Piano Forum

Poll

Rate how much experience you have with the 24 major/minor scales/keys and their chords.

I'm a master at them. I eat neapolitans for breakfast in all inversions.
4 (28.6%)
I know all of them but haven't bothered with whether I'm using all the traditional ways of using them.
6 (42.9%)
I know a few that I'm comfortable with.
3 (21.4%)
If I know any of them, it is intuitively.
1 (7.1%)
I only know C major.
0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 14



International Piano Day 2024
Piano Day is an annual worldwide event that takes place on the 88th day of the year, which in 2024 is March 28. Established in 2015, it is now well known across the globe. Every year it provokes special concerts, onstage and online, as well as radio shows, podcasts, and playlists. Read more >>

Topic: How familiar are you with the 24 major/minor scales/keys and their chords?  (Read 3931 times)

Offline Derek

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1884
I thought this question could potentially be a useful self-evaluation for many of us here, though according to style, using traditional major and minor scales may not be desired. I know for me personally I love a lot of music from the Romantic era and earlier, so learning the 24 keys was essential for me. My personal belief is no matter what style you are pursuing it is a useful skill to have and will give you a lot of power. If you do not already know all 24, pick a scale or two you are unfamiliar with and start improvising in them even if it feels difficult at first, you'll be surprised how quickly they enter your subconscious mind and you no longer have to think about them. Also, once you know them you can combine them to produce fascinating harmonies.

Offline m1469

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6638
I guess I would fall somewhere in the middle of the first two.  I'm not exactly a walking encyclopedia ... which is what I would like to be :).  I have certain theoretical understandings and I can play perhaps every mode of scale (in varying tempos, depending on the scale) with relative ease, but I am not *sure* at this point exactly which ones are my most insecure, for example, even though I know I know some of them less well than others.  And, most of the time, I am doing a mode in the circle of fifths, so if somebody asked me to play a random scale in a random mode (something fairly obscure, like ... Bb phrygian ... I don't know *exactly* what that is at the moment but could probably figure it out in a couple of moments after I stop typing this sentence  :P ... and I'd probably have to consider the fingering ... and I might not play it perfectly on the first try), I would probably have a trickier time doing that in an isolated way than if it were attached to a train of thinking.

I know my scales well enough to figure out the respective chords for each, and I probably have another layer of strictly theoretical understanding, but I'm sure I'd have to think on some of them for moments, depending on what it is.  

What I want though is to have it all clear as day in my mind, and in my body.  Right now there are foggy spots, and this is mainly scales in modes, triads, and 7th chords in basically root positions, though I 'get' inversions and could figure them out if asked, but some with much greater ease than others.  I would like to be eating them for breakfast though :).  I currently feel that this is a matter of a kind of understanding in principle, but then a matter of exploring them in various ways (and I 'get' that these can work together ... and that's exactly what I want!).  I do have it in my mind that I generally look for some kind of anchor in my explorations, as I have been under the impression that without some kind of thread to hold onto, I don't feel like I'll learn anything from the exploration ... even if there is much to be learned (which is why I currently like to learn/play modes in the circle of fifths ... but there is more being born of that, too).  However, very recently my views have ever so slightly changed on that.

I would like, for example, to be able to transpose any Bach's invention into any key for fun, including into modes and being able to do harmonic variations as a kind of improvisation, without losing the thread of the piece, and if I wanted, I would be able to end up in the original key at any time I pleased.  ;D  Perhaps that seems silly, but that's an example of how well I want to understand these things, and I actually feel that in my blood and bones.

Well, I am actually very passionate about these things and could type what feels like centuries of words, but I won't.  I guess you get a glimpse anyway :).
"The greatest thing in this world is not so much where we are, but in what direction we are moving"  ~Oliver Wendell Holmes

Offline Derek

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1884
I forgot about modes...I should have included that. I love to use modes sometimes that are not typically used in common practice music. For some reason I have a particular fondness for the lydian and dorian modes. Every so often I like to use the 7th degree mode...is that one locrian?

I guess the way I think about modes is, if you know the 24 major/minor scales, you automatically know the modes since you simply emphasize starting and stopping at various points in the scale to bring out the character of that mode.

Transposition is fun but I don't personally believe it is essential for creative improvisation.

*edit* and there's so much beyond that that hasn't been mentioned of course, pentatonics, octatonics, other weird modified versions of scales etc. etc.  What I've found is beyond a certain point, knowing exactly what all these are called is not really necessary, as they can be built from simpler building blocks of normal scales/chords, etc. A lot of them can be generated or found "on the fly" during improvisation. In fact, for that reason I wouldn't want to know more than the basic common practice era stuff because it is fun to surprise myself with something strange that I haven't played in exactly the same way before.

