theoretical blues conflict

Theoretical blues conflict, what are we some kind of purists here? Well, to a certain extent as theorists we are purists, as so much of what we do in American music comes from the traditions of European music and equal temperament. So what do these traditions imply? Well, for the most part that in the music created in these European traditions, the relationship between the melody and the harmony are oftentimes very close, meaning that the groups of pitches to create our melody lines contain the same pitches we use to create our chords.

This tradition of a diatonic approach to creating music has created a huge library of music, which spans almost 500 years or so, and includes everyone from J.S. Bach to Duke Ellington, and continues on today to yield new and exciting combinations of colors. As the new European styles emerged, this tradition evolved whereby the "rules" to create one style were gradually "broken" to accommodate new forms of expression as the European civilizations evolved, often causing quite a stir in the academic worlds in which it was created. But like most innovations, if it works and people dig it, the new way of doing things gradually becomes a part of the common practice of what the players do every day, regardless of the existing theoretical rules it may have bent.

So where is the conflict? In most of the American styles and musical traditions, we can oftentimes hear the sounding of the variably tuned blue notes, which by their very nature are outside of the "well tuned" harmonic traditions of equal temper in which we often find them. Common practice among blues players is to combine chords created originating from the European equal temperament system with melodies created from the American blues scale. Easy enough right? Well, the theoretical conflict is basically in that in blues music, we don't have all of the pitches in the blues scale to create the myriad of different blues chords we love to use. So what? That's what Miles said, I think ... anyway ...

Well, nine times out of ten in the blues music we create in the major tonality, there is no major third in the traditional blues scale, so how can we theoretically create major triads to support our blue lines? Confused? Is this a big deal? No, not really, but as a lover of music theory I have a certain need to get things to balance out, follow certain guidelines, kinda like a place for everything and everything in its place? And as a writer of music theory texts, a sense of responsibility to make the reader aware of this dynamic and unique situation. So what do we as players do about it? In common practice, simply enjoy the best of both worlds, just play the lines with the variably tuned blue notes we hear over the in tune chords we create to support them. Again the idea of common practice prevails, this combination of potentially disparately tuned tonal elements is part of what makes the blues the blues. Cool with this?

Is knowledge of this pitch conflict important to your music? Of course each of us must decide for ourselves eh ...? And acoustic piano players must deal with this in a different way than adjustable pitch instruments, but for the most part, knowing that the conflict exists just might be helpful in fine tuning one's ability to hear the pitches, then adjust them to "max the blue milk" so to speak. Blue milk? Got milk? Just kidding ... anyway, the idea here is that there is more to the blue notes than just pushing the instrument button and that knowledge of the "conflict" might encourage a player to explore pitch variance a bit more aggressively, that is once they are cool with the basic blue note sounds and where they sit in the mix etc. When we listen to the vocal cats who really do this blues thing well, say James Brown, their pitch range is from is near perfect intonation to rather off key so to speak. Is it in the of key swell up to the target pitch or the shake or vibrato after it is struck that oftentimes adds that extra element of blueness? By my way of hearing things yes. So, just so ya know that it exists, that maybe the idea of a blues conflict will help ya to hear it and thus begin to dig deeper into the blue notes as they sit atop the in tune equal temper harmony. Cool?

Solutions to this conflict? Is one way to begin to theoretically solve this "problem" to have a minor blues scale and a major blues scale? But what about the other chords we love to use, can they be created from the major blues scale? Well no not really, but that depends on what pitches we choose to include eh? Can't we borrow pitches from other keys, scales and chords? Absolutely, some folks refer to this borrowing of pitches as modulation or chord substitution, even  "anything from anywhere" ... ? Yep.

So, is this theoretical blues conflict discussion more about "food for thought" for the artist than trying to fix the music? Absolutely. But knowing of the theoretical traditions from which the music is created might open up some new doors of artistic direction and to simply bring forth the idea to not let the theory get in the way we write or play our blues. Easy enough eh? Just so ya know.

Everbody is ignorant, only on different subjects.

Will Rogers