I've learned how to write a blues scale in the RCM theory book. I can hear what it sounds like by playing it and I can listen to "the blues" to get a feel. But I don't think I really understand the scale. I suspect that it's based on chord progressions. Can someone help me make sense of this scale?

All I have at the moment is the way the notes go up from the tonic, starting with the tonic of course:
tonic, min 3, P4, dim 5 (or aug 4), P5, min 7.

I just looked at them again. A second way of seeing them is that after the minor third between the first two notes, the 4th, 5th, and 6th notes are all a semitone apart (it's almost like the 5th acts like a chromatic bridge between the two notes on either side, if there can be such an expression), then it jumps a minor third to the next note, and the last is a full tone apart to the tonic, like in a natural minor scale. Am starting to hear and see why it's "blue".

I hope this doesn't sound overly dogmatic, but way back when I had a similar question for my piano teacher.

I told him that I couldn't make sense of the blues scale. He responded, "that because it's not about the blues scale, it's about the blues." He then proceeded to assign to me memorization of ten blues heads (melodies) for the next week. I chose ten and worked on them all week long (melodies, hands parallel).

The next lesson, after demonstrating all ten to him, he said "that's great, now memorize ten more for next week." Midway through this second week, I started to understand where he was coming from.

It all comes from the fact that the blues scale was not invented before the blues were invented. It is more like someone extracted the blues scale out of the body of work known as the blues. Everything you actually need to know is stored in blues melodies and millions of blues solos. The blues scale is a mere representation (and a shallow one at that) of what is going on.

Another problem is that beginners get hung up on using the scale...but it is rarely used in scalar form (one classic example is the tune "Sonnymoon For Two", where you hear the minor pentatonic in descending form). Pianists, for example, get hung up on learning a fingering for the blues scale, but as far as I'm concerned that's next to useless. Those same pianists should be listening to the blues, and extracting licks and patterns and learning to finger those.

After the blues exercise with my teacher, he assigned me the task of transcribing Wynton Kelly's solo on "Freddie the Freeloader" from Miles Davis' Kind of Blue. The solo is a classic one, and fairly accessible for a novice transcriber (but expect to spend several hours the first time you transcribe something...subsequent attempts become much easier).

I was struck by something from Wynton Kelly's solo...blues licks (patterns) are all over the place, but the solo is by no means limited to the blues scale. He has patterns all over the place that fit the key he's in and the chord progression that he is playing over. Almost as if the blues patterns are merely flavoring added to his solo.

I hope some of this helps...

Do you have a non-classical teacher then? I'm trying to get the sense from all sides. I already have the understanding that piano is more chord-oriented, or there is a side that goes vertical, whereas I play mainly single-note instruments and so think melodically. I have thought of beginning to listen to the music itself. But I'm also wondering whether there is something chord-related in their structure, in order to get a more full picture.

What I don't like at the moment is this: The RCM has expanded what it teaches so that now there are blues scales, whole tone scales, etc., and I have memorized the patterns. There is no context and no meaning. Classical repertoire will not give me a sense of these scales. I know that jazz musicians follow chord progressions in the creation of their music. I barely have a sense of that, because I am so melodically minded.

What I found myself doing this morning was to sing the scale, and melodies began inventing themselves out of that scale. Whether they were blues - who knows.

Believe it or not, I actually discovered the blues scale independently on my own.

I'm a classically-trained pianist and decided at a later date to learn to improvise. I would play along with songs on the radio and records and just try to come up with an accompaniment.

I found that my first task was to determine what key the song was in. After fiddling around for a few weeks I discovered that some notes will sound better than others along with the music. Then I started to notice that these "good" notes were tracing out diatonically and that they tended to gravitate toward their tonic. From that I could (and still do) determine the key center.

Then as I started pairing up two-note chords that sounded good (or that I was copying) and riffing around one-handed, a funny scale emerged. It was just a set of notes that sounded good along with blues and seemed to define the blues structure. I learned what the scales were for the most common keys and found that I could literally fiddle around with these notes and chords and play along with blues-based music.

The notes were a mystery to me. It wasn't until I decided to study theory several years later that I found out about the "blues scale", which was identical to the scale I had discovered.

Perhaps approaching it like I did would help you understand a little better.

Don
Kansas City

Cool!

