Black notes sharp or flat ?

[permanent_daylight]

True, stand corrected, that you'd call it augmented unison especially if going to a natural from a much easier key than it's enharmonic for notational purposes. But not in this particular context, A to Bb. I'd tend to avoid them if it makes sense to.

I guess i meant more with music theory and the discussion of intervals, scales, chords or cadences it would be treated as a minor second in most situations, even if not for practicalities of notation. This is just as you don't tend to describe relations between the same number in the scale as the unison tending to be a fixed point to discuss other notes from, nearly always it would be a key change by a minor second, and you might even use the more difficult enharmonic, than notated to discuss this.

Keep it easy for the players. Its always pretty sound advice, whatever the intricacies of theory they don't necessarily provide the best performance. Plenty of instruments often ask for no key signature IME, of course the horn, but often other winds/brass prefer this with frequent modulation, and with VERY frequent modulation that would be probably for all instruments.

[Exalted Wombat]

Here's a very common chord sequence. C C#dim7 Dm G. It's more useful to call the chord (and the note) a C# rather than a Db. Minor 2nd or Augmented Unison? Either label could be useful.

[Guest]

Flippin' 'eck cain't i get a straight answer to a straight question, i do actually understand my query as you all prob know, no diff, so going off kilter in this case is still a learning process, but boy oh boy it's getting beyond me, but i'm working on it.

So all you bleedin' clever clogs, you all seem to agree and disagree about naming, righty ho, cop a load of this:

"Strutural Hearing - Tonal Coherence In Music" by Felix Salzer first published in 1982 is an unabridged and corrected version by C. Boni published in 1952.

This is my bible, now I 'ave no idea if all these type of books tell the exact same thing but he is explaining, in no uncertain terms how to label stuff correctly, i guess the clue is in the title? The published tome is divided between 2 parts, the second part is musical illustrations, notation, frustatingly that's no flippin' good to me, so can't hear the examples or practice them.

Roughly, most of it is way beyond my comprehension, i keep referring back to it cos some info, even the basic stuff (to you lot), i just cain't seem to hold/store in my head, even so, what I have managed to glean so far has been a revelation, I pounced on this immediately, cos i knew I could hear superior intervals when writing/playing when i didn't even know there was such a thing.

I-V-I he states is the highest harmonic progression, a I-V, is also but it's incomplete, a I-III-V-I is the next best and so on, i think you must all know this, because you've read this stuff before, but I'm pretty sure he seems to have the naming well and truly sorted, and that naming, of course can be a composers guide, I hope you understand what i'm rattling on about, borrow it from the library.

And if i'm right about the, (i think,) brilliant concepts? ideas? could you start a thread on it, jus' so i can borrow your brains for a mo', or is there owt new in it, er innit, hmm no, it's, in it, innit.

Oh my giddy aunt some bod's posted it on line

http://hugoribeiro.com.br/biblioteca-digital/Salzer-Structural_Hearing%201.pdf

cost me £11.99, 'bout i dunno 12/15 years ago, do i want my money back, nah i would've payed the earth for this kinda info

I must mention Hienrich Schenker, i believe it was his original work but I think he died before it was completed, and Salzer and the other dude were able to "fill in" the gaps, I think this is right

So thank you Mr Schenker you're a real gent and a clever clogs mate.

[Guest]

just looked seems it's only part 1, part two is the notation examples, you find 'em, I've got it, 'tis you lot that's gotta catch up wiv me now.

[CS70]

how do I know wether I should scribble ( I can't ) a # or a flat, what determines something being in e flat minor rather than d# minor? for what reason?

I understand that you just pick whatever makes it more concise to write it down (i.e. with the least number of sharps or flats).

As of sharp/flat themselves, in old tunings A# and Bb were not the same pitch, so you needed two distinct notations; but with equal temperament instruments the distinction between (note)sharp and (next note)flat has no longer audible significance.

Incidentally, if all you're interested is in giving someone else the idea on which key a pop piece is in (like when one does, for example, when jamming with others over a guitar riff or progression), the key signature isn't really that interesting - what you want to refer to is what's the tonic (i.e. the note whose corresponding scale is used in the majority of chords feels like it's a start/conclusion of the riff or progression) and if it's minor or major. To make a rough test, when you say a pop piece is in the key of X (minor/major), you should then find that most of the chords used in the piece are built with notes of the X (minor/major) scale. I guess one could also do with specifying natural, melodic or harmonic minor, and even other scales but in practice in pop I've not experienced it.

If for example someone tells me a piece is in Cm I will expect it to have mainly chords such as Cm, Eb, Fm, Gm etc. - i.e. chords made with notes from the C natural minor scale.

If the piece modulates a lot - like some jazz - then you simply can't give a single "key" indication (even if a theme may be in one key, to give the listener's brain something to grip to), and the player has to know/read exactly what's playing in that moment in order to know which scale or other chords will work.

[tacitus]

If you're not a string (or trombone) player or interested in Historically Informed Performance, just keep to the simplest way of notating your stuff. So, in the instance we're talking about, Bb minor rather than A# minor. Make sure you have a scale that haas an A, B, C, D, E, F, and G in it, with whatever sharps or flat you need to make it work. Major scales will always be all sharps or all flats, minor scales, melodic or harmonic, are a bit more complicated.

When notating for players, I always use flats going down chromatically and sharps going up as it's easier to read at speed (and if you can't read at speed it ain't gonna matter ...). So A, Ab, G going down, and G, G#, A going up. Also this avoids having to put naturals everywhere.

Not sure why (wind) band instruments got to be in flat keys, but once some instruments were established in Bb and Eb, it makes sense to keep them in those keys. Older instruments, like strings, keyboards, oboe, recorder, and bassoon tended to be in concert pitch and the players sorted out the fingering for different sizes. With band instruments, you want some standardisation, so you keep the fingering the same and make them into transposing instruments to keep it easy for brainless band players.

Long before they had valves, baroque trumpets tended to be in D, so the music was written in D, so new trumpets were made in D and so on. Again, not sure which was the chicken and which the egg in that situation. Similarly, while they had extra crooks (small lengths of tube) to change it, horns (French horns, originally hunting horns in Europe) were popular in F and of course are still made in that size. It may be that an F horn is a good size for the huntsman to put his arm through the loop to carry it on horseback.

LIke orchestral strings, guitars tend to have open strings tuned for sharper keys - E A D G and so on. So notating in sharps is common in the pop world. Midi always seems to take the sharp option, as if whoever invented it hadn't worked out how to do flats! Also, on computers, the hash sign makes a better sharp then lower case b does a flat. Might be relevant.

In summary, then, you're looking for a key signature that allows you to have seven differently named notes and no more than seven sharps or flats, as there's no provision to notate more in standard music. Even minor keys will conform to this as they have the same key signature as their relative major key (a minor third up: A minor has a relative major of C, so both keys have the same key signature - no sharps and flats as it happens). This determines that it's F# minor, not Gb minor, and Bb minor not A# minor. Or, indeed, that it's Eb major and not D# major. If you look at a notated scale in all of the major keys, they have no accidentals and go stepwise from note to note; the key signature tells you which are sharps or flats.

Anything else I can confuse for you?

[Richard Graham]

Flippin' 'eck cain't i get a straight answer to a straight question, i do actually understand my query as you all prob know, no diff, so going off kilter in this case is still a learning process, but boy oh boy it's getting beyond me, but i'm working on it.

So all you bleedin' clever clogs, you all seem to agree and disagree about naming, righty ho, cop a load of this:

"Strutural Hearing - Tonal Coherence In Music" by Felix Salzer first published in 1982 is an unabridged and corrected version by C. Boni published in 1952.

This is my bible, now I 'ave no idea if all these type of books tell the exact same thing but he is explaining, in no uncertain terms how to label stuff correctly, i guess the clue is in the title? The published tome is divided between 2 parts, the second part is musical illustrations, notation, frustatingly that's no flippin' good to me, so can't hear the examples or practice them.

Roughly, most of it is way beyond my comprehension, i keep referring back to it cos some info, even the basic stuff (to you lot), i just cain't seem to hold/store in my head, even so, what I have managed to glean so far has been a revelation, I pounced on this immediately, cos i knew I could hear superior intervals when writing/playing when i didn't even know there was such a thing.

I-V-I he states is the highest harmonic progression, a I-V, is also but it's incomplete, a I-III-V-I is the next best and so on, i think you must all know this, because you've read this stuff before, but I'm pretty sure he seems to have the naming well and truly sorted, and that naming, of course can be a composers guide, I hope you understand what i'm rattling on about, borrow it from the library.

You are Nigel Kennedy and I claim my £50!

[damoore]

Here's a very common chord sequence. C C#dim7 Dm G. It's more useful to call the chord (and the note) a C# rather than a Db. Minor 2nd or Augmented Unison? Either label could be useful.

On the other hand, you would normally notate I N V in C as (C,E,G) (F, Ab, Db) (G, B, D)
(N (the Neapolitan six) being the flattened two chord (in first inversion) rather than the augmented unison chord)

But C#dim7 is correct in the Exalted one's example because the root has been raised. Whereas for the Neapolitan, the second has been lowered.

Another example would be where you used the Phrygian Dominant mode over C7 (in key of Fm, of course). There you would also write Db. Because it is the lowered six not the raised five.

[Guest]

You are Nigel Kennedy and I claim my £50!

Hey, Ricardo mon ami, you've ruled out me possibly being a Nigella? silly boy.

[Exalted Wombat]

If the piece modulates a lot - like some jazz - then you simply can't give a single "key" indication (even if a theme may be in one key, to give the listener's brain something to grip to), and the player has to know/read exactly what's playing in that moment in order to know which scale or other chords will work.

There are degrees of modulation. You can go for a trip around the neighbourhood, or you can move to a new city. As a child, your "neighbourhood" may be one house. Then horizons widen, but you stay rooted. There's a good musical analogy developing here...

Maybe all we have to say to players who crave a list of "permitted" scales and notes for every situation is "you should get out more!".

[damoore]

Or, to put in more succinctly; "play outside"

[Guest]

In the tome I recommended above, Salzer does state there's no such thing as a key change, as it's a contradiction of terms, and he always mentions, modulation, not key change. That's if i'm getting the drift here.

The book addresses the failings of chord grammar (i believe chord grammar is what's generally taught) v's chord function/meaning, what this book teaches/reveals.

But as I've stated before, a lot of the book is beyond me so i might also be getting the wrong end of the USB.

[Exalted Wombat]

In the tome I recommended above, Salzer does state there's no such thing as a key change, as it's a contradiction of terms, and he always mentions, modulation, not key change. That's if i'm getting the drift here.

The book addresses the failings of chord grammar (i believe chord grammar is what's generally taught) v's chord function/meaning, what this book teaches/reveals.

But as I've stated before, a lot of the book is beyond me so i might also be getting the wrong end of the USB.

Any system that can't see going "up one" for the last verse as a Key Change, is probably overthinking the topic.

[Guest]

Exalted Wombat Sir, if I'm in C Maj, what key or choice of keys do I have to change to?

[Exalted Wombat]

Exalted Wombat Sir, if I'm in C Maj, what key or choice of keys do I have to change to?

Db, D, Eb, E, F, Gb, G, Ab, A, Bb and B major or minor. Oh, and C minor. Or you could move into the Dorian or any other mode, based on any note.

Really. Why not?

[CS70]

There are degrees of modulation.

That's why I dislike much jazz

[Guest]

Db, D, Eb, E, F, Gb, G, Ab, A, Bb and B major or minor. Oh, and C minor. Or you could move into the Dorian or any other mode, based on any note. Really. Why not?

Bloody Nora, I 'ad a feeling you were gonna say that. If all are available is that then the 12 tone system. I can understand the C major/minor relationship, as the first riff i ever got on the keys went from C minor to C major in the chorus, and this gives a tremendous lift to the riff/song.

I thought western music lives whithin the struture of a I-V-I and any other intervals II, III, IV, VI and VII are merely passing or slowing the inevitable resolve to the root, thus completing the nescessry harmonic function.

I thought by leaping and stepping, usually taking the shortest route, through I-II-III-VI-V-VI-VII, this is what creates melodic intervals, if every key/note is then available to me what happens to the I through VII.

I mean, i believe that intervals create a certain type of music by bypassing certain notes, if every note is available that must be the 12 tone system?

So in C major (triads only) I have at my disposal Cmj Dm Em Fmj Gmj Am & Bdim if i changed key to Db, or any others mentioned are the equivalent triads/intervals also at my disposal, and can i change to several keys in one composition and still have the same triad intervals.

[Exalted Wombat]

If all are available is that then the 12 tone system.

No, the 12-tone system is something quite different, that doesn't deal in keys and triads at all. It was an early 20th century reaction against tonal music. Very contrived, and no use at all to you. I suggest you forget about it for now.

What I'm telling you isn't way-out or ultra-modernist at all. Bach, Beethoven, Mozart (not to mention The Beatles) didn't restrict themselves to diatonic triads. Only the simplest folk music stays strictly in one mode. You can, quite literally, use any possible chord in a piece in C major.

[Guest]

Exalted one, thanks for bearing wiv me man. I guess when i stray from my norm, it starts to sound like jazz or other genres I'm not too fond of, sorta. And to be honest I'd written lots of tunes before i read about I-V-I, stepping & leaping etc, and my stuff is no better for having this info, i was a bit peeved at first, then realised, when analysing my riffs, that i was instinctively adhereing to the rules of harmony anyway.

Could you tell me how to achieve this wondrous kind of harmony of the Bulgarian Choirs, what are the key/intervals or vertical harmony used, even an approximation would be helpful.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVqrW-fPOQ0

[Exalted Wombat]

A guy called Peter Lyondev is credited as the arranger/composer. Some of his work is available online. Here's one you could look at:

http://www.stantons.com/scores/20-96750.pdf

Or better still transcribe it yourself from the YouTube performance. That's a great way to get really in to how the music's put together.

[Guest]

Or better still transcribe it yourself from the YouTube performance. That's a great way to get really in to how the music's put together.

Exalted one, you're 'aving a larf ain't ya, like Lennon & McCartney et al I can't read or write music, jus' use my ears, still it seems to be basically triads, right up my "one-way" street, so where there's a will there's a er, Shakespeare, or words to that effect, thanks for the link def gonna try and make sense of it one way or the other.

muchas gracias amigo

[Exalted Wombat]

If you want to make YOUR music, instinct may suffice. If you want to analyse and copy other music, either join a group that plays it and let it soak in, or acquire the tools of a musician's trade. I'm sure it's not too late.

[Guest]

Hey Exalted one, prob wiv me is i'm self taught in everything i do, guitar, keys, filming and editing videos, stop frame animation and so on, i've always strived to improve my ability in all these things and more and generally do so by recognising, then learning from my mistakes, or occasionally when others have pointed out the error of my ways. In a similar vein I feel that musicians who have been taught don't ness make good writers, as musicianship is a trade, composing is an art and rightly or wrongly i consider myself an aesthete and this i believe is my particular strength.

Academic learning jus' goes in one ear an' out t'other no matter 'ow 'ard i try, time permitting i will try to discover what makes this wonderful music so unique, it's just there's still so much i want/need to learn and there's only so much time in the day and anything that takes me away from creating new stuff takes a back seat until i need a break from creativity.

Horses for courses, or you cain't teach an ol' dog new tricks, but in my case, this ol' dog can teach 'imself, to a degree anyway.

thanks man

[Exalted Wombat]

Hey Exalted one, prob wiv me is i'm self taught in everything i do, guitar, keys, filming and editing videos, stop frame animation and so on, i've always strived to improve my ability in all these things and more and generally do so by recognising, then learning from my mistakes, or occasionally when others have pointed out the error of my ways. In a similar vein I feel that musicians who have been taught don't ness make good writers, as musicianship is a trade, composing is an art and rightly or wrongly i consider myself an aesthete and this i believe is my particular strength.

Academic learning jus' goes in one ear an' out t'other no matter 'ow 'ard i try, time permitting i will try to discover what makes this wonderful music so unique, it's just there's still so much i want/need to learn and there's only so much time in the day and anything that takes me away from creating new stuff takes a back seat until i need a break from creativity.

Horses for courses, or you cain't teach an ol' dog new tricks, but in my case, this ol' dog can teach 'imself, to a degree anyway.

thanks man

Ah well. If you refuse to get smart, you'll just have to rely on getting lucky.

[Airfix]

The well temperament is a compromise - there are no black notes. just intonation is so lovely - try it and see