That phenomenon was explained to me this summer, pancelticpiper. It was, apparently, laziness on the part of the older players, who couldn’t be bothered to cross-finger a C nat. As the teacher, a top-class fluter said, “But we know better, dont we?”
Well, to me this is another demonstration of the sterility of attempting to fit everything in ITM into a mode mould. When you start poring over the way older tunes are played you encounter so many oddities that the mould has to break. To me, Irish tunes have their own aesthetic and conventions and the scales and inflections they use are also subject to regional and personal variation (and I think you’re skating on thin ice if you automatically assume that such variations are the result of laziness).
I tend to view the idea that Gillan’s Apples “modulates” briefly into “D major” in the same light - i.e. that we are trying to fit a square peg into a classical round hole. I much prefer the idea, which I think stemmed with O’Riada and was developed by Tomas O Cannain, of “multiple tonal centres” (see below).
BTW on the subject of “Gillian’s”, notwithstanding how the tune might have been listed on a Chieftains album or elsewhere (who knows? the typesetter could have been English): Gillian is a woman’s given name quite common in England and presumably the US, Australia and Canada. But I’ve never met an Irishwoman so named. Gillan on the other hand (with a hard G) is a common Irish surname. Even without the origin mentioned earlier (by Simon was it?), this is enough to persuade me that “Gillian’s Apples” is an error that should not be perpetuated.
Also BTW I have always thought that “key signature” referred to the distribution of sharps and flats on the staff - i.e. signature as an indication of the key. So I agree with Ben that G major is not a key signature but a key - its signature being one sharp.
Going back to O Cannain’s ideas, I know it’s bad form to quote yourself but the quote below is taken from an similar topic that came up 7 years ago on here (https://forums.chiffandfipple.com/t/key-signature-confusion-long-and-technical/3552/1):
StevieJ - I agree with you that it would be wrong - in fact, I’d go further, a great folly - to assume that older ways of playing tunes that don’t fit into a modern, or indeed, ANY, mould, are always down to laziness. However, I also think it’s folly to assume that ‘the oul fellas’ always knew best. Some of them were lazy, as some of the best players (old and not so old) well know. In other words, it was a mild plea against citing something as evidence which may, in fact, turn out to be a sacred cow.
And if some clod of a guitar backer plays a subdominant chord in a “Lydian” tune - it ain’t a Lydian tune no more! Cue discussion of how backing can level out the colour in Irish tunes…
I think the tonal centre of my Gillan’s Apples (the Chieftains’ one) is definitely G. There’s always someone backing when we play it, but I’ve played it on my own at home today and I’m convinced that D is not its tonal centre, in spite of its ambiguous (deliciously-ambiguous) ending. You could tidy up the accidentals on the page by giving it a D major key signature, but I think that would be misleading. I have a book somewhere that notates some of those polkas in A as thought they are in D just because they have no G sharps. Great if we’re all notation speed-readers, not so good if you’re a muppet like me who struggles to interpret the dots.
StevieJ, modality in Irish tunes means a lot to me because I play my tunes on diatonic harmonicas and I don’t usually bend to get notes that I haven’t got on the instrument. I think it’s fascinating that (I’d estimate) at least 90% of Irish tunes do not have accidentals in them which means I can play all the notes in them. If nothing else you at least have to say they’re “modally-inclined,” and it’s intriguing to think back into the darkness of time and ponder whether those old church modes you mention had any influence on the origins of the music. Maybe it’s the romantic in me. Or was it something far more prosaic, like a kid playing a piano for the first time - to hell with the black notes!
Modally inclined is a neat way of putting it.
Steve, I can appreciate your way of looking tunes as a diatonic harp player. I do think we need to keep our eyes on the big picture though - what the entire spectrum of traditional musicians are doing, and have done in the past - and be wary of theorizing to suit our own perspective, be it based on our instrument or prejudices.
