# How and why do composers pick keys?



## level82rat

There's obviously the trivial distinction between major and minor keys. But within the major keys for example, why would a composer choose C and not Eb? Is there any truth to the idea that each key has its own emotion? Or do composers just throw darts and use what sticks?


----------



## mikeh375

Often instrument range, timbre, practicality and dynamics decides the question of key. The musical/emotional intent is also clarified and enhanced with the decisions taken. If a composer wants to exploit idiomatic technique then keys are chosen appropriately, hence keys like D or G major for strings which enable exploitation of open strings in techniques like bariolage and multiple stopping.
For me personally, there is not much emotional difference in keys that are close together although one can often discern instrumental and concerted resonance in open keys which does have a bearing on one's perception. I have (good) relative pitch but someone with perfect pitch or perhaps synesthesia may feel differently about emotion and any affiliation with pitch.
Key changes in a piece are often calculated for effect and/or, to move away from tonal centres after too long a time. They are also used traditionally as a functional element in a formal context such as sonata form.


----------



## Open Book

How do you even know what key a piece is in (just by listening)? The range of notes you hear could be found in other keys, especially when sharps and flats are applied here and there.


----------



## mikeh375

Open Book said:


> How do you even know what key a piece is in (just by listening)? The range of notes you hear could be found in other keys, especially when sharps and flats are applied here and there.


Yes, by listening but the music has to conform to certain parameters in order to affirm a key.
This is done by the 7 scale notes deferring to a hierarchy between themselves which is defined by the key signature and their functional role in relation to the tonic. As a result, the tonic holds a gravitational sway over them courtesy of their compliance. This dominance of the tonic is made manifest by compositional techniques such as cadence, resolution of melodic and harmonic tones, melodic and harmonic contour in general, rate of harmonic change and not corrupting the key signature with too many accidentals that are disruptive to the status quo. In this way, a key will be stable and its tonality becomes apparent over time.

Keys do indeed have notes in common, and it is this that allows transitions away from the home key for variety without the main key losing its influence if that is the intent.
In simpler music, these transitions are often introduced smoothly via so-called pivot tones (tones common to both keys) which act as a sort of ambiguous tonal bridge (harmonically and melodically). By applying the techniques above, one can gradually manipulate the music so that a smooth take over is achieved by the new key, shifting the tonal centre away from the original. This sounds long winded (I don't have EdwardB's succinctnesshowever a transition is often fleeting and can happen in a matter of listening seconds.

A transition in the main will be transitory and often wend its way back to the tonic or become a means of travelling to a new key using the same manipulation of the techniques above. Confirmation with a cadence and/or prolonged passage work in the newer territory puts the new key centre beyond doubt that the music has changed key.

Sorry if this was too technical or fuzzy (I'm not a pedagogue) and it is certainly not exhaustive, especially when it comes to changing keys but I hope it helps a little.


----------



## Open Book

Well, I had to look up a few terms because I am not musically trained. Well, barely, I know the staff and remember how keys are notated and about adding sharps and flats to go up or down a half tone. It sounds like added sharps and flats produce a tone that is an exception to the declared key and that employing them in certain ways or perhaps in large numbers, they can take over and transition the piece into a new key.

That's kind of what I suspected, but my ears are not good enough to hear it. I mean I can often hear when something interesting is going on in music, but my ears can't recognize a key when I hear it or know that a transition in key has taken place.

You write nicely, thanks. Hearing music explained, with the terminology, sounds tantalizing and always makes me wish I understood more. I think I would flunk music theory if I took it, though, because I can't identify tones well. The lectures would be fun but I'd flunk the final audio exam.


----------



## millionrainbows

A lot of Chopin's piano pieces are written in "weird" keys like Eb and Ab, because he had an ergonomic system of fingering, which saw the fingers on black keys whenever possible, and the thumb on white keys. He considered the C major scale a bad place to start for beginners, because of the awkward thumb cross-over. See the book "natural Fingering."


----------



## mikeh375

millionrainbows said:


> A lot of Chopin's piano pieces are written in "weird" keys like Eb and Ab, because he had an ergonomic system of fingering, which saw the fingers on black keys whenever possible, and the thumb on white keys. He considered the C major scale a bad place to start for beginners, because of the awkward thumb cross-over. See the book "natural Fingering."


I've played plenty of Chopin over the years and never would have guessed at this MR. I was intrigued enough to quickly peruse my music (Ballades, nocturnes, Preludes, Sonatas, Waltzes, Mazurkas, Rondos) and superficially it looks like the flat keys just edge it, only just mind, as there are plenty of pieces in sharp and natural keys too. I'm with Mr. Frederick about C maj being an awkward key to start with, I find B major is rather nice as the fingering fits the keyboard layout well and the crossover from 3rd to thumb from Dsharp to E is a little easier imv. The 3rd finger is raised more on the black D sharp and does not impinge as much on the 4th's crossing...I'm not a teacher though and this might horrify some!
Didn't Debussy once imply that something like fingering is unique to the individual?


----------



## Larkenfield

Most composers write music in the key that originally comes to them. If a melody comes to them in Eb, the work is composed in Eb, etc. I'm not convinced that Chopin wrote in a certain key for technical reasons when he could play equally well in any key. He would encourage his students to play Bach's WTC daily, not only because he loved the music but also to strengthen the wrists. He seemed to write in every imaginable key, major and minor, as the music came to him and that's where he composed it.

