use whatever our traditional terms are, for the same reason we should continue to say “Germany” and “China”, instead of “Deutschland” or “Chung-kuo”. Foreigners don’t get to tell us how to speak our language.
The names we have work perfectly well, and have the weight of millennia of tradition behind them. If it ain’t broke, why fix it?
I guarantee you that Migos won’t be anymore relevant to people in 2070 than Phrygia or Lydia are to us today.
Language evolves to fit new needs and contexts, why should music be any difference? The names don’t work “perfectly well.” As a teacher of music theory, I see one student after another for whom they are an obstacle to understanding. There are vast numbers of musicians out there who abandoned studying music theory because it seemed too hard and abstruse, not realizing that the concepts are more accessible than the archaic nomenclature suggests. So much music pedagogy and theory is deeply broken. If hip-hop stops being a massively culturally salient reference point in 50 years (doubtful), then we should find new language that makes more sense then.