For instance I spent a while being preoccupied with the question of whether tunes with gapped scales were being treated properly (“mind the gap!”, i.e. not having the attractive holes plugged) and even went so far as to work out purged versions of certain tunes that had an underlying pentatonic or hexatonic nature but which had - in my view - got cluttered up with extraneous notes. After a while though I lost interest in the cause, realizing that I was trying to make tunes fit a mould they had cast off centuries ago, or maybe never had in the first place, and which most trad. musos couldn’t care less about.
Mind you I still tend in that direction, but as a matter of taste rather than principle. In other words I frequently mind the gaps because I like the effect but don’t get too upset when I or somebody else steps into them.
Maybe my taking up a non-diatonic squeezebox has something to do with that: the temptation to slip in little chromatic moves (of the kind that I would have fulminated against a few years ago) can be overwhelming! You don’t know the degraded pleasures you are missing…
OK, rant mode off - or should that be mode rant off?
It would be C# Locrian (C#, D, E, F#, G, A, B, C#)
Just because a piece of music has an accidental in it does not mean that key signature reckoning is useless. Ditto for modes. These categories are convenient tools, rather than attempts to limit the composition.
Whether we know the names of the 7 diatonic modes of the European plainchant tradition or the umpteen modes of the Arabic or Indic or other traditions does not stop our hearing and reckoning of things. Look at the statement, “This tune has two tonal centres”. That very conclusion results from recognising that the tune operates with two different root or focal notes (from within the same group of notes) and the relationship of the other same notes to those root notes gives rise to different interval progressions (and therefore a different sensation). That is a fundamentally modal hearing.
Whether naming or intellectualising about what we naturally hear will be useful for us will depend upon the individual and their musical situation. If modes are confusing for you and you cannot see their relevance for what you are doing, then AT THIS POINT of your life DON’T CONCERN yourself with it. When (or IF) it ever becomes relevant for your development or appreciation, then you will be in the right space to research and receive what the relative system offers. Until then, be content with the relative system you are comfortable with.
I do not agree that a tune which fleetingly, by dint of the penultimate quaver in the final bar of its A and B sections, has thereby become a tune with two tonal centres. Those C sharps in Gillan’s Apples contribute significantly to the feel of the tune but they do very little functionally in terms of changing tonality. Had they cropped up in the middle of the tune it would possibly have been different, but they are simply the first note of a two-note cadence that lends an “unexpected” flavour to the tune. I’ll call that the Lydian effect if you like. And I’m more than happy to concern myself with it AT THIS POINT of my life, thanks, as I enjoy both a little lateral thinking and a bit of whimsy.
Here’s an example of the tune being played without the C sharps at the end. Not my way I think (apologies to the blokes if they read this), as I feel the tune has lost something, but your kilometrage may be at odds.
Please don’t get defensive with me if you are because my comment was a GENERAL one not aimed at you. I didn’t actually say I agree or not that there are two tonal centres in the piece you are discussing. I am merely saying that cognitions of tonal centres are modal cognitions independent of whether one is enlightened/burdened by theoretical nomenclature.
And also, I am not suggesting that we all hear something in the same way, although if we play something according to a mainstream interpretation in a tradition, we are hoping that it will be heard in a certain way.
I hear Gillan’s Apples differently to you and others in this topic.
When and if the dogmatic and absolutist macho bun fighting dies down I might venture to share what I hear, a hearing informed by over 30 years listening to ITM.
I’m not getting defensive, I’m merely not necessarily agreeing with you. You were pontificating there ever so slightly I thought. I won’t show off about how long I’ve been listening to ITM but it’s longer than you! 
no Steve, I am not saying I am better than you.
Thats my way of suggesting I do not come to this topic lightly
but with appreciation of ITM over a period of time.
It wasn’t aimed at you as a put down.
In any case 30+ is not more than 30+.
You should know that as person with maths/science background.
In music, modulation is most commonly the act or process of changing from one key (tonic, or tonal center) to another. This may or may not be accompanied by a change in key signature. Modulations articulate or create the structure or form of many pieces, as well as add interest. Treatment of a chord as the tonic for less than a phrase is considered tonicization
This is what happens in the last bars of both parts of Gillan’s Apples, by adding the C# before the ending D. The tune changes from G major to D major in these bars, and the C# is the leading note (sharp seventh of the D Ionian (major) mode) to lead to the D (as Ben previously already said), not a sharp fourth of the G lydian mode.
