Newly a fan, I checked out some more, such as:

and:

Seriously, how could you not love a song called “Fire, Battle, Metal!”?

Wikipedia tells me that the band was put together a bit oddly; in fact “until the moment the first promotional photos were shot, the entire band had never been in the same place at the same time before. Some members did not even know each other.” Despite that, they rock. Very much. There are shades of Maiden, shades of Priest, they’re named after a Dio album … Well cool. \m/ Some of it is also rather reminiscent of Malmsteen’s vocal stuff.

By which I don’t mean Malmsteen singing …

I also picked up the new(ish) Ratt album: Infestation. I had heard good things about it, but wasn’t prepared for just how great it is. The first thing that struck me was that they haven’t got grungey or nü-metally at all. This is great old-school Ratt-style hair metal. It sits perfectly with Detonator, which is one of my favourite hair metal albums ever (and therefore of course one of my favourite albums of any style.
Herewith my impressions track by track…

Eat Me Up Alive: excellent opener. Classic Ratt riff to begin – though with a grittier, more organic guitar tone. Catchy chorus, excellent guitar work. Classic Ratt (welcome back).

Best of Me: fantastic. Starts with a riff that could sit on Invasion of Your Privacy. Has some neat chords in the verse, and a perfect prechorus: catchy, great backing vocals, cool arpeggiated guitar. The chorus is fantastic and very catchy – reminiscent of Run Around, to my ears. The solo is much, much win – but basically every bit of lead playing on the album is awesome. I haven’t picked out what’s Warren DeMartini and what’s Carlos Cavazo, but they’re both plying brilliantly.

A Little Too Much: again it could be on Detonator. The verse chords are the sort of slightly twisted harmony (as compared to most hair metal at any rate) Ratt often did. The chorus is fantastic: catchy, excellent backing vocals. I’m guessing the solo is Cavazo (he was in Quiet Riot, right? So played the solo on Cum On Feel the Noize?)

Look Out Below: dirty swing – nicely finding the tension between straight and swung. I don’t find it as catchy or immediately appealing as the last three, but it’s much cool. At the end I notice that DeMartini and Cavazo might be separated left and right – even the lead parts.

Last Call – very cool guitar riffs under the vocals. Great backing vocals. Neat bluesy/boogie interludes before the choruses – which again make excellent use of a call-refrain with the backing vocals. Cool harmony guitar solo – and at this point I’m thinking Warren’s on the right.

Lost Weekend: yep, I reckon Warren’s on the right, with a great intro lead. This song brings in some harder elements in the chorus, mixed with classic Ratt throughout. Great bridge!! Oh that’s excellent. The solo is totally choice of course.

As Good as it Gets: slightly odd intro/chorus riff, with a recurring chromatic note that’s slightly jarring in fairly typical Ratt fashion. The chorus doesn’t really grab me, but it’s still cool. More harmony guitars and cool soloing.

Garden of Eden: this doesn’t really sound like classic … oh … now the vocals have come in, and it does. The chorus (and much of the rest of the song – except he prechorus) sounds more hard rock than hair metal. The solo I would think was Cavazo, but sounded slightly to the right until it got panned hard left at the end. 1. That does me think I’m right about Warren being on the right. 2. I’m guessing my earbuds aren’t in that well, so I’ve been hearing centre slightly right.

Take a Big Bite: another medium tempo Ratt rocker with call-refrain between lead and backing vocals. And more great harmony (and traded) lead playing.

Take Me Home: ballad time! The chorus is reminding me of someone else, but I can’t think who. To be honest I find the ascending movement in the chords in the chorus a bit jarring. ah – that’s more Ratt (the bridge). Lovely solo – I’m picking DeMartini. Hmmm – now there’s soloing on the left over the chorus. Whatever; I don’t know Cavazo’s playing hardly at all anyway. I’m just going to listen and enjoy now

Don’t Let Go: an up-tempo rocke to close out the album. Pretty much classic Ratt, but with noticeably heavier guitar styling in the prechorus. They’re still sticking closely to classic pop/rock song structures, with catchy prechoruses and bridges – which I love.

