This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Minor scale article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
This level-5 vital article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
I intend to make a few ammendements to this article. I thought it best to explain my reasons here and to add that I don't wish to offend anybody by doing so, I'm just building on the work you people have already put onto this page. Naturally I expect you to correct any mistakes I make and if your opinions differ I would appreciate some discussion before or after changes.
My first change will be made to the opening sentence:
"A minor scale in music theory is a diatonic scale with a third scale degree at an interval of a minor third above the tonic."
The problem is that minor scales can be derived from sets of pitch relations other than those of the diatonic scale. The paragraph then mentions the Harmonic Minor scale which is not a diatonic scale, containing, as it does a minor third interval).
I will also mention the Dorian and Phrygian modes which, however infrequently they are used in classical music, are both valid and widely used elsewhere.
Furthermore I would suggest, following a brief introduction to those minor scales which cannot be derived from major scales by modal changes alone (Harmonic and Melodic Minor[ascending form]) creating links to other pages (yet to be authored) which cover the properties of these scales in further detail. For those of you who might think this is overkill allow me to explain my reasoning as follows:
By altering just one note in a scale you can also alter the nature of every possible chord formed containing the altered note. This leads to radically different requirements for the harmonisation of the scale concerned and how a piece or fragment of music might be resolved.
To illustrate this take the Harmonic Minor scale (I choose this partly because it is widely used and hence familiar). By sharpening the 7th of an Aeolian ("Natural Minor") you introduce two sets of chords which are effectively rootless, the Diminished 7th (4 notes and four equally valid roots) or the Augmented triad (with its three roots). Neither of these properties exist in the natural minor (Aeolian mode) or the other minor modes derived from the major scale, the Dorian and Phrygian modes.
Melodic Minor (ascending form i.e. Aeolian #6 and #7 for instance) is again very different from the Aeolian modes. Personally I think it is simpler to regard the Melodic Minor ascending form as a derivative of a Dorian because then you only have to alter one note (=Dorian #7).
I hope that this is acceptable. Feel free to contact me. Andrew F. (talk) 03:05, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
"In other words meantone tunings the semitone is not half of a tone, but a somewhat larger interval." This is not an English sentence. (Nor, by the way, does it semantically follow its preceding sentence). Please fix. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.18.201.182 (talk) 02:54, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
It would be nice if a consistent format for describing the tonal spacing could be arrived at and stuck to. Looking at the minor scale its defined by notes, "ABCDEFGA", tones, "W,H,W,W,H,W,W," , and semitones .. "(in semitones - 2 1 2 2 1 2 2)" but this descriptive format is not stuck to when describing the melodic minor a paragraph later, other modes, for example the page on the Dorian scale also misses out elements of this format. A unified format (perhaps incorporating 3 or 4 of the possible ways of describing the scale) but always in the same order and style (ie capital letters for W and H in the whole and half tones description) would allow a user to more easily compare scales. Rszemeti (talk) 12:45, 29 December 2008 (UTC)
The major scale is defined in terms of the spacing of its notes
tone, tone, semitone, tone, tone, tone, semitoneAlso known as "Whole step, whole step, half step, whole, whole, whole, half"
This has not yet been done for minor scale. It only says that some notes have been augmented (raised in pitch).
I may be able to work out the spacing of the notes by the sharps and flats used. -- User:Karl Palmen
Thanks for the information and again, I can't understand why it's different on the way down, because I see a scale as a set of notes used for a piece of music.
The harmonic tone, semitone, tone, tone, semitone, tone, semitone, semitone doesn't add up. An octave needs 5 tones and 2 semitones.
The melodic tone, semitone, tone, tone, tone, tone, semitone does add up. It has a run of 4 tones and a run of 1 tone and so is not a cyclic shift of major and so I'd expect it to sound different.
A look at Musical mode says this is not true and that minor is
tone, semitone, tone, tone, semitone, tone, tone
This is a cycle shift of major. It is identical to major except it starts a tone and a semitone lower. Now I ask Why do Major and Minor Scales sound different?