Chopin also had his students practice Bach every day in order to exercise, warm up their fingers and perfect their technique. Many of Chopin’s contemporaries declared just how attached he was to the works of Bach. He was obsessed with the preludes and fugues of Bach. He had memorized the 48. He played them all the time and they covered every key. He played them at concerts and at more intimate settings. Bach, Händel, Chopin and Beethoven were generally known to be endowed with perfect pitch.


----------



## mikeh375

great composer/pianists are often also great improvisers so choice of key isn't always related to how they hear it at its inception, sometimes music is just 'found'. Also, not every composer _has_ perfect pitch, but _will _have favourite keys to play and improvise in. (I realise you are not actually saying anything to the contrary Lakenfield).


----------



## ECraigR

There’s no one reason why a composer would pick one key over another. Plenty of composers have chosen odd keys for the challenge of it, and yes of course some just prefer certain keys over others for inane reasons. Many different reasons, really.


----------



## EdwardBast

Larkenfield said:


> *Most composers write music in the key that originally comes to them. If a melody comes to them in Eb, the work is composed in Eb, etc.* I'm not convinced that Chopin wrote in a certain key for technical reasons when he could play equally well in any key. He would encourage his students to play Bach's WTC daily, not only because he loved the music but also to strengthen the wrists. He seemed to write in every imaginable key, major and minor, as the music came to him and that's where he composed it.


I agree completely. I would say, not altogether whimsically, that often the principal idea picks the key, not the composer.


----------



## Open Book

ECraigR said:


> There's no one reason why a composer would pick one key over another. Plenty of composers have chosen odd keys for the challenge of it, and yes of course some just prefer certain keys over others for inane reasons. Many different reasons, really.


What would make a certain key "odd"?


----------



## mikeh375

Open Book said:


> What would make a certain key "odd"?


Maybe not odd (not to me anyway), but more unusual are keys that mix sharps and flats, for example a key signature with b flat and perhaps G sharp. Bartok has used this kind of signature as have others to define a synthetic mode/scale the piece is in. For something truly odd and unworkable, what about F double sharp minor.:lol:

@EcraigR, there are plenty of reasons as to why a composer would choose a key as you can see from the responses.


----------



## Open Book

There is vocal music that can be sung by more than one type of voice. Like in Mahler's "Des Knaben Wunderhorn", certain songs can have been done by mezzo sopranos and baritones. I have no idea if Mahler intended this flexibility. Would the song be in the same key for both voice types? And if the key has to be changed to accommodate various voice types, do the performing musicians arrange that?


----------



## EdwardBast

Open Book said:


> There is vocal music that can be sung by more than one type of voice. Like in Mahler's "Des Knaben Wunderhorn", certain songs can have been done by mezzo sopranos and baritones. I have no idea if Mahler intended this flexibility. Would the song be in the same key for both voice types? And if the key has to be changed to accommodate various voice types, do the performing musicians arrange that?


In the case of the Mahler that kind of flexibility is built in - middle range female voice to middle range male voice (could) mean using the same key transposing by an octave. If a change has to be made and it's just a pianist and soloist, the pianist will do it (or find a ready made transposition in a different key.) Good accompanists can often transpose by sight.

Transposing orchestral accompaniments is a more complicated and expensive proposition. I've been paid to make whole sets of orchestral parts for an aging tenor who couldn't handle the high notes of his younger days, and for a countertenor performing Berlioz's _Les nuits d'été_. The orchestra management paid in the first case. I don't remember whether the countertenor paid or the hosting orchestra in the second case.


----------



## Luchesi

Mozart G minor - sadness tragedy

Beethoven C minor - powerful stormy


----------



## jegreenwood

The only instrument I really know is the clarinet. Mozart composed both his concerto and quintet in A Major. And he composed them for an A clarinet (which, because the clarinet is a transposing instrument, means that the clarinet part is written in C Major). These were written in the early days of the development of the clarinet, and pitch and fingering were issues being resolved. Letting the clarinet play in C made life simpler.

FYI - the clarinet trio is in E flat major and is written for a B flat clarinet. That means that the clarinet part is writen in F Major.


----------



## Open Book

So far I've learned that are keys "odd" for two reasons:

1) The notation is odd - many sharps and/or flats in the key signature - which just means the notation is awkward.

or 2) the notes of that key required on an instrument are more difficult to create compared to other keys on that instrument.


----------



## mikeh375

The point about signatures with sharps _and_ flats is to make the reading easier,_ not_ harder or awkward. Pros are able to deal with all types of signatures that are in use, it really isn't an issue. The odd signatures more than likely make sense after a few readings.
As to point 2, it is true to an extent that some instruments have preferable keys that may facilitate playing or naturally favour their design and sound but again, pros will play in any key, so long as what is written is playable. One trick with composing is to know what works well and to utilise it to the music's advantage.


----------



## BobBrines

jegreenwood said:


> The only instrument I really know is the clarinet. Mozart composed both his concerto and quintet in A Major. And he composed them for an A clarinet (which, because the clarinet is a transposing instrument, means that the clarinet part is written in C Major). These were written in the early days of the development of the clarinet, and pitch and fingering were issues being resolved. Letting the clarinet play in C made life simpler.
> 
> FYI - the clarinet trio is in E flat major and is written for a B flat clarinet. That means that the clarinet part is writen in F Major.