I would say the blues scale exists outside of our system of chord-scale relationships. It's not based on a theroetical construct like chord progressions. And you can use it almost anywhere, even if it is not consonant with the chord.

If you remove that middle chromatic note you mentioned (the "tritone") you are left with the minor pentatonic scale, one which occurs almost universally in indigenous and folk music around the world. The blues scale is, I believe, ultimately an attempt to imitate vocal phrasing.


Here's something interesting: Listen to a blues singer or instrumentalist (or even a rock guitar solo). Imitate the rhythm of one of thier phrases, and apply it to the blues scale. Don't worry about playing the same notes they did-- just put that rhythm to any old notes of the blues scale.

With all due respect, I am a bit shocked that only now would you think of actually listening to the music!

Listening is the ONLY way to learn how to play Blues...You have to get the music inside you...It is "caught" rather than taught.

As you listen, you can simultaneously learn the scales, chord patterns, etc, but unless you have internalized the music, you will not get far. What Guy suggested above about listening is right on.

I am a classically trained pianist who teaches both classical and blues, and plays professionally in a New Orleans originated blues band. I frequently have students who are basically in the position you are, so I hope this helps.

What you are struggling with is a common stumbling block for classically trained pianists...they always want the notes spelled out for them, whereas with the blues, the process is sort of the opposite...you internalize the music, then learn the notes that correspond, then you play it.

Unfortunately, most of the students I have taught the blues have not been successful in progressing beyond learning just the pieces we worked on. The reason is that they did not listen to the music, so they could not improvise...because improvisation is playing riffs, melodies, rhythms that you have already internalized.

None of my students was passionate enough about the music to study/listen enough so that they built an internal library of music from which to draw from. Thus, they became like a parrot, able to say a few words but not go beyond that.


Also, what style of blues do you want to play? What Guy suggested is more jazz-based. Nothing wrong with that, however, I suggest listening to it in its most primal form, by listening to "classical blues", i.e. early Chicago blues, Delta blues, etc. That way, you will hear melodies based upon the basic "blues scale", and the basic rhythms in a very primal form. It does not have to be piano...I play a lot of solos learned from guitarists and/or horn players.

Also, I always recommend that one go to the original source blues players, rather than second or third generation, to learn the music. If you wanted to learn to paint like Monet, and had a choice of studying under Monet, or under someone 3 generations away who paints like him, who would you choose?

Some suggestions:

Chicago Blues (usually has a piano in the ensemble):

Muddy Waters, Howling Wolf, early James Cotton, Little Walter, etc.

New Orleans music (usually more complex rhythmically): Fats Domino, Professor Longhair, Dr. John.

Boogie-Woogie: Albert Ammons, Pete Johnson, Sylvan Zingg, etc.

Early Roots Rock and Roll: Jerry Lee Lewis, Ike Turner, etc.

Jump Blues: Roomful of Blues, Big Joe Turner, etc.

Also, go to Youtube and find "Freakyhead" under boogie-woogie...he has about 20 lessons in blues and boogie-woogie, and is a fine player.

Good Luck!

If you are interested in learning via the path that I took, here is what you might do.

First, learn the blues scale for a common key, say C. Play around with it. Don't treat it as a scale going up and down in the same octave. Play the notes in all sorts of orders and over several octaves freely. Try to find some cool sounds. Don't play a melody, just imagine you're doing a Hammond B3 solo for Cream. Find some 2-note chords to mix in. Use grace notes and tremolos. Do this until you feel comfortable with the notes of this scale.

Now learn the scale for some other common keys, like E, A, G, D, Eb, Bb, etc. Don't read the scales from a chart; don't transpose them mentally or write them down. Start with the tonic and figure the notes out by ear. Then play with them just like you did in C. Fairly quickly you'll be able to jump from key to key easily. They all have a distinctive visual pattern on the keys.

Now turn on the radio. Find some blues-based music. Most rock from the Sixties and Seventies is loaded with it. Listen to the song and test out a few of your blues scales. If you're using the wrong key, it will sound terrible...go on to another key. When you find it you'll know it. Now jam with the song one-handed using the scale you found.

This should give you a feel for it.