All three of the above sequences are correct. The Harmonic minor is tone, semitone, tone, tone, semitone, tone-and-a-half, semitone, Melodic minor is tone, semitone, tone, tone, tone, tone, semitone, and Natural minor is tone, semitone, tone, tone, semitone, tone, tone. These are really three different scales. --Celtic Minstrel (talk • contribs) 12:42, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
In line with User:Karl Palmen's comment, I have a question about this excerpt from the article.
Minor scales are sometimes said to have a more interesting, possibly sadder sound than plain major scales.
I, too, noticed this years ago. To date I have not heard a satisfactory answer as to why this is so. Why is it that transposing a piece to a minor key suddenly makes it sound so gloomy and sullen? Whatever answer we come up with, it'll be an important addition to the article. Surely someone must know? --Ardonik 09:43, Aug 8, 2004 (UTC)
According to [1]:
Hyacinth 02:02, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
If I am not mistaken, the notes in the, say, natural Am scale are C, D, E ,F, G, A, and B, whereas the notes in the C major scale are C, D, E ,F, G, A, and B. So, where does one come up with "The dark sound of minor keys"? --Spud Gun (talk) 15:38, 29 November 2011 (UTC)
There is also a minor blues scale, as heard in such songs as "Why don't you do right?" by Lil Green and many instrumental blues, but I am not competent to do more than point this out on the talk page. Basically the third note is flattened, but I wouldn't dare write about it myself, too ignorant. Ortolan88 01:27, 9 Aug 2004 (UTC)
"A natural minor scale, is a scale without any accidentals in it." This language is confusing at best. The scale of A Minor is the only one for which this is true. Could someone please replace it with a better definition of "natural minor"? Also, shouldn't natural minor be listed before the other types? --LostLeviathan 17:37, 13 Oct 2004 (UTC)
The following was removed:
Earlier the article points out intervals in a scale which remind one of some kind of music, so that seems appropriate. My only question would be is "Naughty Girl" really in harmonic minor? Hyacinth 08:11, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
How can we write D-flat minor?? There is no relative major key. Georgia guy 17:34, 24 February 2006 (UTC)
The article uses the term "diatonic" without adequate explanation. This term, along with "chromatic", is the cause of serious uncertainties at several other Wikipedia articles, and in the broader literature. Some of us thought that both terms needed special coverage, so we started up a new article: Diatonic and chromatic. Why not have a look, and join the discussion? Be ready to have comfortable assumptions challenged! – Noetica♬♩ Talk 22:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
I'm just throwing this out here -- would anyone object to a List of songs in minor key? Ten Pound Hammer • (((Broken clamshells • Otter chirps))) 04:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
I'd like to add my site as an external link as I've taken the time to write out every harmonic minor scale with the fingering and notes so could someone please have a look at it for me and give me the go ahead. http://www.learn-piano.org/harmonic-minor-scale.html
thank you for your time. Ben
I was unfamiliar with the term, but it does seem recognized on guitar sites on a quick google search. As it's the same as the harmonic minor scale, it seems like it could be merged there (with simply a brief note of the name). Rigadoun (talk) 18:34, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
I can definitely see why you have suggested this. After reviewing the page, you are indeed correct that Mohammedan and the melodic minor scales are one in the same. I can see no reason why they should not be merged. Perhaps someone might include an explanation, however, as to how the Mohammedan received its name? I am curious to know.
143.207.8.4 11:51, 21 August 2007 (UTC)Anthony James
The use of the term "Mohammedan scale" to refer to the harmonic minor scale is outdated, just as the word "Mohammedan", referring to a Muslim person, is no longer in use. In Arabic classical music the maqam which was described by European orientalists as the "Mohammedan scale" is called Maqam Nahawand.
The article currently says:
The C major scale is C D E F G A B C, so the A natural minor scale is A B C D E F G A (A is the 6th scale note of the C major scale).
In other words meantone tunings the semitone is not half of a tone, but a somewhat larger interval.