Well, sort of. Prior to when the concept of a transposing instrument was worked out -- some time after 1700, a wind player was given a part and expected to figure out the fingerings to produce what ever concert pitch was being used that day. The bulk of these instruments (oboe, recorder, chalumeaux/clarinet, transverse flute) have seven finger holes and a thumb hole. All fingers down produces C4 and became non-transposing instruments. The C clarinet of course went away to be replaced by the Bb/A versions. But it really is not that simple. Let's look at the flute for a minute.

The baroque flute has only six finger holes. No thumb hole. A normally closed key for the right fourth finger for D#. So.... All fingers down is D4. Overblow it and you get D5. The natural key of the flute is D, not C. Indeed the present day Irish flute is called a flute in D and uses essentially the same fingering as a C baroque flute. As keys were added to the flute, a C4 key appeared (a C-foot) and ultimately a B3 key (a B-foot). But I have never heard a flute with a B-foot called a flute in B.

Now check the rest of the baroque not-transposing woodwinds. All the same logic applies. They are tuned in D with a C-foot. Modern oboes and clarinets have had their compass lowered with additional foot keys. Recorders got different. Recorders disappeared rather abruptly while they were still considered non-transposing. So, the F-alto and F-bass are written non-transposing and the player automatically fingers the notes up a fifth or down a fourth. But trust me, the natural key of the F-alto recorder is G.


----------



## millionrainbows

They don't* pick *keys...that's for stringed instruments.


----------



## millionrainbows

Chuck Berry sometimes chose the key depending on what the lowest possible chord was on a guitar. The reason many guitarist choose the key of B for a blues or rock song is because the IV chord will be a low E, going up to F#. It sounds really heavy. The key of A, too, will make the V chord a low E, which sounds killer.

Tuning a guitar down to D will make effective use of the low-G harmonica, and makes it sound good for cross-harp. Robert Nighthawk did this for Big Walter Horton on "Have a Good Time."


----------



## Luchesi

mikeh375 said:


> The point about signatures with sharps _and_ flats is to make the reading easier,_ not_ harder or awkward. Pros are able to deal with all types of signatures that are in use, it really isn't an issue. The odd signatures more than likely make sense after a few readings.
> As to point 2, it is true to an extent that some instruments have preferable keys that may facilitate playing or naturally favour their design and sound but again, pros will play in any key, so long as what is written is playable. One trick with composing is to know what works well and to utilise it to the music's advantage.


That's right. Through the years as I've talk to non-players they can't conceptualize how sight reading is done. How natural it becomes, like reading any other language. They can understand how people will read a half sentence at a time, at a glance, but reading a few measures at a time seems too involved. What they don't realize is, we see the same patterns in every key over and over and over. We rarely see a new pattern (constellation of notes).


----------



## caters

I myself have specific emotional associations with certain keys. I will separate this into a major and minor list.

*Major Key Emotions:
*

C major - Happy boredom
G major - Completed a minor task or in general, warm
D major - Majestic
A major - Bouncy
E major - Triumph over something major
B major - Dreamy, Figuring out what to do next
F# major - Dreamy, Jazzy
C# major - Eternal
Db major - Dreamy
Ab major - Dreamy, Flying and enjoying it
Eb major - Sleeping in a field of flowers
Bb major - Moonlit night
F major - Flowing along a river

*Minor Key emotions:*


A minor - Completely neutral key, as if the sadness of D minor and the happiness of C major canceled out, and left this void of a key that is A minor
E minor - Lost in a maze
B minor - Mountain climbing, Working hard
F# minor - Saddest of the sharp minors
C# minor - Peaceful evening
Ab minor - Mysterious
G# minor - So uncommon I don't have an associated emotion unlike with C# major
Eb minor - Jazzy, even with a completely regular rhythm
Bb minor - Naturally angry, regardless of tempo or dynamic
F minor - The Key of Death, Unrelievably sad
C minor - Most variable of all the minor keys. Any emotion is easy to get across
G minor - If it comes after a dramatic passage, Calming down, Otherwise, variable
D minor - A tad sad, Uncertainty

The fact that C major sounds to me like happy boredom, along with the fact that a small bit of chromaticism makes me question whether or not it actually is in C major, and that C major is the most common key in all of music, is why I have it as my one and only avoid key. Now all these emotional associations are just from my experience as a pianist. I realize that different instruments playing in the same key can sound completely different in terms of emotion, even if the music that is played is exactly the same.


----------



## mikeh375

Well Caters, let's hope you don't have to transpose in a professional capacity a piece of music from Dmaj to Eflat maj, or perhaps Cmaj. That'll really mess with your head...

I had to transpose a Christmas song I'd co-written with a lyricist ( part of the score for a film I did) from _D maj to Bflat maj_, all at the last minute prior to an orchestral recording session, so I'm glad I didn't have your emotional associations to deal with. I think the song is "bouncy" in Bflat maj. I hope you lose the emotional attachments at some stage especially as your harmony develops and flourishes.