Imagine then my pleasure at seeing my 4 year old daughter absolutely transfixed by this same wonderful piece of music, and watching it over and over again – and after I told her who it was, she called out “Joe! Joe!” and earnestly told her mother who it was in the video.

I was also rather impressed that she was able to consistently find this particular video in the list (no pictures to help) and also the Muppets cover of New York State of Mind. She wouldn’t have actually read the words, but she could sure as hell identify the ones she wanted.

I always find it interesting to hear someone else playing on my gear; it always sounds so different. Good different, in this case.

For more Owen – and the other Ninja Monkeys – check them out in the studio:

(which by the way can be found at the awesome short url of http://met.al/ninja )

Also check out their YouTube, Twitter, FaceBook – and even MySpace  pages.

So what is it? If I want to make it sound impenetrable, I could say I play superlocrian starting from the 3rd degree of a major key. Actually though what it really is, is playing (and thinking) in the relative minor key, and playing superlocrian from the 5th degree of that. First thing in explaining that I guess is a brief discussion of superlocrian.

The “superlocrian mode” is the notes of a melodic minor scale (ascending melodic minor, to be pedantic) played from the 7th scale degree, instead of the tonic. The name superlocrian is a reference to the locrian mode which is the notes of a major scale played from its 7th degree. Why would one do this? because it includes all the possible altered 5ths and 9ths, for use over altered dominant chords.

A dominant chord is defined by having a major 3rd and a minor (flat) 7th. An altered dominant is a dominant 7 chord that has been altered (duh). There are only a few notes you can alter, really: if you alter the tonic it’s a different chord, and if you alter the 3rd or the 7th it’s no longer a dominant chord. You can however alter the 5th and/or the 9th with relative impunity. By alter I mean raise (sharpen) or lower (flatten) them by a semitone, giving b5, #5, b9 or #9. Basically these altered notes increase dissonance, and thus the sense of tension and the urgency of a resolution to something consonant.

Ok, so why again the superlocrian? I’m glad you asked. Simply because the notes of the superlocrian are: tonic (1), b2, b3, b4, b5, b6, b7 … It’s a very flat scale. “So what’s the relevance to a dominant chord?” I hear you cry. You can see the b7 there, but the 3rd is flat/minor. But the 4th is also flat, and a diminished 4th is the same note as (sounds the same as/is enharmonic with) a major 3rd. If I write the superlocrian therefore as: 1, b2, b3, 3, b5, b6, b7, you can see the dominant chord in there. What it also includes are those altered notes: b2 is the same as b9 – just referred to differently in chords and in scales; b3 is enharmonic with a #9 (#2); there’s a b5, and the b6 is enharmonic with a #5. So this one scale will serve for any sort of altered dominant chord. It works over straight dominant chords too; used in that way it implies an altered sound, even though the chord itself is unaltered.

Pretty cool, I reckon.

So what is it I’ve been doing for so many years that was so dumb, but actually makes sense? Say I was playing in C major. A minor is the relative minor key, and since guitarists are great ones for playing natural and pentatonic minor scales, it’s very common (and a bit lazy) to play that relative minor. It’s easy to get a little too lazy and think too much in that relative minor, instead of just using the fretboard position. That’s what I did: I thought too much in A minor instead of C major, and used the superlocrian that would apply to the dominant of A minor – which is E. I didn’t like that I did it, because it seemed “wrong” to do so – but I like the slight outside sound it gives, so I kept finding myself doing it. This morning I actually gave it some thought, and was pleasantly surprised to find it’s (mostly) fine.

Taking the C major/A minor/E superlocrian example, we’ll find that the notes of E superlocrian are E (tonic), F (b2), G (b3), Ab (b4), Bb (b5), C (b6), D (b7). The dominant V of C major is G7: G, B, D, F, so you can see we almost have that, and we have an Ab so we’re implying a G7b9. Which is cool.

“Butbutbutbutbut!” You cry: there’s a Bb, not a B! So it’s not a dominant any more. Sadly, that’s absolutely true, but my laziness extends to the patterns I play for the superlocrian, and for convenience’s sake that doesn’t include the b5 (Bb in this case).

So moderate laziness led to a cool implied b9, and more laziness led to no maj/min 3rd conflicts, even though the scale isn’t 100% right. I’m quite happy with that.