I don't see how the second statement is rephrasing the first "in other words". I don't think the article says anything at all about temperament before this mention of meantone. Plus, the "in other words" sentence doesn't seem grammatical; "...meantone tunings the semitone is not hald of a tone..", huh? I'd just delete the "in other words" bit, but am not quite confident enough on my music theory. Can someone explain? Pfly 04:22, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
The explanation in the article of how the descending and the ascending melodic minor scale, respectively, is obtained from the harmonic minor scale, is as follows: "either the subtonic is used, or the sixth scale degree is raised". I was much confused by the part "either the subtonic is used" and it was only after a good while that I realised that the descending melodic minor scale contains the exact same notes as the natural melodic minor scale. For clarity, I really think this should be pointed out, and I'm asking someone with a better grasp of the theory than I have!
In my opinion, this is one of those articles that has WAY too many cross-references to be useful. I have a very strong music background, including some training in formal theory, but even I had a hard time with terms like "subdominant," "common practice period," "subtonic," etc., so I can only imagine how a person with little training might feel if he/she were to come to this article (as I did) for a basic explanation of the harmonic minor scale (with which I was already familiar). While I understand that it isn't desirable to re-explain every term of art that appears on every page where such a term is used, clicking back and forth between the article and the pages for the various terms gets confusing and frustrating (particularly when the linked pages also contain terms of art that require explanation). Even where parentheticals are used (in this case, e.g., with the term "dominant"), the parentheticals contain terms of art. As it is now, the article reads like something out of a scholarly journal. I think it might be helpful if the first paragraphs of each section were written in more of a "plain English" style. I could do this, but I don't feel confident enough in my formal theory knowledge to do so.
Also, there are a number of things like the following that just don't make sense: "Thus, for purposes of melody, either the subtonic is used, or the sixth scale degree is raised; either way, there is a whole step between these two scale degrees, considered more conducive to smooth melody writing." WHICH two scale degrees? And considered by whom to be more conducisve to smooth melody writing? Zddoodah (talk) 16:54, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Actually, I'm just surfing, this rainy Sat. - reading music theory for pleasure ;<} and I was noticing how very well done this article is. I think it's quite clear, if not for newbies. I was thinking the editors could apply some of this to major scale, which could use some work, IMO - I notice Hyacinth is active on both, more or less. ALL of the music theory articles are not for the faint of heart....Jjdon (talk) 20:12, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I have added some audio examples to the article. Hyacinth (talk) 06:00, 27 July 2008 (UTC)
link that shows the circle of fifths quite well: http://www.i-love-guitar.com/circle-of-5ths.html I am writing a book that explains all of these minor scale discrepancies, stay tuned! Microcosmmm (talk) 06:47, 21 January 2009 (UTC)
"A minor scale in music theory is a diatonic scale with a third scale degree at an interval of a minor third above the tonic." This sentence is incomprehensible to almost anyone. I've attended music school and know my theory, so after reading it three times I was able to make sense of it. I strikes me as written by someone who wants you to know that they are a master of music theory, more than they want you to know what a minor scale is. Someone who doesn't know what a minor scale is, clearly doesn't know much about music theory and most likely will not want to read anything more after failing to understand the first sentence. I won't try to rewrite it but here is an example of something someone without extensive knowledge of music theory might understand "A minor scale is the equivalent of starting on the sixth note of its relative major scale and then continuing until you reach that note again, one octave higher. For example, if F major contains the notes F G A Bb C D E 'F' then its relative minor scale would be D minor which contains the same notes but starts and ends on D (D E F G A Bb C 'D')." I understand that it goes on to explain that, but if they don't know what a minor scale is, how likely is it that they will know what the Aeolian mode is? Saying that makes sense only if you are explaining music theory to someone who already knows music theory, which is illogical. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.122.72.51 (talk) 02:24, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Might just be me, but where is all this information coming from? I would be whacking a great big [citation needed] on the whole article...? What's the go with that? Sorry that was poorly posed, I guess my real question is... is all the information coming from that one book Studies on the Origin of Harmonic Tonality? 124.170.186.64 (talk) 08:04, 11 June 2009 (UTC)
THIS ARTICLE NEEDS A FREQUENCE PROPORTION RUNDOWN, AS IS PRESENT ON THE MAJOR SCALE —Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.165.211.235 (talk) 22:43, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
to me , it is just notes borrowed from the major key so the 5th degree of a minor key becomes major (V7) for a perfect cadence (V7 - I) . A good example is autumn leaves. in the real book (for guitar) it is in E minor (F# sig of G Major). the 5th degree is B which is minor (phrygian) in G. It needs to become major for the "cadenza V-I". You then just borrow the notes (from the key of E major) D# for harmonic and C# - D# for melodic. remember that this is western music explanation... 198.103.221.51 (talk) 20:46, 15 February 2010 (UTC) Bachman198.103.221.51 (talk) 20:44, 15 February 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.103.152.51 (talk) 20:38, 15 February 2010 (UTC)
The section "Harmonic and melodic minor" starts out with 'the above considerations of chordal harmony led to the harmonic minor scale'.