This makes the last bars more interesting, leaving the tune suspended on the fifth, and emphasizing the expectancy to return to the proper key of G major.
But I speculate that this is a more modern evolution of the tune. Many old Irish tunes are ending in three repeated full notes, and Gillan’s Apples may not have been different in this. Isn’t it a modern phenomena to break up these repeated ending notes in order to make those endings more interesting?
Also many Irish tunes (like Banish Misfortune) are changing in places between using a Cnat and a C#. Those modulations make them really interesting. I think there is no harm in calling that modulations, or shift of tonal center, and I see no contradiction in either. For harmonisations one need to be aware of these.
Hans, there are no C nats here. Only C# s.
All the notes in it in order from D spell D major which is the key signature.
The same notes in order from G spell G Lydian Mode (ie the Lydian you get in D key sig)and the person who describes the piece as a whole as G major is in fact emphasising a G tonal centre. G tonal centre in a D major series spells a Lydian effect.
And you cannot argue modal shift via the same modes in different keys when there is no shift in the notes. In this example the notes are D E F# G A B C#. Where is the C to complete a G major run of notes?
The G major chord here supports a G Lydian tonic. Major chords do not exclusively flag Ionian.
Good point Hans. In many tunes - e.g. Donnybrook Fair, Willie Coleman’s jig - I prefer the three repeated notes without dipping down to the 7th, doing which generally makes them less interesting to me. Not sure why it never occurred to me to do the same with the Ds at the end of Gillan’s Apples, maybe I will now!
Assuming C#s this setting of the tune, though (after all the transcription came from such an authoritative source 
), I think to assert that the tune is in G lydian on the basis of these passing notes is, well, daft. (Sorry Steve and Talasiga.) If anyone can point us to a recording of a tune that really is in the lydian mode, I’m quite sure it will have a tonal character totally different from that of this little jig.
Also many Irish tunes (like Banish Misfortune) are changing in places between using a Cnat and a C#. Those modulations make them really interesting. I think there is no harm in calling that modulations, or shift of tonal center, and I see no contradiction in either. For harmonisations one need to be aware of these.
I would argue that the best harmonization for that kind of tune is a big fat drone of D. (Of course that would mean tinkering with the tuning of other notes in the scale too.)
Another early Tommy Peoples recording provides an interesting treatment of one of these tunes, The Gander at the Pratie Hole. Rather than alternating C#s and Cnats, he consistently plays C# - but a C# that is a shade flat of ET. This gives a lovely taste to the tune and set me off speculating about whether these modulations could be avoided in many tunes (and might have been in some mythical past golden age) by substituting a C (or F) “supernatural” for all occurrences.
But that is to ignore the role of pipers, and most of these tunes are piping tunes, who love to exploit the different timbre of all the shades of C they can get, including a glorious wide-open C natural. Anyway it’s not what is done today, so my speculation can remain as an academic footnote. Which is what most of the latter part of thread deserves to be IMO.
Yep. One easy way to test this is to take a tune that you hear as solidly in G major, maybe with a clear I-IV-V implied harmonic structure, and some prominent use of the 4th scale degree on strong beats, not just a passing tone. Then play through it while consistently raising the 4th - i.e., play all C#'s in a G tune, or all G#'s in a D tune. That’s what Lydian mode sounds like (or would sound like) in ITM.
Some example tunes might be: Jim Ward’s Jig, The Irish Washerwoman, Easy Club Reel (in G), Sheehan’s Reel
Think about what chord scale(s) you would use to harmonize it. There’s no more perfect 4th degree for a IV-V cadence, or to act as a dominant 7th in a V chord. Would you play or hear a C# Major chord under the C#'s in G, or maybe a C# diminished by rotating the major chord scale? Or maybe a II chord, since the 2-chord is naturally a major chord in Lydian (i.e., A major in G Lydian). Hmmm … 
I’d argue that there are NO common tunes in the the ITM dance repertoire that sound or behave remotely like what you get by doing the “Lydian transform” described in the 1st paragraph above. Which means that any raised 4ths you encounter do not signal Lydian mode, but are either 1) passing tones, or 2) imply a momentary shift of tonality out of the natural mode or scale of the tune.
