Welcome to Gaia! ::

So I've been going about the internets looking for some websites to learn some music theory off of(Guitar Theory, to be more specific). It's actually very helpfull, as I've learned a lot just in the last 24 hours, but I realized that a lot of what they showed was limited, as it only explained the Ionian scales and the tone-tone-semitone pattern that they were made up of.

For example, it explained the concept of Tone and Semitone. To put it in my own words, I would say this:

Tone: The Movement from one note to another without the use of accidentals. For example, From A to B, or B to C#(C being the accidental, as there is no B# or Cb) or from A# to C(B being the accidental as there is no Cb or B#)

Semitone: The movement from one note to it's accidental. For example, from A to A#, or B to C(Since there is no B# or Cb) or from A# to B.

That's my understanding of the terms, as it fits in the way it explained the Ionian scale to me: Tone, Tone, Semitone: CDEFGABC

It also explained the concept behind the Aeolian(Minor) scale as well, which was a tone-semitone-tone concept: CDD#FGAA#C. I thought I understood this quite.

Now the way they explained it to me(Or rather, what I read) was with the use of a stave. The first 4 notes within the scale are made up of the tone-tone-semitone pattern, assuming we're using the Ionian scale. The four notes above it mimic the bottom 4. Meaning that whatever pattern the bottom 4 notes take, whether it be tone-tone-tone, semitone-tone-semitone, tone-semitone-tone, etc. etc, the top 4 must be the same. This made sense to me as well since the pattern remained constant.

However I took a look at the Mixolydian scale and realized this: This does not apply at all. The first four notes went in a tone-tone-semitone pattern. However, the last 4 went in a tone-semitone-tone pattern. This blew my entire focus of what I had just learned out of perspective. After analyzing it for a long while(And probably nuking* it the entire time) I remembered something I learned a while ago about the Lydian scale: It is the same as the Ionian scale, except for the fourth note is raised.

Meaning that the Ionion scale is CDEFGABC, the Lydian scale is CDEF#GABC.

Then I went back and rethink-ed it all: The Mixolydian scale is the same as the Ionian scale, except it has a lowered 7th. Meaning the Ionian is CDEFGABC, the Mixolydian scale is CDEFGAA#C

So I want to know what all of your take is on all of this: Is the idea of a tone-tone-semitone credible? Or should I put more focus in what the pattern of the scale is at the key of C and use that pattern to move it to different keys?

To clarify:

Using the Tone-tone-semitone pattern of the Ionian scale:
C Major: CDEFGABC
D Major: DEF#GABC#D
E Major: EF#G#ABC#D#E

etc. etc.

Using the tone-tone-semitone-tone-semitone-tone pattern of the Mixolydian scale:

C Mixolydian: CDEFGAA#C
D Mixolydian: DEF#GABCD
E Mixolydian: EF#G#ABC#DE

etc. etc.

I noticed that this pattern always assumes that the note after the first 4 is always the same 'status' as the starting note. If you start with a sharp or a flat then the fifth note is going to be the same.

So what's all of your take on this?

Keep in mind:

Using the pattern of Tone-tone-semitone-tone-tone-semitone I can make the C Major scale string by string using the tone/semitone of the note as per position on the C Major in as follows:

e|-0-1-3-5-7-8-10-12 (EFGABCDE)
B|-0-1-3-5-6-8-10-12 (BCDEFGAB)
G|-0-2-4-5-7-9-10-12 (GABCDEFG)
D|-0-2-3-5-7-9-10-12 (DEFGABCD)
A|-0-2-3-5-7-8-10-12 (ABCDEFGA)
E|-0-1-3-5-7-8-10-12 (EFGABCDE)

I can also make the Mixolydian scale string by string as well using the tone-tone-semitone-tone-semitone-tone pattern:

e|0-1-3-5-6-8-10-12 (EFGAA#CDE)
B|1-3-5-6-8-10-11-13 (CDEFGAA#C)
G|0-2-3-5-7-9-10-12 (GAA#BCDEFG)
D|0-2-3-5-7-8-10-12 (DEFGAA#CD)
A|0-1-3-5-7-8-10-12 (AA#CDEFGA)
E|0-1-3-5-6-8-10-12 (EFGAA#CDE)

Highlighted in red = CDEFGAA#C

From what I understand E and B don't have sharps, hence the reason as to why they don't have sharps on a piano. Is that not correct?

I don't quite get what you're trying to explain, either. The Major scale is the Ionian. Either that or all of these published "Gig bag book of Guitar Scales" books are incorrect =x

But in the end, C# would turn out to be C#D#FF#G#A#CC# As the C#D#E#F#G#A#B#C# is not consistant with the progression of the Ionian scale. What you described would have a tone-tone-tone progression rather than the tone-tone-semitone progression that actually exists...

=p

All right, before I get into modes, I don't get the concept behind the B# and the E#. I get the idea behind the "Scale degree" and that each part of the scale, Tonic, Supertonic, Mediant, Subdominant, Dominant, Submediant and the Leading Tone each need to have their own respective identities, but no matter where you go on any instrument there is no individual sound for an E# or a B#, instead you get 'C' and 'F'.

Is it labeled A#B#C#D#E#F#G#A# simply to set it apart from the note prior to it? For instance, rather than calling it A#CC#, you write it down as A#B#C# to avoid using the "C" twice? That's what I'm not quite understanding at the moment...

So, just to clarify, Cb would be the same thing as B, and E# would be the same thing as F? And they are labeled As such simply to avoid confusion between notes such as C and C# within a scale?

Sorry if I sound redundant, I just want to be sure I know what I think I do.

All right, I get it. Thanks a lot.