There aren't any above considerations, and apparently haven't been for several months. Somebody take a look at that, eh? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.248.86.75 (talk) 17:16, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
The Lydian Minor scale (fourth mode of Neapolitan Major) is an interesting exception to the rule that a "minor scale" contains the tonic, minor third, and perfect fifth, thus making the tonic chord a minor triad. Lydian Minor is based on the Lydian mode with a minor sixth and minor seventh--the third, curiously enough, is major (the "minor" moniker is likely based on the minor sixth and seventh, which are also flattened in the natural minor scale). What is even more surprising is that the most likely candidate for the name "Lydian Minor" would be Lydian b3--the fourth mode of Harmonic Major. That scale is the Lydian mode with a minor third. You would expect that to be called Lydian Minor, but this is not attested in the literature (Kadmon, 1997, pp. 50, 102). Anyway, is this "notable" enough to bear discussion? I figured I'd ask here first because these scales seem to be fairly obscure. I'm afraid it might just confuse most readers.
Kadmon, A. (1997). The guitar grimoire: A notated intervallic study of scales. New York: Carl Fischer.
MetalJon (talk) 22:58, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
Harmonic Minor Scale: 1 2 ♭3 4 5 ♭6 7 8 (?) when you have the A minor scale just described below? A B C D E F G# A'. Shouldn't it be tone, semitone, tone, tone, semitone, tone and a half, semitone? Therefore 1 b2 3 4 b5 6# 7. Or an I not understanding what you guys have written? 122.107.131.46 (talk)
The three chords germane to the discussion are shown correctly, but the B-D-F triad is diminished [1] and should be represented by "iio," not "ii." As such, the image needs to be regenerated. Ddunkman (talk) 16:55, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
References
There is a heading 'Natural minor scale', but the text under it refers to the 'Harmonic minor scale'! So two things are missing: 1) The actual text about what the natural minor scale is. 2) The correct heading for the harmonic minor scale. This should be corrected! Lowbop (talk) 05:57, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
Standard music texts will discuss natural minor scale, harmonic minor scale, and melodic minor scale. A reasonably brief discussion about minor key is also appropriate. It may also be appropriate to talk about the modes that have a minor third (Dorian, Phrygian, Aeolian, Locrian), although that's not really necessary as it's not clear that the term "minor scale" really has significant meaning outside of a tonal system. What is clear, though, is that all this stuff at the end--two relatively long sections!--about "chromatic-minor system" and whatnot is idiosyncratic and relies on a single source that may or may not be very good. In my opinion, those sections should just be removed--they do nothing other than give the impression that some oddball "system" apparently devised by one particular author is a standard thing when it's not. Someone reading this article should come away with an understanding that there are basically three types of minor scales in tonal music (natural, harmonic, and melodic). The "chromatic minor system" stuff is a distraction. It is more than unnecessary--it's presence does the article a disservice. SlubGlub (talk) 20:30, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
Someone with a willingness to follow Wikipedia process (really, just takes a tiny bit of patience) should nominate the redirect of "Natural-minor system" and "Chromatic-minor system" to this article for deletion under reason #8 at WP:R#DELETE. That reason is: "If the redirect is a novel or very obscure synonym for an article name, it is unlikely to be useful." "Natural-minor system" and "Chromatic-minor system" are, as far as I can tell, novel and obscure constructs from Ken Stephenson's What To Listen For In Rock: A Stylistic Analysis. Redirecting them to the article on the minor scales is wrong for that reason, but also because it's just wrong! What Stephenson apparently describes is a harmonic system, not a scale. SlubGlub (talk) 04:13, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
"A minor scale in Western music theory includes any scale that contains, in its tonic triad, ..."
