# What is your favorite music key?



## amadeus1928 (Jun 16, 2021)

I'm just wondering what you guys will answer.

But my personal favorite is G sharp minor/A flat minor. I don't know exactly how to explain it, but I just love its uncommonness and completely dark tone. Also my favorite major key is E major, and my favorite flat key is A flat major.


----------



## mbhaub (Dec 2, 2016)

As a listener the idea of a favorite key is meaningless. Even as a performer key is largely irrelevant. But when I sit a piano it's an easy answer: B major. While some people find 5 sharps intimidating, that key fits my hands better than any other key. It just feels so natural compared to a half step either direction. C maj is easy to read but the fingers don't fit as well. And B flat is even more awkward. It's interesting how much anatomy can influence playing.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

mbhaub said:


> As a listener the idea of a favorite key is meaningless. Even as a performer key is largely irrelevant. But when I sit a piano it's an easy answer: B major. While some people find 5 sharps intimidating, that key fits my hands better than any other key. It just feels so natural compared to a half step either direction. C maj is easy to read but the fingers don't fit as well. And B flat is even more awkward. It's interesting how much anatomy can influence playing.


For piano: D-flat, for the same reason.

I'm pretty sure this doesn't qualify as a theory question and that it would get a bigger response in the general discussion forum.


----------



## mikeh375 (Sep 7, 2017)

B maj at the piano for me too and for the same reason as mbhaub, although ditto for Edward's D flat too. As for composing or listening all keys are equal (ha!) for me.


----------



## Art Rock (Nov 28, 2009)

EdwardBast said:


> I'm pretty sure this doesn't qualify as a theory question and that it would get a bigger response in the general discussion forum.


Agreed. Let's move it.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Favorite Key?


----------



## Animal the Drummer (Nov 14, 2015)

mbhaub said:


> As a listener the idea of a favorite key is meaningless. Even as a performer key is largely irrelevant. But when I sit a piano it's an easy answer: B major. While some people find 5 sharps intimidating, that key fits my hands better than any other key. It just feels so natural compared to a half step either direction. C maj is easy to read but the fingers don't fit as well. And B flat is even more awkward. It's interesting how much anatomy can influence playing.


When Chopin got his piano pupils started on scales it was with the B major scale, not C major, for the same reason you give here. So you're in good company - or maybe Chopin is.


----------



## fbjim (Mar 8, 2021)

G major. Underrated (and rare in post-classical symphonies) because it's too happy, and post-classical symphonies are supposed to be elevated, serious works- but sometimes I just wanna have a good time!


----------



## Auntie Lynn (Feb 23, 2014)

D flat - on the piano you get even distribution of black and white keys...problem solved.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Just for ease of playing, C, G, F. Less black keys to remember.


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Phil loves classical said:


> Just for ease of playing, C, G, F. Less black keys to remember.


Those are easy keys to remember the key sigs, but generally not considered the easiest to play. Try playing the different exercises in the brown scale book, and you will soon realize C major is not the easiest. Doing arpeggios, chords and scales on all white keys is kind of a pain.

Keys like B major, D flat, or E major all fall under the fingers more easily.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^ I'm sure you're right. When I did warmups, I only did them in C major so it became my base key.


----------



## Brahmsian Colors (Sep 16, 2016)

Cancelled............


----------



## tdc (Jan 17, 2011)

Phil loves classical said:


> ^ I'm sure you're right. When I did warmups, I only did them in C major so it became my base key.


Yes, also for sight reading. In that sense those keys you mentioned are easier.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

I play both piano and guitar, and I have favorite keys on each.

On guitar, I'm a bit more of an amateur, although I've actually performed with acoustic guitar. Some keys are simply easier to *think* in on a guitar: *E, Em, G, A, Am*

On piano, playing-wise, the key really doesn't matter that much to me although I find some keys a bit more awkward to play in, in general, the less common keys. Brain-wise, those might be keys like G#m, Bbm and Bm. The easier key for me to *THINK* in is probably *C*.


----------



## Merl (Jul 28, 2016)

On guitar I love playing music in A minor, as I love the sound of that particular chord, but I've no preference in the music I listen to.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Does anyone feel much difference between keys even when they're tuned in equal temperament?


