The Concept

I was reading kuro5hin this evening, and ran across an interesting article entitled “Tonal Gravity“. I’ll summarize here, but you might want to read it and the comments.

It points to a site promoting a book, George Russell’s Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organization. This is supposedly a “groundbreaking” perspective on “relating chords to scales”. Now, I’m quite interested in such things; if you visited my little Scalculator, you might suppose I know a thing about the mechanics behind chords and scales.

Anyway, I went to the site to check it the book. It turns out the thing runs $125, a little too high for me just to check it out on a whim. So, I read the FAQ, hoping to get an idea of what the “concept” is here:

5. Why is the Lydian Scale of paramount importance in this Concept?
The Lydian Scale was not chosen as the primary scale for this system of music theory because it sounds nice or has some subjective or historical significance. Since the interval of a fifth is the building block of tonal gravity, a seven-tone scale created by successive fifths establishes the most vertically unified harmonic order whereby the gravity falls down each fifth back to the singular Lydian tonic. When seven ascending consecutive fifths (i.e. – C, G, D, A, E, B, F#) are arranged within one single octave, the result is the Lydian Scale.

Here’s the thing, it is true that if you arrange those notes you get a Lydian scale (C Lydian), but since Lydian is a “church mode”, you also get the other modes. That is C Lydian contains the same notes as G Ionian (G Major), A Dorian, B Phrygian, and so on…

So, it’s a bit worrying that the FAQ here seems to make the Lydian out to sound like a special type of scale made up of fifths, when this is the case for all the “church modes”. In fact, the strength of fifths is already a very important concept in standard music theory.

Edited to add:
I’ve been thinking on this point, and think I now understand it. What they are trying to get across is that the Lydian scale meets the “all-fifths” requirement, and has the root note as the tonic. That is, A Dorian has the same notes a C Lydian, but doesn’t apply the same over a C chord, because of the differing tonic. There is some logic to this, that I didn’t pick up on the first reading.

Let’s look at another FAQ:

6. What is the fundamental difference between the Lydian and Major Scale?
As described in the answer to the previous question, the Lydian Scale has one single tonic, otherwise known as the “DO” of the scale. The Major Scale is known as a diatonic (meaning: two tonic) scale. Therefore, the essential difference between these two scales is that the Lydian (a single tonic scale) is in a state of unity with itself, and the Major Scale, with its two tonics, is in a state of resolving.

This is even more troubling because all the church modes, including Lydian, are diatonic. To give them the benefit of the doubt, I’ll assume they explain in the book some terminology different from standard use (or some strange temperment) or some such.

I know it’s not fair to judge what I’m sure is a serious effort based on two short FAQs, but I will say those two alone stopped me from seriously considering picking up the book. I’ve got to have a better explanation than that to kick out 125 bones.

4 Responses to The Concept »»


Comments

  1. Comment by Felix | 2005/07/13 at 06:56:25

    Hey, junior,
    Wise up. George Russell is one of the great musician-philosophers; his Lydian Concept was first published sometime in the 1950’s, and has had great influence on many generations. Miles Davis first used it on “Kind of Blue.” Do your homework before you start dissing people you should be aware of. Russell is a great composer and theoretician. with a ground breaking body of work. I discovered him 40 years ago, and have been into his stuff since then. Live and learn.

  2. Comment by Jason | 2005/07/14 at 17:26:58

    Wow. Defensive much?

    I am in the process of “doing my homework,” read my last paragraph again:

    I know it’s not fair to judge what I’m sure is a serious effort based on two short FAQs, but I will say those two alone stopped me from seriously considering picking up the book. I’ve got to have a better explanation than that to kick out 125 bones.

    I’m not not saying the Concept is garbage - I don’t know enough about it. I am saying the FAQ offered up on the site is not specific enough to convince me to invest $125 in the book - and there appears to be at least one factual error (the “diatonic” thingy), although I do leave open the possibility of some different terminology.

    This means I’ll have to search out other people’s opinions and begin to form my own. This is “doing my homework”, not “dissing” Russell, or anyone else - it means I was just exposed to a new concept (pun!) and am trying to gather more information about it. I read a story on a website and began to do reasearch - how is this not the correct action?

    Let’s just end this by noting your contribution was less helpful than it could have been. Instead of name-calling and insults, you could have used this as an opportunity to explain away my concerns or pointing to better resources. Instead, for your part, you have made it look like people that subscribe to the Concept are quasi-zealots incapable of rational discussion.

  3. Comment by Yamil | 2005/09/12 at 11:06:37

    Hey there, I’m from Argentina. I’m really-really keen on “The concept”

    Maybe we could communicate via e-mail and talk about it.
    Let me tell you, it’s almost imposible to come a cross a book like this over here, mainly because of the price… (here it would be around 300 bucks).. also… this publications do not reach Argentina.

    Heres my mail adress… yamil_violero@netcombbs.com.ar

    Good luck!

  4. Comment by Jason | 2005/09/13 at 21:05:07

    Yamil,

    Thanks for the comment!

    I don’t know anything about “The Concept” beyond what is on the web site and a few posts I’ve read in rec.music.theory.

    However, please feel free to email me (jason at this domain) if you would like to discuss it - although I’m afraid unless you are offering to explain it to me, there won’t be much to discuss!

    Peace,
    Jason


Leave a Reply »»