Heya guys, I have a theory question that probably seems really dumb but I just can't figure it out.

So... if you know about modes and how they relate to the major scale, you'll know that the natural minor scale (characterised by the intervals WHWWHWW) commences from the sixth of the major scale (WWHWWWH). For instance, the usual example used to teach this (presumably because only whole notes are used) is that natural minor in 'A' is simply an inversion of the C major scale. It follows that there are 6 other modes like this for the major scale - the natural minor being 'Aeolian', and the major itself (commencing at '1', or the tonic) is 'Ionien'. Moreover, out of the 7 modes available for a major scale, 3 are major and 4 are minor (having a flat 3rd compared to the major scale they are derived from).

Now I can accept all this, but what really bugs me is where the natural part of the 'natural minor' (or aeolian) mode comes from. What makes A-aeolian more 'natural' than D-Dorian? Both are defined as being 'minor' modes, in the sense that they have flat thirds (in relation to the C-Major scale that they are derived from), but so far I've only managed to find a really loose explanation for determination of 'naturalness' via the web...

...apparently, some folks claim that natural minor is called 'natural' because it's key signature is not altered with respect to it's original major scale. And yet other folks claim it is natural because it contains no accidentals when compaired to it's original major scale. I believe these are one and the same definition. As far as I can tell, the use of C-Major as a starting black helps to visualise this effect because C-Major has no sharps/flats, NOR does it's derived A-(natural) minor. BUT....and this is when I start headbutting the wall...the same can be said for ANY mode (flat third or not) derived from a major scale - there is no change in sharpage or flattage.

So now I'm starting wonder whether the tonality of 'natural minor' was in fact 'invented'/'discovered' just as the major scale was, and then the introduction of modes brought them together. One clue I have for this theory is that one of the sites I dragged up called referred to the 'natural minor scale' as the 'ancient minor scale'. So, this may well be the case. What I'm trying to do know is found out why the Dorian mode (for example) wasn't discovered and named as the 'ancient minor scale'. There has to be something that sets Aeolian apart from all other minor modes, and gives it a unique association with the major scale.

I understand that an answer to this question has no effect on playing ability, or even the application of theory, but I'm just the sort of guy who likes to know why things are the way they are...so if any you guys know what the hell I'm talking about and can point me in the right direction then you will have prevented more sleepness nights (seriously! I'm such a muppet I know! )

First of all, it's just names and many names in music theory reflect a bias towards european classical music. From a jazz perspective, ascending melodic minor is much more natural! But anyway:

In C, an A minor chord can substitute for a C major chord (just look at the fretboard, they're practically the same chords and if you listen you'll hear they have about the same amount of tension, the 6 has very little pull towards the 1). You can play a melody based on Am over Cmaj and vice versa with no problem. Therefore, it's considered the relative minor. Dm is also a minor triad diatonic to the C major scale, but cannot be substituted for a C. In fact, Dm over C is called an upper structure triad since it gives you non-chord tones only: the 9,11 and 13. The II, Dm, is considered a substitution for the V (G), i.e. a secondary dominant which means it has a huge urge to resolve towards the 1. I suppose this explains why in the key of C, Am (aeolian) is the natural minor option.
[Edited 2/11/05 5:29am]

this might be the simplest answer of all, but I think they had to call it something and natural was a name or tag of some kind. If you look at the way it sounds, it sounds more natural than other modes so to speak.

<- me after trying to figure out what the heck hectim was on about. BUT I think I did in the end

I also posted my question on rec.music.theory, and it's as if I'd asked, "why is 'down', down, and 'up', up?" and then got a dozen different lectures on quantum mechanics

From what I can make out, it seems both you guys are right - natural differentiates it from harmonic and melodic minors, which both have additional accidentals. And I think the Aeolian became the model for minor keys because of how the tritone is resolved compared to the other minor modes i.e. interval between F and B in A-aeolian (Am) is less dissonant than that of D-Dorian.

Apparently it's all historical, and is all part of the story of how the major/minor keys evolved from modal music. But I'm still trying to study the answers from that newsgroup

Taureau said:

This was my guess. Cool! I haven't forgotten too much of my edgumacation.

VinaBlue said:

It's funny because my geetar prof teaches me some theory, and now I've just gone obsessed with it - I friggin' love it! I think it does naff-all for my playing at the mo' but I would like to get to the stage where I can join in one of those really pretentious open jazz jams without sounding accidentally like Sun Ra, and even read music (which I think is extra hard for geetars )

Taureau said:

I liked it when you said "sharpage or flattage".


I took a jazz improvisation class once and I was like, only playing the root note in each key. I mean, DAMN, they change keys every two measures!!! I ended up dropping the class.

Taureau said:

Sorry if I wasn't too clear.

See, as blues/rock-based funkateers we're used to treating scales based on the dominant (Mixolydian) and secondary dominant (dorian) as tonic scales. This is pretty far out, theoretically speaking but to us it's just logical. So to 'get' theory we need to learn to think from a major/ionian perspective. Relate everything to Cmajor7th (with a B, not a Bb!), and relate all the modes to the chords they're related to. So when thinkung theory, think of mixolydian as the scale that goes with G7 when the song is in C. (NOT as a cool bluesy scale you can use over a tonic G). That oughta help clear things up a little.

I believe I can best answer your question with a riddle. What do you get with you cross an Elephant and a Rhinoceros.

Elephino.

Glad I could help.

Hectim, I am a music grad and I don't like to go quite that deep in music theory terms. It can take the fun and spontenaity out of the jam. I think its great to know and understand theory but we have gotta balance it somehow.

Well, when I play I don't think of theory. (I DO visualise shapes on the guitar neck a lot) If I play F# over the F in a Cm-F-Bb, I don't give a rat's ass if that's because I'm using the altered scale, the diminished scale, a tritone substitution, a Fb9 arpeggio or side-slipping (I guess you could explain it all those ways). I just dig the SOUND of that note at that point. But if you're gonna learn theory, you gotta learn it all the way before you can forget it, right? Otherwise you'll end up with a narrow set of "rules". And I think from the banging-head-against-the-wall-part that our friend Taureau is past the point of no return.

Hectim, it would be a pleasure to be around such an accomplished and knowledgable musician. That is hard to find these days.

hectim said:

A lot of times, I'll play F# over the F in a Cm-F-Bb because I'm reaching for my beer and my left hand slipped. I call that "Jazz".

[Edited 2/17/05 19:16pm]

otan said:

Seriously, that's probably how these things came to be. I read once that Thelonious Monk was extremely interested in mistakes and often wouldn't correct the people in his band because he liked the mistakes. Then he'd find a way to make the mistake work and make it part of a song's harmony or melody.

talmuzic said:

hectim said:

Miles Davis did that too. I like his quote "Do not fear mistakes... There are none."