# Different moods of keys.



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

What are you opinions of the different moods if certain keys?
I'll start

A major, bright and joyful, but calm

E major, celebratory, loud and joyous

D major, happy but gives a feeling it is capable of darker moods

D minor, sad and melancholy, sings the song of lost love

A minor, unhappy but restrained and capable of beauty

E minor, love-sick feel to it, it seems to be trying to find happiness but not succeeding


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Keys do not have moods: people have moods.

There is no one mood that all attribute as associated with one key, Even synasthetes do not agree on what 'color' any particular key is, so with internal equipment and associations being varied... there will be no conclusion other than "some people associate some (Common Practice Repertoire in certain) keys as triggering within them specific personal moods. Among those who do believe keys set off moods within the listener, what mood a key evokes will vary from individual to individual.

Next week, we will all discuss what we think "Blue" tastes like


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

PetrB said:


> Keys do not have moods: people have moods.
> 
> There is no one mood that all attribute as associated with one key, Even synasthetes do not agree on what 'color' any particular key is, so with internal equipment and associations being varied... there will be no conclusion other than "some people associate some (Common Practice Repertoire in certain) keys as triggering within them specific personal moods. Among those who do believe keys set off moods within the listener, what mood a key evokes will vary from individual to individual.
> 
> Next week, we will all discuss what we think "Blue" tastes like


Rasberry ..........


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

"Beethoven, having received an air in the key of A flat marked amoroso, remarked that the key of A flat should be marked barbaresco and he accordingly changed the key signature." But what about the Op. 110 piano sonata? He also called B-minor a "black key."


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Burroughs said:


> Rasberry ..........


Well, to confess... if it helps you justify mood equating to key ... while in school, a bunch of musicians and I sat around and we all finally settled on E-flat as probably being a reddish-mahogony color, similar to many a varnished string instrument


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

KenOC said:


> "Beethoven, having received an air in the key of A flat marked amoroso, remarked that the key of A flat should be marked barbaresco and he accordingly changed the key signature." But what about the Op. 110 piano sonata? He also called B-minor a "black key."


Well, B-minor, a black key... is it?






or isn't it?


----------



## IBMchicago (May 16, 2012)

See here for some more romantic notions about keys characteristics.

One of the many reasons I love Bach's WTC is his precision and care in revealing the mood of the keys. His D minor fugue in Book 1 is quite meditative/contemplative and transports me into a monastery. The B-Flat Major fugue is a more placid expression of simple pleasures and contentment.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

IBMchicago said:


> See here for some more romantic notions about keys characteristics.


Or you could just take two aspirin, drink plenty of fluids, rest, and call the doctor in the morning


----------



## pileofsticks (Mar 25, 2014)

F major and G major: Majestic!
F minor: runny and fast and makes a nice little sad chanting melody
C major: the most neutral of all keys
D major: some Baroque overture. Makes me thinks of wigs.
E-flat major: pretty jumpy in my opinion.
E major: very violin-like.
B minor: sad, crying, melancholy, deep, deep, deep.
A major: birds, flowers, violins, and violence.


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

Seeing as I don't have perfect pitch, they all sound pretty much the same to me. Apart from the difference between major and minor, that is...


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

I think any mood I associate with a particular key would be due to the effect of hearing multiple works with similar moods in that key, not anything to do with how the key actually sounds.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

violadude said:


> I think any mood I associate with a particular key would be due to the effect of hearing multiple works with similar moods in that key, not anything to do with how the key actually sounds.


a-Yep, hear enough 'heroic' pieces in Eb Major, et voilà! Eb major = "heroic."

Give that man _another_ cigar!


----------



## Eviticus (Dec 8, 2011)

PetrB said:


> Well, B-minor, a black key... is it?
> View attachment 38059
> or isn't it?
> View attachment 38060


B minor is one of my favourite keys. It's a great key for composing gloomy pieces.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

Eviticus said:


> B minor is one of my favourite keys. It's a great key for composing gloomy pieces.


It is just D major on an off day


----------



## dgee (Sep 26, 2013)

Years of playing things and I still don't really know what key things are in upon first coupla hearings. Sometimes I know cos I've seen a score or I can take instrument tessitura clues, but generally no. And what about how things change key. Do you ascribe the same mood for whole pieces as they traverse different keys? Do you always feel the "home" key? How does this work for the key structures of operas or other large scale works (ie things that aren't "in x key")?

It's easy to say key x is nice, but if you hadn't heard a favourite piece for a while would you know if it started in C major or D major? I'd like to back myself to do so if it was an orchestra, but a string quartet or piano piece? I wouldn't be so certain


----------



## maestro267 (Jul 25, 2009)

E flat major is open and spacious, like standing on a windswept cliff overlooking the ocean.

