How does the blues scale really work?
If you try to find out more about the blues scale on the Internet, you will find contradictory explanations.
There is also talk of minor blues scales and major blues scales, but isn't it the case that in the blues we can have a coexistence of major and minor or even a major/minor neutrality?
Starting from a minor pentatonic scale such as ACDEGA, in blues on the piano the major third C# is often played alongside the minor third C, so that we get the following scale: AC/C# DEG A.
But isn't this first blue note actually a neutral third between the minor third of C and the major third of C#, which is possible on the guitar by pulling the string, but not on the piano? On the keyboard, you could use the pitch wheel to pull out a note like on the guitar.
Isn't it exactly the same with the seventh? Isn't there also a blue note between the minor seventh G and the major seventh G#, so that we now get the following scale: AC/C# DEG/G# A.
If we now also add the tritone as a blue note, which of course also works on the piano, do we then get the complete blues scale with AC/C# D Eb EG/G# A?
Am I seeing this correctly or not? What do you think?
(5 votes)
Loading...
Right. Moll blueston conductors and dur blueston conductors basically do not mean them because they are moll or thirs, but because they have the foundation of the Moll-Pentatonik/Dur-Pentatonik.
It is only played on the piano as it is not really possible to achieve a free intonation, as on string or brass instruments. The second sound is to imitate a blue note, which is a really bad imitation. However, you can also tune your piano arbitrarily and play Blue Notes with different impact strengths as well as different pedal techniques. Only this is very complicated on a real piano.
This is also a variant. The blueston ladder is varied, so maybe your feeling would be contradictory.
I’d say, but basically you’re seeing it right.
Your thoughts are right! A generally overlooked problem – especially in the piano – is the equally heated mood, since the ancestors are totally wrong anyway. Also valid for normal tuned guitars. Here you can occasionally help by diverting the string, so the tone becomes higher, of course you can’t humiliate it.
Geiger gave it better, they can move freely on the tone scale.
Equally-level mood is not per se a problem, nor wrong. It is the most proven solution so that we can jump anywhere between the tones. If you want to change, you can decide at any time and play outside this mood.
Equatorial mood is already a problem! But you could talk about it for a long time. The fact is, for example, that strings prefer to play quartet and not piano trio. In the former, they can play pure, in the latter they must necessarily be oriented towards the piano and the “wrong” terzens.
And with the urging on the keyboard instruments, it’s not so easy, because you have to change them all the time.
Here I agree with everything. However, I still have to say that the blues feeling on a piano is not established because free intonation is not as flexible as on strings or wind instruments. The missing blues feeling is not due to the mood, but rather to the construction of a piano. You can also tell yourself that even with an adjusted mood, no real blues feeling would arise. But yes, with a different mood you would at least approach.
Okay! Personally, I am at least on non-smoothly heated moods, at least on embalis and hammer wings. You just have to choose the appropriate tempering and then you can’t use certain tones. (This also plays a role in the occasional tonal characteristic.)
But – I think – the typical blues feeling doesn’t really get involved with the piano, and I think this is due to the mood.
dispute is neither in my interest; There is also no reason from my side. What you say is also true to the greatest extent. Except:
I know several people who went through this view. Only she is a mistake, because the same-level mood was simple and simple preferably. There has been no misfortune, no real problem has arisen. For whom? Uniform mood and pure mood have different sound character, one is not better or worse than the other. Dissonances are nothing wrong, and many works that are specially designed for the uniform mood would sound terrifying in pure mood.
Of course, it is right that a purer sound is lost, but that is no longer bad or a problem, and it is also not extraordinarily complicated to tune his instrument if you want to play in pure mood. Musicians are open all doors, they are not restricted at all, at most if you don’t know.
We humans had the choice between either or, have agreed, and everyone is free to continue to choose either or personally.
I want to argue with no one. Only so much: there are intervals due to a physical nature law. Pure (natural) intervals are pure. Equatorial (or rectangle) tempered terzenes float very strongly.
In folk music there is (due to the natural musical sense of people) for example very strongly the tendency to pure intervals. Temperature-controlled intervals have only occurred when one has built instruments (key instruments) whose tones can be predetermined and can be changed easily (organs, piano instruments). Tempered moods with impure intervals) are always a – notged – compromise.
That’s not the fact. This is individual. It depends on the context and the musical intentions. Uniform mood and pure mood are by far not the only mood systems, and all have their own advantages and disadvantages, which vary according to subjective feeling.
If she’s a problem, then certainly not because of the previously quoted.
So I haven’t heard about the note between C and C#… but that one takes the Pentatonik and grabs the Tritonus as far as I know
I could imagine, however, if you play the small and big terz together/in short, you can also approach a piano of the “neutral terz”… or you just play both sounds to create a compromise
Yes, I also think that piano players make it so or so similar as you say.
As I said, the Blue Note between Mollterz and Durterz works on the guitar but of course not on the piano.