Offline littletune

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2501
Well I only know a few major scales (and chords) (C, G, D, A, E) (and a few others but just in theory) - what's the difference between keys and scales?  :-\  :-[ -  ...  but I'm not really thinking very much about them when I'm improvising (if you could call it that  :P ) ... cause I get confused  ::) I try to sometimes but...  :-\ I guess I should try thinking about the scales more...  :)

Offline Derek

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1884
I'm no music theorist, but my amateur view of the difference between keys and scales is that if you emphasize certain chords and chord progressions, you'll get a strong sense of a tonal centre and of "arriving home" or "departing". (this is my understanding of a "key") However, we're in the 21st century and this should be considered an option rather than a requirement for a modern creative improviser.  A "scale" on its own does not necessarily imply emphasis of any given chord, so you could avoid the traditional sounds of tonality while still using a familiar sounding scale.

Offline pankrpec

  • PS Silver Member
  • Jr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 72
Well, after reading the topic subject, I now know that there are 24 of them. And that's about it I'm afraid. I know I should study them a little more seriously, but I never get around to it. I always considered it somewhat useless, but seeing what was written here, I will try to convince myself to learn them.
All truths, not merely ideas, but truthful faces, truthful pictures or songs, are highly beautiful.

Offline ted

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3987
In the context of improvisation this is actually a much more complicated issue than it seems. Many thousands of people are very familiar with scales and chords of all sorts but do not actually do anything with them aside from knowing them and playing them in the same way all their lives. Thousands more people are very familiar with names and theories about chords and scales but spend a lifetime doing as little with them as the first group. Also, I have met several people who would have to answer in the first category and who cannot improvise at all.

My own view is that intimacy (which isn't the same as knowledge) with these things, abstract patterns, is at least partly necessary for improvisation in terms of forging a coherent personal vocabulary, but that  even copious knowledge of them is completely insufficient for that purpose.
"Mistakes are the portals of discovery." - James Joyce

Offline m1469

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6638
Ted, I appreciate your thoughts.  One thing that I get from your post is that you can know this stuff, but to be able to improvise is something slightly different, I guess.  I appreciate that.  I also understand why some people can say that it's "not necessary" to some respect, but what I say is that in my core, it's necessary for me.  Not necessarily just to become a better improvisor, though I can't imagine that to have an intimate knowledge of these things would actually hurt my improvising abilities.

Now, I have roughly 25 minutes to try to put something into words that I don't even know if I ever should.  Something that I have been "working" with is the idea of Oneness in my playing.  It's easy to believe there are all of these separate elements going on and all of this different stuff a person needs to know, and that playing is some kind of juggling act.  Well, I've been in there and I don't know that for sure some sense of that ever stops.  However, what I am just ever so slightly beginning to glimpse is that there is, in fact, one principle taking place and that the origin and expression are all one idea.

I believe that harmony is written in our hearts.  Actually, I believe that there is a kind of principle to harmony which our very human hearts represent; our core.  To me, the core of music are within principle and, ultimately, the act of making music is a kind of reflection of this principle.  Ultimately, it's more or less one and the same.  I think that what appears to be development in our experience is rather a clarifying of this oneness, and that the best music a person could ever make is when the individual involved in making it is not just some human smarty or musically inclined, or whatever (not to knock those things), but rather some kind of perfect window to universal harmony  :).  Hmmmm ... mere lispings.

The reason I must play is because it is the only way to express this, which exists within motion.  I want to know these things in motion.
"The greatest thing in this world is not so much where we are, but in what direction we are moving"  ~Oliver Wendell Holmes

Offline ted

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3987
Yes, I have to be careful not to generalise too much about harmony because in comparison to the vastness of rhythm, it is something of a speck on my musical landscape. Harmony doesn't move me as profoundly as rhythm. That's just the way my brain is made I suppose. I do get pleasure from absorbing discrete combinations of notes and at least at the intuitive level I'm probably not quite as dense as I think I am. Nonetheless, for me, harmony forms a sort of surface colouring of underlying phrase and rhythm. The peculiar thing is that on the rare occasions I improvise live, people remark about liking my harmony. That's still a mystery because I certainly don't think about it.
"Mistakes are the portals of discovery." - James Joyce

Offline m1469

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6638
On the piano there are, in fact, 88 different characters.  That's how it was to me when I was young.  While I don't wish to stay a child in ability forever, there are certain aspects of what I knew then which seem important for me to deeply reconnect with and move forward.  And, there was a tone bank inside of me.  The piano served merely as a means of manifesting what was in my being, and by the time I was in adolescence, I could feel a harmony that I wanted while improvising and I could hear a melody, and my hands/fingers would start to know how to find it, even in motion (but sometimes I would hear/feel quarter tones in my being and never be able to find it).  By whatever it's called, that's what I want but on a much bigger scale.