I do not see anywhere a definition of "tonic triad". Links to the separate articles on "tonic" and "triad" are not adequate to define "tonic triad". The reader is unable to understand "minor scale" because its supposed definition uses an undefined term.CountMacula (talk) 09:31, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
"A minor scale in Western music theory includes any scale that contains, in its tonic triad, ..."
Then certain scales are included among the minor scales. Are these the only scales included? Are these exactly the scales that are included? Are any other scales included? Let's make it easy, not hard. Please don't leave the reader wondering.CountMacula (talk) 09:36, 5 March 2013 (UTC)
The article should serve to show the incorporation of 3 component scales into one hybrid flexible-melody, functional-harmony whole. It shouldn't contain, in the exclusive sense, the 3 component scales.
Melodic minor, for instance, has modes, which are treated only in an article on jazz. Melodic major, of which melodic minor could be said to be just a mode, is missing entirely from the wiki. Harmonic minor exists only here, but leaves no parallel place for corresponding harmonic major. Natural minor, melodic minor and harmonic minor are also components of the larger (n=6) set of ancohemitonic heptatonic scales, those scales accessible by the Western key signature system, and should be available as independent pages for reference from that (coming) page, too.
Thus I propose removing the redirects for natural, melodic, and harmonic minor, and segregating those sections into separate pages, while reinforcing the main thrust of this page as the historical and functional fusion of those 3 scales. 173.172.210.42 (talk) 04:19, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
There's no fringe theories, just your lack of context. You may not have heard of these scales, or understand tetrachord construction and their derivation from such, but that's no reason to make accusations of drug abuse. Research, learn a little bit. Read. It'll do wonders. 173.172.210.42 (talk) 04:19, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Does anyone know what the word "natural" in "natural minor" refers to? Was there any rationale for choosing it? Or is it just a random label used for lack of a better one? Is the inventor of that term known? Did the term originate in English or in some other language? In French "natural minor" ("gamme mineure naturelle") is referred to sometimes as "gamme mineure de type antique", although I don't know which term is more common, which older, and whether "gamme mineure naturelle" was not in fact borrowed from English. Contact Basemetal here 17:35, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
This article currently says that the ascending melodic scale is the same as the natural minor and the descending scale has two altered notes, compared to the natural minor. This is backwards. It's the descending scale that is the same as the natural minor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Timbomania (talk • contribs) 18:33, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
What do people think of the diagram at the very top with the white and black keys (File:MinorScale.svg)? My instinct is to delete it. In the very least, I think it's too small to read. Squandermania (talk) 01:55, 9 February 2018 (UTC)
'Scale formation' is used in the first sentence as an underlying concept -- but it is not explained or linked. 37.99.61.154 (talk) 10:36, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
Major and minor scales are an incredibly simple concept. Over explained in this article to the point of stupidity.
Major scales can be written as TTSTTTS
The T represents tone. Or 1 full step. A to B would be considered a tone. The S represents a semitone or 1/2 step. B to C would be considered a semitone.
there are multiple minor scales but all that does is add confusion. The most commonly used is the natural minor. Using the same format as above....