E minor is nocturnal, a dark blue.

B flat major is spring. Green fields and birds singing and flowers.

F major is summer. Searing heat, dry grass.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Associations between 'keys' and 'moods' are not only present in the Western practice, but also in India or China. And they have changed over time, being of course also more relevant in a way for instrumental music, where the composer had only music alone, and not a text to be delivered, as the tool of choice.

So, for instance, a common belief was that sharp keys were associated with bright moods, gaiety, while the flat keys were associated with a more sober feeling. And there were several theories to try and explain why using several different reasons. Even recently, a composer like Olivier Messiaen linked his "Modes of Limited Transposition" to colors.

In my opinion, all this is basically a convention, within a common culture spanning centuries, and highly subjective, but from an acoustic point of view there is no real basis for it. If anything, a posible explanation beyond cultural background would come from Psychology, but I strongly doubt it.


----------



## violadude (May 2, 2011)

PetrB said:


> a-Yep, hear enough 'heroic' pieces in Eb Major, et voilà! Eb major = "heroic."
> 
> Give that man _another_ cigar!




I think of it like this, if you were to have someone listen to Beethoven's 9th symphony and ask them "What is the mood of this key?", how would they distinguish the mood of the key from the mood of the piece? They would probably just say what they thought the mood of the piece was. Keys don't have one particular mood, it depends on the other factors put into the piece itself and how you manipulate the scale tones of the key.


----------



## CyrilWashbrook (Feb 6, 2013)

To add to what has already been said, it is worth keeping in mind that pitch has varied considerably over the centuries. If you go back far enough, then at various times and in various places "A" could have struck modern ears as being rather more like an F sharp or a B flat.

The association of keys with moods is not illusory per se, but there are mediating factors, such as what violadude pointed to on the first page ("the effect of hearing multiple works with similar moods in that key").


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

There used to be differences in keys, before Equal Temperament evened-it all out. The differences in sharp and flat keys were due to tempering (adjustments of relations within an octave). Thus, in mean-tone temperament, designed to give purer thirds, the major thirds within different keys might sound different, some sharper, some flatter. Some fifths in certain keys might have been more pure, some in other keys less so. The 'beating' which resulted is what gave each key a different feel. Some keys might be better for minor, some might have better-sounding flat sevenths, so more dominants could be used, or different modes.

Keep in mind that back then, music didn't modulate very much; it tended to stay in one key area. As things progressed through time, and harmony advanced (Hi, KenOC), more usable, decent-sounding keys were needed. Everything gradually went towards Equal Temperament (ET), but this was a gradual achievement, as tuning was done with watches and counting "beats per second" as a guesstimation. Bach's "Well-tempered" system was just that; an approximation of true ET, in which every key sounded "decent" and usable in all 12 keys. His was the best "ET" achievable "by ear." See Bradley Lehman.

Not until after the turn of the century, about 1919, did electronic tuning enable us to perfect this ET.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Perfect pitch, or absolute pitch, had nothing to do with 'key color' or affekt. The standard pitch has varied throughout time, usually going up as instruments got better and stronger. "A 440" of today might have been 435, 430, or lower. 

This 'absolute' pitch standard had nothing to do with the internal relations of intervals within keys, or the octave. These differences of color are due to internal relations, not absolute values like A=440.

It's basic math: a ratio, or relation (fraction) is not an absolute value; it's a relationship.

"1/2" of a million dollars is more than "1/2" of a thousand dollars. "1/2" is a relation, not a fixed value.


----------



## IBMchicago (May 16, 2012)

I think I read once that Alfred Brendel thought of C minor as a key about defying one's fate. Then again, I'm not sure if he meant C minor in general, or just Mozart and Beethoven's C minors.


----------



## Guest (Mar 28, 2014)

PetrB said:


> a-Yep, hear enough 'heroic' pieces in Eb Major, et voilà! Eb major = "heroic."
> Give that man _another_ cigar!


Funny you should say that :
Journal of Musicological Research, *Of Hunting, Horns, and Heroes: A Brief History of E♭ Major before the Eroica*, John David Wilson, University of Vienna. Published online: 10 Jun 2013.


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

TalkingHead said:


> Funny you should say that :
> Journal of Musicological Research, *Of Hunting, Horns, and Heroes: A Brief History of E♭ Major before the Eroica*, John David Wilson, University of Vienna. Published online: 10 Jun 2013.