If I hear in my head a resolution, I would like very much to be able to find that, you see?  And, not feel stuck with fishing around and not even necessarily being able to get the sound that I want.  There are, I guess, many ways to approach it and I want to approach it in more than one way.

But, yesterday I started to remember more clearly that sense of hearing something in my being and finding it on the piano.  For a long time I couldn't seem to hear it anymore, for some reason.  What I found yesterday is that I would play the starting pitch, and then I would listen to myself for what I wanted next, and so I would then try to find it on the piano (of course, I want to aim for finding it on the first try).  And, do you know what?  Melodies would just start to flood back to me.  This is how I used to know the keys, okay?  I had to because I played by ear and that was all I had.  But, the result is that when I looked at the piano, even just looked, it spoke and sang to me and called me to it because the keys and the instrument looked alive to me.

This morning I realized that of course I have a tone bank within me still, we all do.  I just want to know that again and I just want that to come first.
"The greatest thing in this world is not so much where we are, but in what direction we are moving"  ~Oliver Wendell Holmes

Offline rachfan

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3026
Hi Derek,

I can play all of the major and minor scales in parallel for four octaves ascending and descending, but not as a regular routine, as I get all my technique from practicing the repertoire.  I might play them every two weeks or so, and it only takes a few minutes at M = 100 or so.  Anyone can call out any key signature, and I can play the scale immediately. Different people choose different ways of playing scales, for example, playing through the circle of fifths; or all majors, then all minors; or by playing scales grouped by similar fingerings.  What I do specifically is to start with C, drop down to A, the relative minor, then down to F, then to D its relative minor, etc.  On another day, I'll do the same thing but in reverse starting with E minor, then up to G its relative major, and working my way upward until I stop at C going from minors to relative majors.  

For minor scales I play the harmonic minors, as they are slightly more difficult than the melodic mode and more prevalent in the piano literature.  If I want to play a melodic scale, it means changing only one note, no big deal.  I never bother with scales in contrary motion.

The practical value that I see in scales is that scalar passages occur in repertoire pieces. These can be complete or partial scales.  Almost always, if you already know how to play the scale in question, you can simply apply the same fingering in the passage work, thus it's convenient and a time saver. And if the scale is slightly altered, more often than not that same fingering will still work well.  I would add that I don't view knowing the scales as an end it itself; rather, scales are just one tool, although an important one, used in performance.  

As far as chords go, I can play the cadences in all keys and can play all first and second inversions, as well as all augmented and diminished chords.  I don't practice cadences, as I get all the chords I need in the repertoire.

I guess that's it.  :)
Interpreting music means exploring the promise of the potential of possibilities.

Offline 1piano4joe

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 418
It depends on your definition of familiar.  There are to my knowledge 15 major keys/scales and 45 minor scales (15 natural, 15 melodic and 15 harmonic) but only 15 minor keys. I am considerably more familiar with B major (5 sharps) than C flat major (7 flats).  Again, I am "comfortable" with G sharp minor (5 sharps) but A flat minor (7 flats) I would be less familiar with since many composers didn't write in it.  These of course play the same under your fingers but on paper look quite different.  Alfred has an excellent  book "The Complete Book of Scales, Chords, Arpeggios & Cadences" and for pieces Edna-Mae Burnam "Play With Ease in Many Keys" which strikes me as the easiest set of "Preludes" in all 30 keys.  And of course then there are the diminished scales and at least another 100 others.

Offline pianoplayjl

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2075
Depends on your definition of 'familiar' but I think I might be able to recognise half of them. I only use C-F-G chord progressions in my composition.
Funny? How? How am I funny?

Offline ajspiano

  • PS Silver Member
  • Sr. Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 3392
I certainly know them all inside out as scales and isolated chords.. and certain well practiced progressions (eg. ii-7 v7 iM7 or ii half dim. V7b9 i-M7) I can also competently play/improvise in any key but in saying that I certainly have stronger keys.

anyone care to add relevant passing notes? bebop scale anyone?

also the standard major/minor pentatonics, blues scale, harmonic vs melodic vs jazz minors.. diminished and whole tone scales..  pentatonic variations..

these are all equally relevant if you're going to really know your way around the instrument.
For more information about this topic, click search below!
 

Logo light pianostreet.com - the website for classical pianists, piano teachers, students and piano music enthusiasts.

Subscribe for unlimited access

Sign up

Follow us

Piano Street Digicert