TSTTSTT
In the above examples if we use c as the root note. The major scale becomes
CDEFGAB
The minor becomes
CDD#FGG#A#
The way I wrote it is correct. One way that Wikipedia could differentiate itself from the other websites is to actually use the notes the way that normal musicians use them. If you don't play jazz you don't say E minor. You don't say A minor. You say D sharp and G sharp.
It needs to be explained in the simplest most easy to understand way. The way it's written right now is a joke. nowhere on either the C minor or C major scale page or the major or minor scale page does it explain what I just explained in simple terms like I just explained them. There should be nothing on any of those pages other than what I just said. The notes the order they go in and that's it. The music theory stuff is irrelevant and immaterial. While it is important the vast majority of people do not understand the mathematical underlay of music. They don't get it and they don't care. There's no reason to have it here there's no reason to discuss the triads and the fifths and all the other garbage that is not important. Just answer the question what is the major scale the answer is
TTSTTTS
no matter what note you pick the major scale follows the pattern above. Doesn't matter. You can start with any note you want and it follows the pattern above. There's nothing else needed. This page is ridiculous.
Please believe I am only trying to help. I've read almost every music theory page on Wikipedia. Hundreds of pages and they all contain garbage upon garbage information. Overcomplicating what is actually a very simple concept.
I don't know how to make it simple. I can provide the information but I don't know how to make it simple and easy to understand. What I do know is this current page needs to be one paragraph long. Not 74 paragraphs. Just one is all that's needed
again I'm just trying to help. I'm abrasive and some people think I'm an asshole. ;) I just want to be able to share my love of music and the joy of music with the world. This article does not do that Sickboy254698 (talk) 06:37, 13 February 2020 (UTC)
Let's discuss the criteria for which this link: https://www.fachords.com/tools/scale-finder/?key=3&scale=21&position=3 has been removed (an interactive tool for learning scales), while other links really similar to it are still there — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gianca1976 (talk • contribs)
The introductory section states that the 1st, 3rd, and 5th scale degrees form minor triads i. All minor scales rather than major triads as compared to major scales. Looking at the example scales shown in that same section this does not seem to be true (also isn't true for the major scales). Instead the 1st, 4th, and 5th form minor/major triads in the minor and major scale(s) respectively. To clarify what I mean: the chords constructed from the notes in Cmaj in order are C, Dm, Em, F, G, Am, Bdim. How is the third scale degree form in a major triad here? What am I missing? 2001:16B8:49FD:C00:7494:5666:AC3A:425E (talk) 12:03, 16 March 2022 (UTC)
The lead mentions that there are three scales classified as "minor scales": natural, harmonic and melodic. It doesn't mention the dorian mode, which is the default minor scale in jazz and other forms of popular music.
In my opinion the current order of the lead should be reversed. It should start with the definition that is currently the last line "A minor scale is a heptatonic scale in which the first, third and fifth scale degrees form a minor triad". This is the most general definition that everybody can agree on. Then it should say something like "In classical music, minor scale usually refers to three scale patterns: [...] In jazz, minor scale if unqualified commonly refers to the dorian minor." --Alextgordon (talk) 10:20, 20 June 2022 (UTC)
I don't mean to be rude (ironic, maybe) but the introductory paragraph of this article is a virtuoso performance in the Art of Explaining Things Really Badly. Nothing in it has any resemblance to a definition — definition being defined, according to Wikipedia, as "a statement of the meaning of a term (a word, phrase, or other set of symbols)". Of course, there's no point in writing an article that only people already familiar with the topic can even start to understand what is writen, right? 148.69.193.46 (talk) 21:26, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
These scales would be the same as the harmonic and melodic minor scales, but with the second degree flattened, hence why they are called harmonic and melodic Phrygian, and Phrygian is the same as natural minor but with a flattened second degree. These scales, starting on E, are:
Here are the modes of these scales:
Modes of Harmonic Phrygian:
Modes of Melodic Phrygian:
2601:C6:D200:E9B0:719C:B277:6D03:BE90 (talk) 01:46, 14 August 2024 (UTC)