Don
Kansas City

That's not quite fair, you know. I prepared for a theory exam, noticed that they had changed the book and stuck in four different kinds of scales and some other things. I rushed out, got the new edition, crammed, and wrote the exam. With the classical thrust of my lessons I will never see or smell a blues scale. I had two weeks to cram for all the new material. I could have left it at that. But I decided that I didn't want to just memorize a bunch of stuff that I could write out like a parrot - I wanted to understand it, so here I am asking.

Ok, I already have a sense of the scale. Most of my life I didn't know note names so I'm sort of solfege-based, and I can transpose a melody into any key by ear - ditto for this blues scale. I will indeed start listening to the music.

I guess that I was wondering whether the blues also has a kind of chord progression around it. I know absolutely nothing so I was stabbing around in the dark. I hate having this scale sitting in the back of my head like a mathematical formula. In fact, I wonder how many of the classical students doing the exam are in the same boat and simply won't bother. It has only been in the curriculum for one year. Up to then scales were: major, melodic and harmonic minor, melodic and harmonic chromatic. For some reson they dropped the harmonic chromatic. It was kind of fun, intellectually speaking.

Rocket88 is spot on (including the part that I am coming at this from more of a jazz angle)...

But I'm going to repeat something rocket88 said, just so it isn't missed. I believe this is the most important part of all:

If you want to play the blues, you'll have to internalize the blues. The best way to do that is with a good old-fashioned dose of listening (focused listening -- the kind that sticks). "You are what you eat" when it comes to internalization.

I'm not a big fan of memorizing patterns from books (I wasted some money on buying some blues pattern books -- what I found is that the patterns in the books don't sound particularly usable at all; that is, they don't sound much like what I hear on recordings). On the other hand, I've found that grabbing a few phrases off of a recording adds a huge dose of usable stuff in my playing "bag of tricks".

Keystring:

Sorry to offend you, but from your posts it appeared that you were trying to learn or understand blues music. You did not mention anything about this being for an exam.

I was just trying to answer your question:

Originally posted by keystring:
"But I don't think I really understand the scale. I suspect that it's based on chord progressions. Can someone help me make sense of this scale?"[/b]

Listening is the only way I know to make sense of the blues scale.

Regarding listening to the blues, you said this:

Originally posted by keystring:
"I have thought of beginning to listen to the music itself."[/b]

So when I said, respectfully, that I was a bit shocked that you hadn't actually listened to the music that you were trying to understand, I do not think I was being "not quite fair"!

I'm not offended, rocket 88. I just started off on the wrong foot, which isn't hard to do when you get into uncharted waters. I know that jazz is based heavily on chords, which is what allows people to navigate in their improvisations, so I thought blues must have the same kinds of underpinnings.

Anyway, I have these notes with rules about minor thirds and diminished fifths sitting here, and I can zip them off any time I want for the exam, and I even passed the exams - both of them - with a high grade. But I am not satisfied that I understand what I can write out so easily and that bothers me. Now that the hustle has died down I'm reviewing all that theory and making sure it also is meaningful. And there is that blues scale sitting in the middle of nowhere: 1 3 4 4 5 7 8 ... just numbers and a recognizable sound. I don't like leaving it at that.

I'm a beginning Blues pianist, but have been playing blues harmonica for a couple of decades. I agree with everything posted by rocket88.

What eromlignod has posted, I have just started after about 2 years but wouldn't recommend it to a novice pianist. It's absolutely wrong that blues instructional or pattern books/videos are a waste for the beginner. Bad ones are, though, and there are many of those.

The good ones --Tim Richards, Mark Harrison, Dave Limina, Pascal Simoni, (Davey and Poloney are the best for boogie-woogie), possibly Andrew Gordon-- show you patterns and cliches --the first two, Harrison less so, give you in depth theory and exercises.

Without the instruction books, you have to teach yourself to play by ear as well as[/b] learning the blues. It would be like refusing to buy a phrase book when beginning a language, because most of the phrases don't deal with situations you think you'll find yourself in. You still get vocabulary, you see the rules for verbs, questions and pronouns etc. Combine that with listening to the language and trying out your little phrases in context and you'll begin to learn. But it sure helps to know a few phrases before you jump in.

Personally, I've internalized blues changes, but all my harp licks are direct from brain to mouth, I don't know what notes or chords I'm playing, except now, in retrospect. So when I play a simple chorus whose chord structure I've seem written out [/b] , it's not such a big stretch to figure out what the improvs that I hear in my head --from years of listening and forming preferences--would look like on the keyboard.

