Welcome to one of the most active flamenco sites on the Internet. Guests can read most posts but if you want to participate click here to register.
This site is dedicated to the memory of Paco de Lucía, Ron Mitchell, Guy Williams, Linda Elvira, Philip John Lee, Craig Eros, Ben Woods, David Serva and Tom Blackshear who went ahead of us.
We receive 12,200 visitors a month from 200 countries and 1.7 million page impressions a year. To advertise on this site please contact us.
hello everyone, i have noticed that there are some people here who play flamenco guitar, but also know music theory. it makes sense, because im sure a lot of the players here have backgrounds in other music
i love music theory, and always have preferred to read it over novels and such, so i know a little bit about it, and have always used it to drive y creativity and help my understanding of music
since i started learning about flamenco guitar, i have not worried so much with theory, I just watch and listen very carefully in lessons, and ask lots of questions, then i spend a lot of time listening to flamenco music and trying to hear the dynamics, im listening for where contra is used, being very aware of what is happening
i wanted to ask if the pro's here would recommend me also taking a theory approach when im at home. im not sure if it is something that i should be doing
for example, if i harmonise modo dorico with A as the root note, would the scale tone chords be the cocrrect choices for a bulerias in A? or did the early flamenco players take different approaches than what i would be used to
i hope that question made sensse, i find it difficult to be clear and concise when i am typing instead of talking
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
No the Phrygian mode is what gets used more. Start from A in the Key of F major. Add C#'s, (land leave the C naturals too), F#'s, D#'s, A#'s and B natural's too... just use those other tones in an "ornamental" fashion.
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to JasonMcGuire)
thank you jason, i am sort of familiar with playing phrygian mode, and i will explore those other tones, in context
quote:
Sorry, I don't know the terms in Spanish....
thats fine :) up until recently i would have called modo dorico "phyrgian dominant"
quote:
Yeah, it's confusing; in Spanish (at least when referring to flamenco), phrygian mode is called 'modo dorico'. Don't ask me how that happened.
i believe that modo dorico is based on teh phygian dominant of harmonic minor, as apposed to phrygian mode, which is based on major, this stuff is a little fuzzy to me though
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
hi A phygian is A Bb C D E F G A A phygian [Dominant] would be A Bb C# D E F G A the term 'phygian' generally means a 'scale' with a b2nd the first is minor [derived from a western major scale] the second is Major [with a dominant 7th] [derived from a western harmonic minor scale] The second outlines the harmony in a Bulerias starting on a A7 type chord [with a diminished 2nd] Both ARE phygian. But put in those G#'s or D#!!!! or anything else! Forward motion!!!
The term 'Modo Dorico' comes from the assumption that the diatonic 'dorian' Mode was considered [in ancient times] the Tonic of the modes, Unlike the church 'modal' system that starts on the major scale. but none of us were around to witness any of this!! Hence the the Dorian mode of old is the phygian mode of today. hope that makes sense...my head is hurting now!!
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
The Levine book is an excellent read with many practical applications to music, harmony and melody. Also Mick Goodrick's book [Berkley faculty] 'the advancing guitarist" is a great way to put head and hands together....
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to Ram87)
thanks guys,
that makes much more sense then the way i tried to describe it, and i also appreciate teh references, i will really enjoy reading that. I want to know as much of the history of flammenco as possible, and i have found that the theory behind the music is the hardest information on the topic to find
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
quote:
i have found that the theory behind the music is the hardest information on the topic to find
...because there's no theory behind it. 'Theory' comes afterwards (if at all) when people attempt to explain it or, as is often the case here, communicate with each other about it.
Posts: 15725
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to Guest)
quote:
A modified theory of Tonality works much better to describe flamenco
yes that is right. Because the guitar is not a modal instrument like the greeks would use say, it is not appropriate to use greek modal theory to apply to flamenco. The guitar is a tonal instrument being used to accompanying singing that is kind of a mix of modal and tonal concepts. Something like martinete or siguiriyas can be thought of as more a "modal" type song, where you dont' need much more than a drone to harmonize the singer. Vs Fandangos which modulates to major and uses tonal V-I type progressions.