But the whole essence of Irish tunes is in the, er, tunes, not in any harmonic structure, implicit or explicit. Those are just just add-ons that sound hunkydory to us because we’re conditioned by nearly all the music we listen to to expect harmony. Your dismissal of the C sharps as mere passing tones would be more convincing (a) were there any C naturals in the tune, (b) were those C sharps not at very pivotal points in the tune. I provided an example of the tune played with just straight Ds at the ends instead of D/C#/D and I thought it detracted quite a lot.
I understand what you’re saying, Steve, and appreciate your POV, but I can’t agree. Just because the tunes are monophonic doesn’t mean they’re aharmonic. They’re not just strings of notes (and are arguably homophonic). Implied harmonies are critically important in ITM. And harmonic structure doesn’t have to be “vertical” (i.e. polyphonic). As one blatantly obvious example, take any of the common hornpipes that feature long sequences of what sound to all the world like arpeggios. To deny that their melodic structure and melodic intervals are not driven partly by an underlying (and implied) harmonic “deep structure” would seem pretty perverse to me. It’s not just a contemporary perceptual artifact from saturation listening to pop music.
And addressing the lack of C-nats in something like “Apples” is easy. No one’s going to tell me what steenkin’ notes to play when I start to explore and create variant settings of a tune. And I’d argue that it’s the internalized underlying harmonic structure in the ear and mind of the player that constrains the improvisational choices which end up sounding “right”. (Along with, of course, other stylistic constraints such as melodic interval size, and phrasal structure.)
So here’s a variation of “Apples” I might decide to play in a moment of irrational exuberance:
[K:G]g3 BcA|GAG Bcd|efe edc|dcB A2B|
Now I don’t think anyone would fail to recognize the basic identity of this half-part in the context of a variant setting. I’ve just chosen to explicitly play the missing 4th degrees from the gapped scale of the “standard” melody.
But now raise those C-nats to C-sharps. If that sounds right, then I’d say yes, we have ourselves a Lydian melody here. But to my ear it sounds simply dreadful. Which means that any C-sharps that do occur in the tune are functioning not to define the 4th degree of the prevailing mode, but in some other capacity. Namely, in “Apples”, the C-sharp is a lower chromatic neighboring tone (and leading tone) to the D that clearly dominates the last 6 beats of the A-part.
If you want to hear that as a momentary outburst of Lydian tonality (over, say, an imagined G drone) … I’d say that’s fair enough. But not a defining characteristic of the entire tune.
Nah, you don’t understand what I’m saying. [EDITED TO ADD because I didn’t make myself very clear]. Essence means essence and does not exclude other elements. I was refuting your references to chords, with which your previous post was replete.
I enjoyed reading MT Guru’s posts which is unusual for me. I liked the way he explained complex, multilayered issues simply and in a way relevant to my hearing of ITM.
I do not hear Gillan’s Apples as Lydian but I have not been able to see the antagonists to Steve Shaw providing a cogent explanation why it isn’t on the basis of info. in the ABC notation which (confusingly) describes the key of a piece of music with D E F# G A B C# as “K: G maj”. In trying to explain that one would need to propose that it is identifying the piece by toniczation via G major chord which is how I rationalised that. I am not saying I agree with it.
I think it is wrong, confusing and prejudicial to identify traditional melodies by what chord/s one may arbitrarily apply to them. Melodies can simply be identified either in the modern way by stating the key signature (which tells you the notes, or at least, the notes in most of their incidence) OR the olden way by nominating the mode (which tells you the “evocative scale” for the piece from out of the technical or key signaure scale of notes).
TBC
for those who don’t know - TBC means to be continued
(for some reason my PC starts playing tricks with long posts - anti intellectual gremlins)
To settle a mode and emphasise it you need
- to ID the last note of the melody
- have a drone at hand
- know the olden ethos of the tradition in which the melody occurs
TBC