The blues scale is only a part of blues piano. Sure, it's the basis of those lightning-fast slow blues runs, but you also need 6th, 7th and extended chords, Mixolydian scales and chords, and even minor chords and arpeggios.

My advice is get a good book --I recommend Tim Richards-- listen to all the names suggested (I'll add Ann Rabson of Uppity Blues Women, Marcia Ball and Pinetop Perkins) and you'll be on your way.

Rocket88, I'll take your last blank message to mean - stop talking, start listening. Okey doke.

No, I posted something that really wasn't completely on the subject, so I deleted it...no hidden message there...but, keep us posted on your quest for the blues.

It was an attempt at humor. I've left so many blanks myself.

keystring,
nice topic.
rockett88 and guy Rock! I play by ear and mostly blues, jazz and rock. One quick way of calling out a 'scale' for me is playing the major scale 2 half steps down against the key I'm playing. Ie> your playing in the key of C. Play a Bb scale against it. Use this same scale against the C F and G. Your scale does not follow the changes.
Another example: Tight Wire (Leon Russel), Dm, Gm, Bb, F, C, A (C#dim). Thru the chords until you hit the A (the turnaround chord) play Dm runs.
learn dif runs (by listening) then string them together. most blues I play has minor 7th scales (Bb major scale against the C), played against a Major progression. I think that is where some of the blues comes from.

3/7-Mugs Away Mission Viejo
3/14-Arcadia Blues
4/12-Coach House San Juan Capistrano (opening for Charlie Musselwhite)
If your local come check us out.
Or listen at: soundclick.com/thissideupblues

Keystone, if you are still interested here is the basic chord progression used in a 12 bar blues progression in G:

G7///|C7///|G7///|G7///|
C7///|C7///|G7///|G7///|
D7///|C7///|G7///|D7///| to loop or G7 to end.

Basic I7-IV7-V7 all dominant 7th chords.

Here is a piece on the evolution of the 12 bar blues progression:
http://www.bobbrozman.com/tip_evol12bar.html

Safe scale improv choices:
G Blues scale
G Major scale - Mixolydian is the only mode I'd try.
Then the pentatonic scale - Major or minor G C D over the parent chord. Keeping in mind that the Blues scale is just the minor pentatonic with a blue note added.

As mentioned earlier blues riffs, licks and runs play an important role in the blues.

Now from that evolution site I gave you looks like a basic G rhythm on the guitar came first. Now how that basic G (one chord)chord progression plays into which came first the progression or the scale I have to leave to others. How the progression has evolved I found interesting.

The call and response rhythm is necessary to capture the feel of the blues. So much so that I often place the lyrics under the notes and chords so I can get those pauses that are so important to maintain the blues feel.

Now this comes from a novice keyboard player, but an OK acoustic rhythm guitar player. For whatever that is worth.

Hope that helps.

Malcolm

Thanks, Malcom. I've filed it away in the "still another thing to explore and learn" file. I appreciate it. I hope to get the sound restored on this computer so that I can start listening to things.

Granted I don't really understand the whole RCM system, but I would have to say that I don't understand the wisdom of requiring (or presenting) a scale such as the blues scale, without really showing how it is used.

It is almost as if the RCM has presented the academic/musicologist view without really explaining that the scale is extracted from the blues. The point really shouldn't be that one needs to memorize or understand the blues scale, but rather one should learn the phrases that make up the idiom that makes up the blues.

I'll give a concrete example: years ago, I'm playing in a study group of novice players. One young high-schooler, playing flute, is heavily using the blues scale while soloing on "Watermelon Man". As far as I'm concerned, having a little taste isn't such a bad thing, but a steady diet of the blues scale is not very nourishing, so to speak. I mentioned to the kid that he should learn to get away from using the blues scale as a crutch. His retort was "but it sounds so good!".

Well, no. It doesn't. I think as one's ear matures, one can hear why. If not applied properly, there are inherent wrong notes in the blues scale (try emphasizing a C over a G7 chord, for example). (side note -- my mentor would actually say "there are no wrong notes, there are only poor choices", because in fact, you can make the C work over a G7 -- that why I said "if not applied properly").

No one ever said that every note of a scale has to be represented or sound well with the common chords of that key. Even in diatonic-C, an F doesn't sound well over a C-major triad. I don't get your point. By your thinking, all scales are useless as a tool for creating melodies.