----------



## Luchesi

caters said:


> I myself have specific emotional associations with certain keys. I will separate this into a major and minor list.
> 
> *Major Key Emotions:
> *
> 
> C major - Happy boredom
> G major - Completed a minor task or in general, warm
> D major - Majestic
> A major - Bouncy
> E major - Triumph over something major
> B major - Dreamy, Figuring out what to do next
> F# major - Dreamy, Jazzy
> C# major - Eternal
> Db major - Dreamy
> Ab major - Dreamy, Flying and enjoying it
> Eb major - Sleeping in a field of flowers
> Bb major - Moonlit night
> F major - Flowing along a river
> 
> *Minor Key emotions:*
> 
> 
> A minor - Completely neutral key, as if the sadness of D minor and the happiness of C major canceled out, and left this void of a key that is A minor
> E minor - Lost in a maze
> B minor - Mountain climbing, Working hard
> F# minor - Saddest of the sharp minors
> C# minor - Peaceful evening
> Ab minor - Mysterious
> G# minor - So uncommon I don't have an associated emotion unlike with C# major
> Eb minor - Jazzy, even with a completely regular rhythm
> Bb minor - Naturally angry, regardless of tempo or dynamic
> F minor - The Key of Death, Unrelievably sad
> C minor - Most variable of all the minor keys. Any emotion is easy to get across
> G minor - If it comes after a dramatic passage, Calming down, Otherwise, variable
> D minor - A tad sad, Uncertainty
> 
> The fact that C major sounds to me like happy boredom, along with the fact that a small bit of chromaticism makes me question whether or not it actually is in C major, and that C major is the most common key in all of music, is why I have it as my one and only avoid key. Now all these emotional associations are just from my experience as a pianist. I realize that different instruments playing in the same key can sound completely different in terms of emotion, even if the music that is played is exactly the same.


I have barely adequate relative pitch for being a musician. My violinist has the best relative pitch I've ever seen in a person. So because of your post, before our music night I played the first two measures of the song "When Sunny gets Blue" and I asked him what key it was in. I've always been fascinated with people who can hear things in music - when I can't do it myself. How did they do it? he tells me it just comes to him..

He couldn't tell me what key it was in by just hearing. He knew the song but he couldn't do it. He could guess like everybody can. But then he picked up his violin and played the melody and said without hesitation, oh that's F. That was correct, but there's no F chord in the first two measures.

So the point is if he couldn't hear what key the song was in how could the key's name elicit an emotional mood? We tried the two measures in different keys and a few of them he got right - probably just by guessing or remembering the earlier correct answers. I don't know since he can't explain how he got some right.

He said it just comes to you when you've been playing a long time - and I said sheepishly, no it doesn't. heh


----------



## ECraigR

Open Book said:


> What would make a certain key "odd"?


A key may be odd if it's difficult for an instrument to play in, like a lot of sharps or flats can be difficult for reed instruments. Also, C sharp major is just a weird key.


----------



## ECraigR

caters said:


> I myself have specific emotional associations with certain keys. I will separate this into a major and minor list.
> 
> *Major Key Emotions:
> *
> 
> C major - Happy boredom
> G major - Completed a minor task or in general, warm
> D major - Majestic
> A major - Bouncy
> E major - Triumph over something major
> B major - Dreamy, Figuring out what to do next
> F# major - Dreamy, Jazzy
> C# major - Eternal
> Db major - Dreamy
> Ab major - Dreamy, Flying and enjoying it
> Eb major - Sleeping in a field of flowers
> Bb major - Moonlit night
> F major - Flowing along a river
> 
> *Minor Key emotions:*
> 
> 
> A minor - Completely neutral key, as if the sadness of D minor and the happiness of C major canceled out, and left this void of a key that is A minor
> E minor - Lost in a maze
> B minor - Mountain climbing, Working hard
> F# minor - Saddest of the sharp minors
> C# minor - Peaceful evening
> Ab minor - Mysterious
> G# minor - So uncommon I don't have an associated emotion unlike with C# major
> Eb minor - Jazzy, even with a completely regular rhythm
> Bb minor - Naturally angry, regardless of tempo or dynamic
> F minor - The Key of Death, Unrelievably sad
> C minor - Most variable of all the minor keys. Any emotion is easy to get across
> G minor - If it comes after a dramatic passage, Calming down, Otherwise, variable
> D minor - A tad sad, Uncertainty
> 
> The fact that C major sounds to me like happy boredom, along with the fact that a small bit of chromaticism makes me question whether or not it actually is in C major, and that C major is the most common key in all of music, is why I have it as my one and only avoid key. Now all these emotional associations are just from my experience as a pianist. I realize that different instruments playing in the same key can sound completely different in terms of emotion, even if the music that is played is exactly the same.


I've never seen such a schematically complete taxonomy of emotional responses to keys in one person. I, personally, have never really had such a response to keys and tonality. Keys are just tools.


----------



## mikeh375

ECraigR said:


> I've never seen such a schematically complete taxonomy of emotional responses to keys in one person. I, personally, have never really had such a response to keys and tonality. *Keys are just tools.*


I'd agree with that but with the proviso that synesthesia and perfect pitch might potentially have an emotional resonance too.


----------



## Listenerris

I am think that professional composer, see the key choices, as merely something systematic of own theory. He did understand, that it is better, if he writes on all possible combinations and begin in that manner. And then


----------



## Luchesi

mikeh375 said:


> I'd agree with that but with the proviso that synesthesia and perfect pitch might potentially have an emotional resonance too.


I see Fm as gray, Cm as brown, E as dark green, Em as light green, A as yellow, Bb as dark gray almost black, F#m as maroon. And I've noticed that the E7 in the key of Am keeps it from being too white.

I'm thinking that this all comes from my earliest study of the Beethoven sonatas.


----------



## ECraigR

mikeh375 said:


> I'd agree with that but with the proviso that synesthesia and perfect pitch might potentially have an emotional resonance too.


That's true, hadn't thought of that. But to have perfect pitch and synesthesia would be quite a pairing, unless they're possibly linked in occurrence? I'm not sure. Regardless, that could certainly alter things.


----------



## mikeh375

ECraigR said:


> That's true, hadn't thought of that. But to have perfect pitch and synesthesia would be quite a pairing, unless they're possibly linked in occurrence? I'm not sure. Regardless, that could certainly alter things.


oops, yes it would. I should have said and/or....


----------



## jegreenwood

BobBrines said:


> Well, sort of. Prior to when the concept of a transposing instrument was worked out -- some time after 1700, a wind player was given a part and expected to figure out the fingerings to produce what ever concert pitch was being used that day. The bulk of these instruments (oboe, recorder, chalumeaux/clarinet, transverse flute) have seven finger holes and a thumb hole. All fingers down produces C4 and became non-transposing instruments. The C clarinet of course went away to be replaced by the Bb/A versions. But it really is not that simple. Let's look at the flute for a minute.
> 
> The baroque flute has only six finger holes. No thumb hole. A normally closed key for the right fourth finger for D#. So.... All fingers down is D4. Overblow it and you get D5. The natural key of the flute is D, not C. Indeed the present day Irish flute is called a flute in D and uses essentially the same fingering as a C baroque flute. As keys were added to the flute, a C4 key appeared (a C-foot) and ultimately a B3 key (a B-foot). But I have never heard a flute with a B-foot called a flute in B.
> 
> Now check the rest of the baroque not-transposing woodwinds. All the same logic applies. They are tuned in D with a C-foot. Modern oboes and clarinets have had their compass lowered with additional foot keys. Recorders got different. Recorders disappeared rather abruptly while they were still considered non-transposing. So, the F-alto and F-bass are written non-transposing and the player automatically fingers the notes up a fifth or down a fourth. But trust me, the natural key of the F-alto recorder is G.


As I mentioned, I don't know nothin' 'cept the clarinet. However written Middle C on the clarinet (ignoring transposition) requires one to cover the upper four holes with the thumb and 3 fingers of the left hand. The lower holes are left open.


----------



## millionrainbows

Since everything is in equal-temperament now, there are no differences in keys anymore. I've come up with a chart which illustrates this:

Major Key Emotions:


C major - Happy
G major - Happy
D major - Happy
A major - Happy
E major - Happy
B major - Happy
F# major - Happy
C# major - Happy
Db major - Happy
Ab major - Happy
Eb major - Happy
Bb major - Happy
F major - Happy

Minor Key emotions:


A minor - Sad
E minor - Sad
B minor - Sad
F# minor - Sad
C# minor - Sad
Ab minor - Sad
G# minor - Sad
Bb minor - Sad
F minor - Sad
C minor - Sad
G minor - Sad
D minor - Sad


----------



## Luchesi

millionrainbows said:


> Since everything is in equal-temperament now, there are no differences in keys anymore. I've come up with a chart which illustrates this:
> 
> Major Key Emotions:
> 
> 
> C major - Happy
> G major - Happy
> D major - Happy
> A major - Happy
> E major - Happy
> B major - Happy
> F# major - Happy
> C# major - Happy
> Db major - Happy
> Ab major - Happy
> Eb major - Happy
> Bb major - Happy
> F major - Happy
> 
> Minor Key emotions:
> 
> 
> A minor - Sad
> E minor - Sad
> B minor - Sad
> F# minor - Sad
> C# minor - Sad
> Ab minor - Sad
> G# minor - Sad
> Bb minor - Sad
> F minor - Sad
> C minor - Sad
> G minor - Sad
> D minor - Sad


Eb minor must be off the charts SAD!


----------



## Vasks

Luchesi said:


> Eb minor most be off the charts SAD!


and meanwhile I'm wondering what the happiness difference is between his C# major and Db major!


----------



## Woodduck

Vasks said:


> and meanwhile I'm wondering what the happiness difference is between his C# major and Db major!


Merely that musicians are happier playing in five flats than in seven sharps.


----------



## KenOC

Historically, some composers felt that different key signatures had definite characters. Beethoven, for instance, had his “C minor” mood and tended to write his broader and more expansive works in E-flat and B-flat. He once stated that works in a particular key (B minor?) should be marked “barbaresco”.

Others evidently had similar feelings. When Beethoven’s Moonlight sonata was published, AMZ’s enthusiastic 1802 review noted that it was “written in the eerie C-sharp minor key.”


----------



## BobBrines

jegreenwood said:


> As I mentioned, I don't know nothin' 'cept the clarinet. However written Middle C on the clarinet (ignoring transposition) requires one to cover the upper four holes with the thumb and 3 fingers of the left hand. The lower holes are left open.


I will admit that it has been half a lifetime since I actually had a clarinet in my hands, and everything I am about to say may be nonsense. If so, please disregard. But....

According to this fingering chart : http://clarinet-sales.com/clarinet-fingering-chart/

The fingering you suggest produces (non-transposed) G3 (G below middle C) or with the speaker key C5. The thing about the clarinet is that it overblows the 12th whereas the rest of the woodwinds overblow at the octave. This suggests that the clarinet in C (if you could find one!) is pitched in the natural key of G, just like an F recorder. I was able to locate a fingering chart for an F tenor chalumeaux: https://gtmusicalinstruments.com/instruments/baroque-chalumeau/

And this pretty much confirms it. The F clarinet would finger exactly like the F chalumeau in the lowest register and exactly like an F recorder. All of this is pretty much useless trivia and I should find something more useful to research, but there it is!


----------



## Luchesi

KenOC said:


> Historically, some composers felt that different key signatures had definite characters. Beethoven, for instance, had his "C minor" mood and tended to write his broader and more expansive works in E-flat and B-flat. He once stated that works in a particular key (B minor?) should be marked "barbaresco".
> 
> Others evidently had similar feelings. When Beethoven's Moonlight sonata was published, AMZ's enthusiastic 1802 review noted that it was "written in the eerie C-sharp minor key."


Beethoven was so passionate and committed to develop musical expressiveness, - and the paper and the ink quills and the scratch-outs of his trying times probably added to his intense feelings about the look of different keys. What Mozart accomplished in Cm, Dm and Gm etc. added to his emotional world. 
How would it be? He knew he could do great things - and he was losing his hearing.


----------



## Larkenfield

For orchestral writing, most composers write in keys that are convenient to the musicians and are not technically cumbersome. Look up what crossfingerings are that are technically harder to perform cleanly. But even then, certain compositions can pass through any key and the musicians need to be familiar with them, regardless of how many flats or sharps are involved. The great composers go where the music takes them.


----------



## mikeh375

Let's start a thread about how and why composers use Sesquiquadritone progressions......:devil:


----------



## jegreenwood

BobBrines said:


> I will admit that it has been half a lifetime since I actually had a clarinet in my hands, and everything I am about to say may be nonsense. If so, please disregard. But....
> 
> According to this fingering chart : http://clarinet-sales.com/clarinet-fingering-chart/
> 
> The fingering you suggest produces (non-transposed) G3 (G below middle C) or with the speaker key C5. The thing about the clarinet is that it overblows the 12th whereas the rest of the woodwinds overblow at the octave. This suggests that the clarinet in C (if you could find one!) is pitched in the natural key of G, just like an F recorder. I was able to locate a fingering chart for an F tenor chalumeaux: https://gtmusicalinstruments.com/instruments/baroque-chalumeau/
> 
> And this pretty much confirms it. The F clarinet would finger exactly like the F chalumeau in the lowest register and exactly like an F recorder. All of this is pretty much useless trivia and I should find something more useful to research, but there it is!


Maybe a communications problem. I am referring to the C on the second line of the chart. The lower holes are open. With the register key it becomes G5. (All non-transposed).

Edit - maybe we're interpreting non-transposed differently (and the mistake may be mine)? When I see a C4 on a piece of sheet music, the fingering I use is left hand: three fingers and thumb down. Right hand: no fingers down.


----------



## BobBrines

jegreenwood said:


> Maybe a communications problem. I am referring to the C on the second line of the chart. The lower holes are open. With the register key it becomes G5. (All non-transposed).


Ah yes. Communications. Middle C -- C4, c' -- is usually considered the first line below the treble staff or the first line above the bass staff. The note in the middle of the grand staff. Now all fits.


----------



## millionrainbows

KenOC said:


> Historically, some composers felt that different key signatures had definite characters. Beethoven, for instance, had his "C minor" mood and tended to write his broader and more expansive works in E-flat and B-flat. He once stated that works in a particular key (B minor?) should be marked "barbaresco".
> 
> Others evidently had similar feelings. When Beethoven's Moonlight sonata was published, AMZ's enthusiastic 1802 review noted that it was "written in the eerie C-sharp minor key."


These differences might have existed as actual sound, before _true_ equal temperament was achieved in 1919. This was when electric frequency analyzers were invented.

Before that, equal temperament was being sought, but not fully achieved, because all tempering had to be done with stopwatches, counting the "beats" of intervals. It was mechanical, and guesstimation.

Still, the earlier temperaments were more pronounced in these effects, called "affekt."

If you're saying that Beethoven & others had certain _feelings_ about keys, it may have been simply what they _thought, or felt, _which can't be substantiated, since that would be totally subjective. However, maybe enough difference existed in Beethoven's tunings for this to be true.

True physical "characters" of different keys can only physically exist within temperaments which are not equally-spaced. This inequality would give different fifths and thirds for each key.

The following chart shows the tuning that Beethoven used.















As you can see in equal, all major thirds are 13.7 cents sharp from a "zero" or true major third (5:4).

In meantone, the keys C-G-D-A-E and Eb-Bb-F have perfect major thirds, but the keys B-F#-C#-Ab are unusable.

Well-temperament, used by Bach, is better, and you can see how the Thomas Young temperament is a variation of this.

In Young temperament, the fifths are all almost perfect, closer than ET (under two cents).


----------



## isorhythm

I sometimes wonder if people who get really worked up about temperament forget that it only applies to keyboard and fretted instruments and nothing else.


----------



## Schoenberg

millionrainbows said:


> Before that, equal temperament was being sought, but not fully achieved, because all tempering had to be done with stopwatches, counting the "beats" of intervals. It was mechanical, and guesstimation.


I have been under the impression that most tuning is still being done this "mechanical and guesstimation" way. The piano tuner that came to my house certainly used this method, or a similar method as he spent hours comparing each note in various intervals with others, and my various instrument teachers (whether for violin or for keyboard) all have said that using frequency analysers is the easy way out for people that can't actually tune by ear.


----------



## BabyGiraffe

isorhythm said:


> I sometimes wonder if people who get really worked up about temperament forget that it only applies to keyboard and fretted instruments and nothing else.


You are clearly underestimating the influence of keyboard.
Modern western music is based on optimized for keyboards (and derived from them) tunings.
I also said this in the previous thread where you had similar remark: different tunings lead to different music, because we have different enharmonic relations (tempered commas), so different chord progressions, modulations and scales are optimal. 
Unfretted string instruments or vocalists follow conventions set by keyboard music - it doesn't matter that they don't play exactly in it, because the repertoire is not based on what is possible to be played by more flexible instruments.
If we had to play in optimized for let's say pipes systems, it would lead to strange music - derived from harmonic series or based on linear division of octaves.



Schoenberg said:


> I have been under the impression that most tuning is still being done this "mechanical and guesstimation" way. The piano tuner that came to my house certainly used this method, or a similar method as he spent hours comparing each note in various intervals with others, and my various instrument teachers (whether for violin or for keyboard) all have said that using frequency analysers is the easy way out for people that can't actually tune by ear.


 He used his ears, because there is no simple way to find the optimal stretched piano tuning (I doubt anyone is crazy enough to measure each string and then start solving equations to find the best compromise instead of just doing it by ear). If he doesn't use stretched tuning, it will sound less good.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inharmonicity#Inharmonicity_leads_to_stretched_tuning

And noone can tune perfectly by ear - the best ears supposedly catch around 5 cents difference. 2 cents difference is the amount of mistuning that you need to start tuning into meantone spectrum (12 equal is there). Bigger than 700 cents fifths = pythagorean temperaments range and there you get intervals, separated by commas and false relations. If your piano tuner uses his ears and they lie him with 5 cents mistake, he may tune your piano to something like 12 notes out of 34 equal (705.882353cents fifth), where all Western music can sound better, but requires more keys, because of the enharmonics.


----------



## millionrainbows

> He used his ears, because there is no simple way to find the optimal stretched piano tuning (I doubt anyone is crazy enough to measure each string and then start solving equations to find the best compromise instead of just doing it by ear). If he doesn't use stretched tuning, it will sound less good.


The Yamaha digital tuner that piano tuners use has stored tunings for every brand of spinet piano out there. It's easy.


----------



## Schoenberg

BabyGiraffe said:


> And noone can tune perfectly by ear - the best ears supposedly catch around 5 cents difference. 2 cents difference is the amount of mistuning that you need to start tuning into meantone spectrum (12 equal is there). Bigger than 700 cents fifths = pythagorean temperaments range and there you get intervals, separated by commas and false relations. If your piano tuner uses his ears and they lie him with 5 cents mistake, he may tune your piano to something like 12 notes out of 34 equal (705.882353cents fifth), where all Western music can sound better, but requires more keys, because of the enharmonics.


Although it's true that you can't tune perfectly by ear, you can get much better than 5 cents off, as you can calculate precisely the difference between an interval by calculating the period (the time between each wa-wa sound.) For example, go to this site: https://www.szynalski.com/tone-generator/ and run two tabs, one with 440 hertz and another with 441 hertz. You will notice that there is a distinct "beat" every second, and if you change it to 442 hertz there will be two "beats" every second. The actual formula is much more complicated than that, but that's the gist of it.

It's by this same concept that all professional stringed instruments are tuned by ear (except for the A string.)


----------



## isorhythm

BabyGiraffe said:


> I also said this in the previous thread where you had similar remark: different tunings lead to different music, because we have different enharmonic relations (tempered commas), so different chord progressions, modulations and scales are optimal.


This is a more compelling point, though it's worth noting that distant enharmonic modulation were explored relatively early on in vocal music by Gesualdo and others without a lot apparent concern about these problems. I suppose keyboards may have been influential on that, though.


----------



## BabyGiraffe

isorhythm said:


> This is a more compelling point, though it's worth noting that distant enharmonic modulation were explored relatively early on in vocal music by Gesualdo and others without a lot apparent concern about these problems. I suppose keyboards may have been influential on that, though.


They used split black keys or even big, experimental keyboards (in Vicentino's case). I think that most popular version was with 14 keys per octave - 7 white and 7 black keys.

Check this - (surviving) "Renaissance Keyboard Instruments Italian Split-Keyed Instruments with Fewer than Nineteen Divisions to the Octave"
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/70978324.pdf

I remember reading Handel having 16-notes per octave organ? Of course, these were not 14 equal or 16 equal, but a chain of 14 or 16 flat (meantone) fifths, so good major and minor thirds and sixths were available.


----------



## samm

It's much harder with a guitar. It takes a fair bit of practice. Maybe buy a guitar for yourself? If you're still wondering how to buy a guitar, you'll also need to decide between different types. A few general categories of guitar are very popular. These styles have very different sound and playability characteristics. Deciding the style of which guitar to buy in advance will help narrow down your choices considerably. You have a list of different guitars https://bestelectricguitars.reviews/best-jazz-guitars/ just so it helps you out and makes it easier. That's how I narrowed down my search. Out of all the types of guitars, electric guitars are by far the most popular style used in modern music. Think for yourself.


----------



## Phil loves classical

I noticed Debussy and Bartok pick some keys that maximize the number of white notes in some pieces, while in others they pick keys that are more exotic.


----------



## Luchesi

I think composers initially get a few germs in a key they see in their mind. Then they might change the pitch slightly and use that new key, or similarly they might transpose their ideas to one of their few favorite keys specifically for the playability and sound (mood) of the piece (but there's the range to keep in mind).

That scene in Amadeus (composing the Requiem) might have given people the wrong idea, because keys are second nature to a composer.


----------



## millionrainbows

Phil loves classical said:


> I noticed Debussy and Bartok pick some keys that maximize the number of white notes in some pieces, while in others they pick keys that are more exotic.


Debussy used the whole tone scale. it's a six-note scale, and there are only two of them, with completely different notes. One has 3 white notes (C-D-E-F#-G#-A#) and the other has 4 white notes (C#-D#-(E#/F)-G-A-B). This gives you two gateways into adjacent WT territory.

Bartok divided the octave at the tritone. He frequently used the 8-note octatonic (diminished) scale.

I don't think Debussy and Bartok thought in terms of "keys."


----------



## Bwv 1080

Bartok thought of his music as having a tonal center and much of it is based on diatonic modes which then get abstracted into other pitch sets such as octatonic or whole tone


----------



## millionrainbows

Bwv 1080 said:


> Bartok thought of his music as having a tonal center and much of it is based on diatonic modes which then get abstracted into other pitch sets such as octatonic or whole tone


It's got local tonal centers, but they are temporary, and based on motives, usually. To describe Bartok's music as using "mostly diatonic modes" is misleading.


----------



## Bwv 1080

millionrainbows said:


> It's got local tonal centers, but they are temporary, and based on motives, usually. To describe Bartok's music as using "mostly diatonic modes" is misleading.


I said 'much', not 'mostly' and go read chapter 6 of Antokoletz


----------



## millionrainbows

Bwv 1080 said:


> I said 'much', not 'mostly' and go read chapter 6 of Antokoletz


I've got the Antokoletz book, and I still don't think that Bartok thought in terms of "keys." You're probably misinterpreting the meaning of "diatonic modes."

I could quote Antokoletz as well, to bolster _my_ position.


----------



## isorhythm

millionrainbows said:


> Debussy used the whole tone scale.


Sometimes, but most of his music isn't based on the whole tone scale and much of it is recognizably tonal.


----------



## Larkenfield

Debussy probably used the whole tone scale more than anyone: 
Chansons de Bilitis
Children's Corner 
Images for piano, No. 1 
Jeux 
La mer
Pelléas et Mélisande, act 4 scene 2 
Prélude à l'après-midi d'un faune
Voiles from Préludes, Book 1


----------



## Bwv 1080

But not exclusively in most of those pieces, Jeux, for example, has a lot of octatonic material as well. The main motive of the first images is Ab F Eb, so not whole tone. Voiles I believe is exclusively whole tone


----------



## millionrainbows

isorhythm said:


> Sometimes, but most of his music isn't based on the whole tone scale and much of it is recognizably tonal.


Tonal, yes, but I don't think Debussy thought in terms of "keys."


----------



## mikeh375

millionrainbows said:


> Tonal, yes, but I don't think Debussy thought in terms of "keys."


He did in his lighter moments, The Arabesques, Suite Bergamasque, Children's Corner, Petit Suite etc.


----------



## isorhythm

millionrainbows said:


> Tonal, yes, but I don't think Debussy thought in terms of "keys."


Mostly not in the way common practice composers did, no.


----------



## SergeOfArniVillage

Fascinatingly, Berlioz actually wrote about how certain key signatures on violins would, in general, sound.









I haven't looked, but he may have done the same for different instruments. You can find the entire book here:

http://www.opus28.co.uk/Berlioz-Strauss.pdf

It's a massive book, but contains all sorts of interesting remarks on orchestration (most of which goes over my head) and funny personal anecdotes.


----------



## Bwv 1080

Keys matter on stringed instruments because of the resonances of the open strings. Ab will always be weird on guitar for example


----------



## Luchesi

I think Mozart and the others in those centuries picked keys by how attractive they looked on paper, in addition to the practical considerations of playability and different instruments.

Looking at a key in Eflat or its polar opposite Amajor has a curious effect on people who do a lot of sight reading.


----------



## hammeredklavier

Cantata "Dir, Seele des Weltalls" in E flat major K429
Cantata "Die Maurerfreude" in E flat major K471
Maurerische Tauermusik in C minor K477
Adagio and Fugue in C minor K546
Adagio and Rondo in C minor K617
Piano Concerto in E flat Major K482 (Written for and performed at a concert given by the Lodge Zur gekronten Hoffnung, 15 December 1785)
Symphony in E flat major K543 (Written as a celebration of the Craft and the joy of living)


----------



## MAXSWAGGER

Every key has its own unique character.

Like with colors some may have a broader, less defined character, while others simply have something special (like satin-purple and Ebm), but don't have a such a wide spectral range.

Of course you can just combine all keys - then you have the ULTRAKEY.


----------