----------



## GucciManeIsTheNewWebern (Jul 29, 2020)

hammeredklavier said:


> Does anyone feel much difference between keys even when they're tuned in equal temperament?


I've never quite gotten it either. C minor is the stereotypical dark, melancholy key, but if it were in Bminor could anyone really be able to tell the difference? Or C# minor? If you're not already familiar with the piece I mean. If you are than a transposition like that is definitely noticeable.


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

^ Not sure if there is any scientific evidence to support it, but I feel there is an acceptable range and where it matters relative to that range in a melody. If it's too high, it can sound too sweet and happy, and too low, it can sound unnecessarily heavy and murky. It's not the key itself but the pitch tolerance in a melody line. My unproved theory.

Try transposing something like this higher and lower a few semittones. It can make a big difference.

I think it also has something to do the ear having long term memory of other works with certain associations to certain tones/pitches. Unproved theory #2.


----------



## Kreisler jr (Apr 21, 2021)

My hypothesis is that equal temperament was not applied to most instruments until the early 19th century when brass were natural instruments. Many wind instruments still retained favorite keys (same with open strings of string instruments, and they need not be played equally tempered either) and also register-depending differences in sound, so it is quite relevant if a melody is played, say a fourth lower, thus getting from the best sounding register of a clarinet to the dullest sounding. So there are real differences in sound.
Furthermore, some of the 17th and early 18th century supposed key characteristics (F major pastoral etc. as found in Mattheson or other writers) had established a bit of a tradition that was not thrown overboard immediately.

Because of these factors many composers perceived characteristic features of keys and developed favorites, thus continuing the tradition even as the basis for the differences in acoustics mostly went away with equal temperament.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Phil loves classical said:


> ^ Not sure if there is any scientific evidence to support it, but I feel there is an acceptable range and where it matters relative to that range in a melody. If it's too high, it can sound too sweet and happy, and too low, it can sound unnecessarily heavy and murky. It's not the key itself but the pitch tolerance in a melody line.


I like your unproved theory, and I think it has good support in music itself. In sonata form movements and rondos one often hears a second theme with repeated phrases or sentences that stay in the same octave in the exposition, that is, in the octave they were originally written for, but when they're recapitulated and transposed to tonic we get the first phrase in one octave and the second phrase in another. It's as if neither register is right in the recap, so we get half that's too low for the character of the theme, and half that's too high - but the combination more or less balances out. This is true in the first movement of Schubert's Sonata in A major D. 664. In the finale of the same sonata it works the same way with the rondo theme. In the original presentation we get a repeated sentence with both phrases in the octave, but when it returns in the subdominant (D major) one phrase is "too high" and the other in a lower octave. There are many examples like this, I just thought of the Schubert because I'm currently playing that sonata.


----------



## MusicSybarite (Aug 17, 2017)

E-flat minor. It provides a sort of troubled and serious sound that fascinates me so much. Another favorite is B-flat minor.

On the other hand, my least favorite is A minor and probably D major when used in fast movements.


----------



## Enthalpy (Apr 15, 2020)

To the listener, the key should change zilch, nada, niente.

I suppose this bizarre idea, that the key changes the sound colour, dates back to pre-Boehm woodwinds, where fork fingerings made the sharps and flats sound muffled, and possibly back to natural horns that stopped some notes depending on the height. But presently, it makes no sense.

Almost two centuries later, it would be time to amend these misconceptions. A bit like Plato isn't the source of science any more.


----------



## Bwv 1080 (Dec 31, 2018)

given that there was no standardized concert pitch until well into the 19th century, it cannot be from the absolute pitch level. C minor in Haydn's day could have sounded at A=440 anywhere from Bb to Db minor


----------



## Neo Romanza (May 7, 2013)

I’ve always loved A minor and B minor, plus A♯ and B♭.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

Enthalpy said:


> To the listener, the key should change zilch, nada, niente.
> 
> I suppose *this bizarre idea, that the key changes the sound colour*, dates back to pre-Boehm woodwinds, where fork fingerings made the sharps and flats sound muffled, and possibly back to natural horns that stopped some notes depending on the height. But presently, it makes no sense.
> 
> Almost two centuries later, it would be time to amend these misconceptions. A bit like Plato isn't the source of science any more.