You can't simply play any notes in a blues scale randomly along with blues music and sound well. I think you're mis-interpreting your friend.

Don
Kansas City

No, in fact I think you just did a better job of articulating something I didn't.

A blues scale isn't an end unto itself. You can't just play notes from the scale and expect it to sound good (just like the extension of your statement: you can't just take any notes from any scale and expect it to sound good in that particular key). The whole chord-scale style of improv wasn't meant to be that way.

That's why I don't understand the point behind the RCM teaching the blues scale -- if they want to teach the blues, that's fine, but if they just teach the blues scale and leave it at that, it's not really all that useful of an exercise. Knowing a blues scale (even in all keys) doesn't really get you any closer to playing the blues.

Maybe I didn't tell my story so well, but the flute-playing kid was just running the blues scale (and virtually nothing else), and emphasizing those notes (in his improv over Watermelon Man). It sounded like every other kid who is taught the blues scale without being taught how it is used.

Side note: Don -- I've seen your name around somewhere before, but I can't place you (the backwards spelling gives it away). May it have been in the old rec.music.bluenote?

I think teaching the blues scale is just as important as teaching the diatonic scale, as it applies to melody. It is a handy group of notes for each key from which to derive melodies, just like the diatonic scale for each key. They are, by all means, not the only notes you can use, but then neither are the notes of the diatonic scale (which is why we have accidentals).

And, as I posted before, I find the blues scale particularly useful for quickly finding the key of an unknown song by ear.

[I used to be a regular on r.m.m.p. a number of years ago (when it was worth visiting). I'm the inventor of the self-tuning piano. Perhaps that's how you remember me.]

Don
Kansas City

Well, the RCM just ahd a major overhaul, the first in decades I understand. They don't teach it - these are curriculum guidelines - and they test that knowledge in examination. The Barabara Wharram book was the basis of theory and it was published in 1969. It got overhauled 2 years ago, I guess.

Suddenly there were all these new scales: whole tone, blues, octatonic, learning to write out the modes (Phrygian etc.) instead of just knowing they exist: cluster chords, various kinds of sevenths. None of it was in the old book - I had the joy of discovering that two weeks before the exam since I had the old book. I gues that whoever revised it realized that the music stduents are exposed to does not reside only in the diatonic scale. I imagine that it is up to the individual teacher to decide how to mesh the theory with practical music.

Anyway, I was left with the fact taht I had crammed a bunch of material that I knew how to write out, without much of an idea about it otherwise, and that is not satisfactory.

That would be it -- I mostly lurked on usenet, but I would occasionally chime in with strong opinions on certain topics like memorization or ear training or transcription. And an occasional post on why I thought learning how to finger the blues scale is close to useless :-).

(I know everybody doesn't share my opinion...it would be no fun at all if everyone just sat around agreeing with each other.)

As long as I'm spouting, so to speak...

I've seen this now with both my kids (studying piano) and my older kid, who just started tenor sax. I've really given little in the way of preference to their teachers (both happen to be jazz players, and Berklee grads), and in fact, I was pretty excited for both teachers to introduce the concept of improvisation at fairly early stages. Less excited, however, that both have chosen the blues scale as the initial path (BTW, I've not said anything to either teacher about this -- I don't feel it's my place to micromanage lessons when they are teaching professionals).

Also in both cases, these teachers have presented it as a scale and mentioned that it would be worth practicing (demonstrating it monotonically up and down). Then both did "call and response" exercises with both kids. My older kid went as far as to write a 10-bar melody, not quite grasping the idea that the teacher was playing a bass line for a 12-bar form. My younger kid was just recently taught the scale, in D (to play over "So What"), but didn't really know how to practice the scale. After a few times listening to him just play the notes, with no real purpose, I gave in and showed him some simple patterns. "Here are some things you can do with it."

So, I guess what I'm trying to say is that while both have spent some time with the blues scale, they've really learned zero about the blues. And I keep going back to what my piano teacher said to me: "it's not about playing the blues scale, it's about playing the blues.".

Applying the blues scale properly has little to do with how the scale is usually presented, in my experience (and my opinion, of course). In some ways, it's just a convenience tool, albeit an imperfect one, that's a naming convention for a group of notes.