Not! It may be water off a duck's back to say it again, but FYI here it is:KenK wrote: Interesting that:
Hypodorian is the same as Aeolian
Hypophrygian is the same as Locrain
Hypolydian is the Major scale (Ionian)
Hypomixolydian is Dorian
Hypomixolydian is Phrygian
Hypoionian is Mixolydian
Mode does not equal scale - EXCEPT in the dumbed down version which is current now. (A recent historical change.) A scale is just a series of notes, but a mode, in the classical sense, is a collection of melodic tendencies, and with regard to the church modes and the later 16th century additions which made the set of 12, the melodic tendencies were confined to a particular range, which range is the approximate length of the associated scale. The uses of the material are as important as the material, in these older systems. The old modes are not condusive to chordal thinking, which is a later concept. The advent of chordal thinking, which is generally pegged at (for a useful and accurate enough rough date) 1600, or the beginning of the Baroque, spelled the end of the use of the old modes by condensing them into the major/minor system. Hence the arguments about 8 vs. 12 modes in the 17th century, when musicians tried to maintain their old theoretical framework in the face of a modern (then) practice which led to a different way of thinking. Even today, the Major and Minor modes, which are quite alive and well, are differentiated as much by the different use of the material (most specifically the changing 6th and 7th degrees of the minor, which are seldom used in the major but very common in the minor) as by the scale itself.
If you want to get educated on ancient music practice, go to medieval.org and read up. There are tons of information there.
Jazz practice is about fitting scales to chord progressions. For this, the new concept of "modes" is OK, although not strictly necessary for most practice. I mean, when I improvise, I don't bother thinking about mode names, I work with only major or minor scales for the most part, and the fact that I start a scale on a different note than the tonic does not mean that I need to name it. I'm not particularly likely to start playing the scale on the root of the chord and go up an octave anyway, that's a recipe for boredom, so why should I bother identifying the name of the mode-as-inversion-of-scale? I'm concerned with movement from one scale system to another, and identifying the mode in Greek-name terms is about as useful to me as naming the legs on the chair before I sit down. Hey, it's got four legs, it doesn't fall over, big deal.
However, to get back to your observation:
What's going on here is that you are overlooking the internal structure of the mode. In the Hypodorian, the root is D, but in the Aeolian, the root is A. The relationship of the root to its range is different in each case. The melodic tendencies of these two modes are also different. The Hypodorian, classically, allowed either B natural or B flat, under certain fairly definable rules - when it didn't simply skip the B - but the Aeolian does not allow a changing B - as a general rule. At cadences, the Hypodorian is likely to contain a C# for a leading tone; the Aeolian's leading tone is G#. In late 16th century polyphonic practice (not earlier, generally speaking), you could expect a major third for each, at cadences, which would be F# for the Hypodorian, and C# for the Aeolian.KenK wrote: Hypodorian is the same as Aeolian
In late Renaissance polyphonic practice, two modes were used at once: for instance, Dorian and Hypodorian. The use of polyphony was already blurring the distinction between plagal (="hypo-") and authentic modes, because (for instance) while the soprano voice might be in hypo-Dorian, the alto might be in Dorian, because of the difference in the range. Thus, if you look at Luis Milan's music, you'll find that he identifies the mode up front: "This Fantasia is in the First and Second Modes" and so on.
Historically, the modes have roots that are specific to each mode. In modern practice this has become confused, and so you get this idea that (for instance) a Dorian "mode" on D "belongs" to the "key of C", and then you get confused questions like the one that started this thread. There is a genuine confusion about that. I don't want to definitively argue the point - modern practice seems to permit both interpretations - but historically, the mode had it's own root. It's my opinion that if you say "A Phyrgian" then this should mean the series "A - Bb - C - D - E - F - G - A" - for what's it's worth.