It does change the sound color - obviously! How could it not? The same passage transposed by, for example, a third, will have a significantly different effect and character that's clearly audible to anyone with ears. Want proof? Listen to the finale of the Schubert sonata linked below. The secondary theme in the major mode (in so-called harmonic major) sounds three times in different keys, F major (17:48), C major (19:17), and A major (21:20). The effect is quite different each time and it's because of the disparate timbre (sound-color) of the different registers of the piano.


----------



## SanAntone (May 10, 2020)

Enthalpy said:


> To the listener, the key should change zilch, nada, niente.
> 
> I suppose this bizarre idea, that the key changes the sound colour, dates back to pre-Boehm woodwinds, where fork fingerings made the sharps and flats sound muffled, and possibly back to natural horns that stopped some notes depending on the height. But presently, it makes no sense.
> 
> Almost two centuries later, it would be time to amend these misconceptions. A bit like Plato isn't the source of science any more.


Prior to equal temperament, different keys absolutely had different characters; this has been claimed by a number of composers.

*Affective Musical Key Characteristics*



> The association of musical keys with specific emotional or qualitative characteristic was fairly common prior to the 20th century. It was part of the shared cultural experience of those who made, performed and listened to music. When Mozart or Beethoven or Schubert wrote a piece in a Ab major, for example, they were well aware of this was the 'key of the grave' and knew that many in their audiences were as well. We lose a part of the meaning of their music if we are ignorant of their affective choices. Although these characteristics were, of course, subjective, it was possible to conceive of each key as unique because each key actually sounded distinct within unequal temperaments. When equal temperament became the dominant tuning after 1917, the aural quality of every key became the same, and therefore these affective characteristics are mostly lost to us.


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

Take a look at:



Natural Horn said:


> I also often read that the recitatives are perceived as boring. I can understand that, because what is still sold as recitative in many recordings (and live performances) has nothing to do with real recitatives.
> The singing is mostly monotonous, the notes are sung as written in the score, while a harpsichord plays a chord or arpeggio now and then.
> 
> The notated note values hardly matter, however; a recitative should follow the speech rhythm (which is how it was taught in Mozart's time
> ...


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

EdwardBast said:


> It does change the sound color - obviously! How could it not? The same passage transposed by, for example, a third, will have a significantly different effect and character that's clearly audible to anyone with ears. Want proof? Listen to the finale of the Schubert sonata linked below. The secondary theme in the major mode (in so-called harmonic major) sounds three times in different keys, F major (17:48), C major (19:17), and A major (21:20). The effect is quite different each time and it's because of the disparate timbre (sound-color) of the different registers of the piano.






Bernstein: "C sharp minor, which is as far away as you can get from the home key of G minor. Sounds pretty remote doesn't it? "

But in equal temperament, isn't this exactly what F minor would do in the context of a piece in B minor? What special colors do keys have other than situational feelings arising from their contextural functions?


----------



## Couchie (Dec 9, 2010)

As a pianist I have always preferred the flats over the sharps, and the more the better!


----------



## Bruckner Anton (Mar 10, 2016)

no preference for me.


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

Couchie said:


> As a pianist I have always preferred the flats over the sharps, and the more the better!


Same with me. I do particularly enjoy D, however, for reasons unrelated to Baroque trumpets.


----------



## EdwardBast (Nov 25, 2013)

hammeredklavier said:


> Bernstein: "C sharp minor, which is as far away as you can get from the home key of G minor. Sounds pretty remote doesn't it? "
> 
> But in equal temperament, isn't this exactly what F minor would do in the context of a piece in B minor? What special colors do keys have other than situational feelings arising from their contextural functions?


What I'm saying is that register makes a big difference when the same passage is transposed from one key to another. It's not the key per se that's responsible, it's where in register a passage lies in different keys.


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

*What is your favorite music key?*

It's this one:









Not only does it open the piano fallboard, it happens to fit the wine cooler lock as well.

Which is when _this_ key comes in handy:


----------



## Woodduck (Mar 17, 2014)

SONNET CLV said:


> *What is your favorite music key?*
> 
> It's this one:
> 
> ...


Who knew that the name "Steinway" referred to beer mugs?


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

Woodduck said:


> Who knew that the name "Steinway" referred to beer mugs?


Mahler?


----------



## amadeus1928 (Jun 16, 2021)

wait why can't i reply


----------



## amadeus1928 (Jun 16, 2021)

The weird thing about the Christian Schubart thing is that even before I already similar ideas about the different keys even before I knew it existed.


----------



## Sondersdorf (Aug 5, 2020)

This thread makes my head explode, discussing many different phenomena at the same time. And, that is totally, totally leaving the corkscrew aside. Temperament, absolute pitch, ease of playing on particular instruments, instrument and vocal register—what's everyone talking about? These are all very different things.

I am interested in the listener's perspective. What sounds different to you, if anything, and what instruments are you listening to? Also, the subject of how and why does a composer choose a key is at the top of my interest list.

Is D major really a sunny key? Or, was that just common thought when a composer sat down to write a happy little piece? Let's have a string quartet play a movement without using any open strings, better yet, let's have a vocal quartet sing it. They use just temperament. No reason not to, right? Now transpose it to Db. It is not happy anymore?


----------



## amadeus1928 (Jun 16, 2021)

The message that I left earlier today about me not being able to respond involved a similar message asking if changing a key would change the mood of the music. However I am still very sensitive to these changes as I have absolute pitch.


----------



## Azol (Jan 25, 2015)

My favorite key is a Treble key (clef).
Always had troubles sight-reading bass clef (not even mentioning alto clef, ugh!) in music school


----------



## SONNET CLV (May 31, 2014)

hammeredklavier said:


> Favorite Key?


 I just read through the thread referenced by hammeredklavier. There is some wonderful discussion concerning synaesthesia.

I wonder now about color blindness and blindness in general, and if that would have some effect upon those with mental proclivity towards a musical sense of synaesthesia. I don't see how perceptual color blindness, a defect of the mechanisms of the eye itself, should have any effect upon the synaesthesic sense, which must be centered in the brain rather than the ear (and likely have nothing to do with the eye). Yet, if one is unaware of the hue of "colors", how does a mind with musical synaesthesia register the sounds, tones, key that the unafflicted synaesthete will perceive in the various hues we term "colors"? One cannot describe "redness" to one born blind, so how does a born-blind musician with in-born synaesthesia register what his seeing peers will perceive as hues? Perhaps with texture? Or geometrical shape sense? Or does the mental sense of synaesthesia degrade early on because the mind of a blind person has no access to color information, and thus makes the synaesthesia moot?


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

pianozach said:


> I play both piano and guitar, and I have favorite keys on each.
> 
> On guitar, I'm a bit more of an amateur, although I've actually performed with acoustic guitar. Some keys are simply easier to *think* in on a guitar: *E, Em, G, A, Am*
> 
> On piano, playing-wise, the key really doesn't matter that much to me although I find some keys a bit more awkward to play in, in general, the less common keys. Brain-wise, those might be keys like G#m, Bbm and Bm. The easier key for me to *THINK* in is probably *C*.


I forgot to mention the key I prefer to actually _*HEAR*_.

I think it might be *D flat*.


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

SONNET CLV said:


> I just read through the thread referenced by hammeredklavier. There is some wonderful discussion concerning synaesthesia.
> 
> I wonder now about color blindness and blindness in general, and if that would have some effect upon those with mental proclivity towards a musical sense of synaesthesia. I don't see how perceptual color blindness, a defect of the mechanisms of the eye itself, should have any effect upon the synaesthesic sense, which must be centered in the brain rather than the ear (and likely have nothing to do with the eye). Yet, if one is unaware of the hue of "colors", how does a mind with musical synaesthesia register the sounds, tones, key that the unafflicted synaesthete will perceive in the various hues we term "colors"? One cannot describe "redness" to one born blind, so how does a born-blind musician with in-born synaesthesia register what his seeing peers will perceive as hues? Perhaps with texture? Or geometrical shape sense? Or does the mental sense of synaesthesia degrade early on because the mind of a blind person has no access to color information, and thus makes the synaesthesia moot?


I'm a member of a Synesthesia group on Facebook. I don't really have any overt synesthesia, but a little suppressed synesthesia. But . . . I am a somewhat latent psychic, and a card-carrying empath. I also do pretty well with intuitive reading of Dreams, and I used to dabble in Tarot (like 30+ years ago).

It all comes from the same "pool" or "ocean".

There are some famous composers with varying degrees of synesthesia:

Alexander Scriabin.
Jean Sibelius.
Olivier Messiaen.
György Ligeti.
Franz Liszt.

There's also some musicians that have (/had) it: Duke Ellington, Billie Eilish, Pharrell, Billy Joel . . .

The whole condition is fascinating from a scientific perspective. It's not really a perception issue, but more of a processing issue . . . EXCEPT that it's one of those real things that cannot be scientifically quantified . . .

My take? There is another sense, call it a dimension, a spiritual connection, psychic ability, the "paranormal", but there is something ELSE in our existence that is mostly unseen/unfelt by most people. Most folks simply subconsciously train themselves to ignore it at a young age. Cats "see" things that aren't there . . . or are they?

Some good questions you bring up . . . do colorblind people dream in black & white? What do blind people dream, and how can they describe it to the sighted in a way that makes sense?


----------



## hammeredklavier (Feb 18, 2018)

pianozach said:


> I'm a member of a Synesthesia group on Facebook. I don't really have any overt synesthesia, but a little suppressed synesthesia. But . . . I am a somewhat latent psychic, and a card-carrying empath. I also do pretty well with intuitive reading of Dreams, and I used to dabble in Tarot (like 30+ years ago).


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

hammeredklavier said:


>


This guy's explanations are pretty good; concise, brief. I like how he leads with the fact that every synesthete experiences synesthesia differently.

I especially like his parting shot: "We are all a little bit synesthetic".

In fact, this applies to other attributes we have as well. We might all have a percentage of autism, or OCD, or psychic ability, and we all experience these things differently.

For me, I can usually experience a bit of synesthesia by closing my eyes, can focusing on how the sound affects what I see visually. What's left of my vision behind closed eyelids is somewhat geometrical, and the patterns change as the sounds change, but usually only in smaller places in my "Field of vision". Sometimes there will by "suggested" fuzzy places of color. But it's an unreliable sense.

*Sonnet* asked "how does a mind with musical synaesthesia register the sounds, tones, key . . . " (although it was in the sense of blindness).

The first I'd ever heard of synæsthesia (I think the word looks better with the æ, the 28th letter of the alphabet) was a story of someone discovering that their synæsthesia wasn't something that everyone had. She'd mentioned how wonderful some music she was hearing *looked*, and her friend corrected her "you mean 'how it sounds'". She then described how the colors and shapes for the song came out of the speakers in pleasing combinations.

I once had a girlfriend who claimed that she could see auras. She found it mildly annoying, so every few years she'd go to a hypnotist that would "fix" the problem for a few years, with the unbidden seeing of auras gradually returning, overriding the hypnosis suggestion that she wouldn't 'see' them.

But that's an entirely different thing. People that see auras will see the same color auras on the same people, making it a psychic/spiritual world thing, whereas synesthesia is a personal perception that differs from person to person. I think of auras as being in the same basket as dogs hearing things we cannot, or the cat staring at something through a wall.

We KNOW that a human being has audio and visual spectrum ranges that general go from here to there. Human hearing range goes from 20 (at best) Hz to 20 kHz, while a dog's hearing range is from 67-45,000 Hz.

Our human visual range, under optimal conditions, can extend to 310 nm (UV) and 1100 nm (NIR). Cats, on the other hand can't detect colors as well as humans, BUT their night vision is better. But just as dogs can hear higher frequency sounds, is it possible that cats can "see" a visual spectral range that is wider than humans?


----------



## ClassicalMaestro (Dec 10, 2017)

C Minor Beethovens 5th Symphony my favorite


----------



## pianozach (May 21, 2018)

I often keep my iTunes on "random" mode, and *Tchaikovsky's 6th*, *1st mvt*. came up yesterday.

Man, that is one great movement.


----------