For marduk, I say don't worry so much about music theory just yet. Work on compas and techniques for playing, and traditional falsetas and chord patterns. A chord scale won't help, because you need to think more about the clever voicings that flamenco players use, which are mostly unique to this style. (interesting extensions and inversions result from simply allowing open strings to ring for example).
So start developing a flamenco "vocabulary" first, and later you can apply or anylize using tonal harmony theory concepts.
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to Ricardo)
thank you Ricardo.
i have been running through the chords Jason M suggested ffor my bulerias attempt. it has been pointed out to me before about the use of lots of open strings,
i have plenty to keep me busy. i just love reading music theory (good way to take a break from practice without losing the mood to practice)
Posts: 15725
Joined: Dec. 14 2004
From: Washington DC
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
quote:
ORIGINAL: marduk
thank you Ricardo.
i have been running through the chords Jason M suggested ffor my bulerias attempt. it has been pointed out to me before about the use of lots of open strings,
i have plenty to keep me busy. i just love reading music theory (good way to take a break from practice without losing the mood to practice)
Oh in that case have "fun" reading this thread....one of the worst.
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
It's important to know all the notes in the diatonic scale relative to the key you're playing in. For example, when you're playing toque de Levante (F sharp tonic, for tarantas, etc.) the underlying diatonic scale is D major, B minor or whatever you want to call it (F sharp phrygian). But you probably already know that much. It's also useful and interesting to transpose to other keys, especially the chords used in all the fandango-based styles (fandango, malagueña, granaína, taranta, minera, etc.) But that's not really music theory.
I agree with Ricardo's advice. I would say just keep an eye on the notes of the underlying diatonic scale, the major third in the tonic, and the implications of using seventh chords (G7 and D7 in toque de Levante, for example).
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to Estevan)
quote:
'Theory' comes afterwards (if at all) when people attempt to explain it or, as is often the case here, communicate with each other about it.
Bravo! The Roman arch and the Roman road were developed long before Civil Engineering. The Wright Brothers (who were bicycle mechanics) flew before Aeronatuical Engineering was 'invented.'
Enjoy your playing, and yes the academic stuff can also be fun.
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to Alatriste)
quote:
ORIGINAL: Alatriste
quote:
'Theory' comes afterwards (if at all) when people attempt to explain it or, as is often the case here, communicate with each other about it.
Bravo! The Roman arch and the Roman road were developed long before Civil Engineering. The Wright Brothers (who were bicycle mechanics) flew before Aeronatuical Engineering was 'invented.'
Im sure the wright brothers will have made up their minds and maths about aerodynamics, before putting a "flight machine" together. In fact there are theories (in science at least) that you can theoretically deduct, but practically cant test in experiments yet, because you dont have the means to it. I have read that some of Einsteins theses could been proved DECADES after they were published. If anything, your examples actually show that you can get much further with than without theory but yeah, theory is not a must in music.
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to hobersmith)
quote:
ORIGINAL: hobersmith In time theory will come by itself in the form of a personalized view on things.
Absolutely. I call it the "felt knowledge" because, for example, you dont need to know that the chord is a Bb or C chord and functions as this or that harmonic device to capture the meaning of it in the song. You can simply "feel" it.
RE: question - theory and flamenco (in reply to marduk)
You guys all forget that everyone is different, so everyone learns, performs, assibilates and digests ideas and theories differently.
I am a brain person. If my brain can't digest it, forget my fingers or my ears doing anything with it. Without theory I'd be lost.
That however is the exact opposite where composition is involved. Because composition (as opossed to improvisation and melody) is more "broad strokes" I'm much more apt to just throw something out that works.
I see this constantly on this site, the idea that one method will and should work for everyone. That's rarely the case.
Printable Version
but yeah, theory is not a must in music. 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread