I'm just an amature on music theory. But still i think it makes sence to
define things like a B# chord. You know, there's an actual difference
between, lets say a sharp and b flat. Not only in a harmonic way, but also
in real pitch. Play a song with g# and one with an a flat in it and try to
remember the pitch of the accidental. If you listen closely you'll hear an
(imaginal) pitch change. If you don't, try the following (only works for
people who know how to sing!!!) Sing a piece with an g# in it and record it.
Than sing a piece with an A flat in it and record it. Cut out the g sharp
and a flat and listen.
Now... if you agree with me after some experiments an a sharp and g flat is
a total different thing. That means the chords are actual difference as
well!!! In modern music were all instruments are almost tuned in a
mathematical way, there is no practical relevance so we try to easy things
up a bit. My personal oppinion is, just write down how you think it's
easiest to play. I once had a piece of music written in F key, full of
naturals in front of every b flat. And it didn't sound alteratic. Well,
theoreticly it sounds diffenent, but don't try to be so interesting and just
say it's in C key. I don't even bother the difference between Cmaj7 and Em/C
but maybe that's a bit to careless.
----
some background info for those who are interested:
the whole tuning problem is a result of the following. The frequency of a
natural harmonic of a tone is 2 times of ones frequency. That's like an
octave. An other natural harmonic is 3/2, like a perfect fifth. And 4/3 for
a perfect 4th. (so 3/4 for a perfect 4th downwards) so lets define
freq{note} as the frequency of a note.
freq{g} = 3/2 * freq{c}
freq{d} = 3/4 * freq{g}
freq{a} = 3/2 * freq{d}
freq{e} = 3/4 * freq{a}
freq{b} = 3/2 * freq{e}
freq{fis} = 3/4 * freq{b}
freq{cis} = 3/2 * freq{fis}
freq{gis} = 3/4 * freq{cis}
freq{dis} = 3/2 * freq{gis}
freq{ais} = 3/4 * freq{dis}
freq{eis} = 2/3 * freq{ais}
freq{bis} = 3/4 * freq{eis}
We want bis to be equal to c. We went up exactly one octave. freq{c'} = 2
freq{c}. now we want bis to be equal to c. Lets check: (3/2)^6 * (3/4)^6 =
2.027... So here we go... no perfect pitching possible in our 12 notes in an
octave system. In western music we've decided to equally make the intervals
just a little bit smaller. But i guess you've heard ugly (no offence) arabic
music at least one time. And in the past they've been using many different
systems by many different people (a famous one is by pythagoras (that a^2 +
b^2 = c^2 guy you hated at geometrics)) who thought of new ways to tune an
instrument. Another famous way of tuning is the meantone. For this one
they've decided that the difference between dis and es, and gis and as was
so large, they made an extra key on some harpsichords keyboards.
Just one more small thing for your interest: we do use pitching with equal
distances, but much piano tuners don't ignore what is said above. What you'd
expect to be the most important thing: freq{c'} = freq{c}, they play around
with. Most time the lower notes are tuned just a bit lower, and the higher
ones just a bit higher. The notes in the middle are equally tuned.
Still, for the people who say a b# and a c chord is the same. I must admit
that using chords as we do are relatively new in the music world were
pitching isn't really an issue anymore.
gr. tiM
From: Andre Schnoor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: triangle chord notation
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 01:42:08 +0200
Well, D# may not occur as the tonal center of a key, but it occurs as a
horizontal scale step in some keys (E Minor, F# Minor). Anyway, it's a
rather difficult to decide what momentary tonal center exactly rules at
each particular position in a piece. It also depends on the vertical scales
being used. This decision should be left to the composer/transcriber.
I believe it is a good thing if chord root tones are able to express the
full pitch vocabulary, even with double sharps/flats. This way a composer
can decide what the actual meaning of the chord should be.
Andre
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't heard of the key of D#, but if it did exist it would contain two
double sharps. All chord symbols are named by convention. As for the
root relating to the key signature; I doubt it, because musical
compositions contain many tonal center shifts - hence accidentals. The
root of a chord symbol and is related more to the the momentary tonal
(key) center, not necessarily the written key signature.
-----Original Message-----
From: Andre Schnoor <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Aug 9, 2006 5:02 AM
To: lilypond-user@gnu.org
Subject: Re: triangle chord notation
Michael J Millett wrote:
Key signatures don't count when using chord symbols.
Only for the naming of the root. There's a big difference between Ebmaj7
and D#maj7, so the root pitch should reflect its meaning within the
current key. This information is valuable when looking at chord
progressions as a whole. The interval construction on top of the root, as
you suggested, is handled by convention (static).
Andre
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
_______________________________________________
lilypond-user mailing list
lilypond-user@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
