Talk:Phrygian mode
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] F# minor being Phrygian (True or false??)
This article says F# minor is Phrygian, but what does this mean?? Of course, it it makes sense that the F# Phrygian mode is a mode of the D Major scale, namely, F#-G-A-B-C#-D-E. True or false; this is what the sentence means. 66.245.117.183 19:03, 2 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- "Additionally F# minor is sometimes referred to as Phrygian."
- I removed the sentence. Hyacinth 00:20, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
[edit] Removed
- "Interestingly, a note is in the Phrygian mode of a given tone if and only if the given tone is in the major scale of the note being mentioned first."
I removed the above sentence because far from being interesting the observation is self-evident. If you define the Phrygian mode as the major scale, then of course only pitches in the major scale will be in the Phrygian mode. Hyacinth 00:18, 14 Sep 2004 (UTC)
I dont understand this sentence. "Confusingly, the Phrygian mode is the same as the mediaeval and modern Dorian mode." If this is true then why does dorian mode of c major start on "D" and the phrygian in c start on "E"--Esmason 02:04, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
- The sentence says that what the ancient Greeks called Phrygian mode is exactly the same as the mediaeval and modern mode called the Dorian mode. All that happened was that the meaning of the names was misinterpreted in mediaeval times. This mode consists of the intervals tstttst, whereas the major mode is ttsttts (where a t is a tone, s is a semitone). Therfore,
- C major is C D E F G a b c
- Greek Phrygian in C is C D Eb F G a bb c
- Mediaeval/modern Dorian in C is C D Eb F G a bb c (same as above)
- Greek Dorian in C is C Db Eb F G ab bb c
- Mediaeval/modern Phrygian in C is C Db Eb F G ab bb c (same as above)
- D major is D E F# G a b c# d
- Greek Phrygian in D is D E F G a b c d
- Mediaeval/modern Dorian in D is D E F G a b c d (same as above)
- Greek Dorian in D is D Eb F G a bb c d
- Mediaeval/modern Phrygian in D is D Eb F G a bb c d (same as above)
- E major is E F# G# a b c# d# e
- Greek Phrygian in E is E F# G a b c# d e
- Mediaeval/modern Dorian in E is E F# G a b c# d e (same as above)
- Greek Dorian in E is E F G a b c d e
- Mediaeval/modern Phrygian in E is E F G a b c d e (same as above)
- I hope that makes it a little more clear. --Gareth Hughes 16:07, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Too clear cut?
I've been fascinated by Ancient Greek music theory and have been studying it for a little while, and I'm worried that this description of the Ancient Greek concept of "Phrygian" (and indeed all of the modes) is far too clear-cut given the current understanding. From what source have you derived this description, is it Aristides Quintillianus? The Quintillianus explanation (sorry if I'm spelling that wrong) is highly suspect. Alypius, though certainly not without his problems as well, has a completely different and, at least for some, more definitive description of the Ancient Greek tonoi (which may not even translate comfortably as mode at all) which seems to place the concept somewhere closer to the modern-day idea of key.
I certainly wouldn't suggest ommitting the description currently in the article, but I would suggest giving the source of this description more obviously and adding some alternate understandings of the Greek concept of tonoi. For instance, the description of a "phrygian tetrachord" in the article is very strange. It implies that there were different tetrachords for each mode, but that seems highly unlikely to be the case. Although just plain "tetrachord" was undoubtedly of massive importance to Ancient Greek music theory, it does not appear to have any bearing on modal or tonoi considerations. The only types of tetrachord I'm aware of in Ancient Greek thinking are diatonic, chromatic, and enharmonic; which are often considered to ROUGHLY represent W-H-W (e.g. D-E-F-G), H-H-m3 (e.g. D-Eb-E-G), and 1/4-1/4-M3 (e.g. D-Dquarter# -Eb-G) respectively. Only the relative choice of tetrachords within the Greater Perfect System seem to have had any bearing on mode or tonoi.
I guess this is just a long-winded request for more information/source-citing. I haven't changed the article because I'm new here and am still trying to get my mind around the basic protocols.
--P4limpsest
[edit] Project for Mode Articles: Standardization and Consolidation
The mode articles are a mess when taken together. The articles need to be standardized and some of the general information consolidated into the Musical mode article and removed from all the articles about specific modes.
a few specific propositions:
corresponding information
- I think all the mode articles should have corresponding information in corresponding sections. For example, the intervals that define the mode should be given at say, somewhere near the top of the article in a section called "intervals" or something (whatever, as long as its standard for all articles and maximally descriptive). Also things like if the scale is "symmetric" or "asymmetiric" or whether its a "minor" or "major" scale should be all in one place (perhaps a table would be best for these things).
Information about modes in general
- All information that is about modes in general (i.e. applies to all modes) should be moved to the Musical mode article, and not mentioned in the articles about specific modes (all articles should of course be linked to the general Musical mode article). Information about idiosyncratic properties of the modes then will be easier to find that way, and there will be no confused and redundant info (sorta like this paragraph).
Greek vs. modern terminology confusion'
- Information about the confusion between the greek and modern terminology should stay in the Musical mode article, with a note at the top of each article--out of the main body--highlighting the terminology confusion (to eschew obfuscation). Perhaps there should be serperate disambiguable articles for the greek modes e.g. a article for Ionian (Greek Mode) and Ionian (Gregorian Mode).
avoiding articl style divergence with later editors not privy to the standardization project
- As time passes, people who don't know about the effort to standardize the article no doubt will add information to the article in their own style, perhaps causing the articles to diverge in style over time. To avoid this, we can make a template to go at the top of each talk page that tells editors to keep in mind the style standardization (perhaps a project page--"metawiki pages" I think they are called--with a template and style explanation). Although this may not be that much of a problem, if the style is obvious and is suffieciently elegant to begin with.
Am I getting across the idea here? What do you guys think about such a project? I know there is a way to set up a wikiproject for this sort of thing, but I've never done it before. I'll look into how to do it. Any other ideas on how to make the articles fit better together? Any objections or improvements to the above suggestions? Brentt 09:28, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
- PS please respond and discuss at the Musical mode talk page