Take the wind and brass families in their earlier generations, work within the common practice tonality, and you have Eb as a key in which many of the innate intonation problems of the various instruments were avoided, the pitch areas most accessible on the non-valved brass, generally readily handy for the players to render -- very importantly -- with a fair amount of_reliable accuracy._ The friendly to the instruments key area loans itself to 'open sound' and 'full sound,' and there ya go, well on your way to 'large' 'epic' 'dramatic' and post Beethoven's ground-breaking Eroica, with its sort of battle of themes in the first movement -- Ergo, "Heroic."

Technology had as much to do with some of these key choices, earlier keyboards in their approximate equal temperament, the piano in combination with winds (Mozart, K. 452.

Add them up and you have an established tradition, and 'association' with a certain emotional quality in response to.... 

Of course, Mozart's Eb and Beethoven's Eb were not the same pitch as "our" current Eb


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

F Major= Nature
E Flat= Majestic
C Major= Triumphant
D Minor= Awesome and Fearsome and Terrifying
C minor= Seriousness
G major= song life
B Flat= Happy
A Flat= Warm, Nostalgic and a bit romantic
D Major= Polite and Proper


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

PetrB said:


> Take the wind and brass families in their earlier generations, work within the common practice tonality, and you have Eb as a key in which many of the intonation problems, accessible notes on non-valved brass, were readily handy for the players, and very importantly, could be produced with a fair amount of_reliable accuracy._ The combination lends itself to 'open sound' and 'full sound,' and there ya go, well on your way to 'large' 'epic' 'dramatic' and post Beethoven's ground-breaking Eroica, with its sort of battle of themes in the first movement -- Ergo, "Heroic."
> 
> Technology had as much to do with some of these key choices, earlier keyboards in their approximate equal temperament, the piano in combination with winds (Mozart, K. 452.
> 
> ...


What pitch would Mozart have used?

About 432hz?


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

C major: Very bright. Very happy.
G major: Somewhat darker, with the addition of F#, a black note. Happy.
The keys get darker the more black notes occur. 
E major: Turn that guitar down.
Bb: Majestic, king-like in its bearing. It's chest is stuck out proudly, and it carries forth a smaller "b".

Due to equal temperament, all fifths in all keys have been flattened by 2 cents, so all keys sound somewhat dark. If you want full brightness, you must go to HIP performances with pure fifths. Otherwise, this is the "dark ages" of music, thanks to ET.

Also, due to the fact that our entire 12-note system was based on Pythagorus' stacking of 3/2s (fifths), and that he closed the circle to preserve the octave (hence the 'Pythagoran comma' which we compensated for by spreading-out the error and flatting all fifths by 2 cents), the major third has suffered greatly, and is about 14 cents flat! Therefore, "happy" music in major keys is not as happy as it used to be; in fact, it's almost disturbing! Thus, we usher in the age of anxiety, the existential depression of modernity.


----------



## ScipioAfricanus (Jan 7, 2010)

millionrainbows said:


> The keys get darker the more black notes occur.
> .


racist hahaha very racist


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

ScipioAfricanus said:


> racist hahaha very racist


Watch it.......


----------



## brianvds (May 1, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> Perfect pitch, or absolute pitch, had nothing to do with 'key color' or affekt. The standard pitch has varied throughout time, usually going up as instruments got better and stronger. "A 440" of today might have been 435, 430, or lower.
> 
> This 'absolute' pitch standard had nothing to do with the internal relations of intervals within keys, or the octave. These differences of color are due to internal relations, not absolute values like A=440.


Yes, but as I understand it, thanks to equal temperament those relations are now all identical across the keys, hence all major keys sound the same, unless you have perfect pitch. I for one cannot hear any difference in mood between different keys.

I remain a bit perplexed that it took equal temperament so long to develop. It would seem to me that in the absence of electronic tuners, it would be far easier to base one's tuning system on octaves rather than fifths, and if you have a good ear it shouldn't be too difficult to just chop up your octave into equal parts. Isn't that what musicians nowadays do quite routinely anyway, when they tune their instruments?


----------



## PetrB (Feb 28, 2012)

brianvds said:


> Yes, but as I understand it, thanks to equal temperament those relations are now all identical across the keys, hence all major keys sound the same, unless you have perfect pitch. I for one cannot hear any difference in mood between different keys.
> 
> I remain a bit perplexed that it took equal temperament so long to develop. It would seem to me that in the absence of electronic tuners, it would be far easier to base one's tuning system on octaves rather than fifths, and if you have a good ear it shouldn't be too difficult to just chop up your octave into equal parts. Isn't that what musicians nowadays do quite routinely anyway, when they tune their instruments?


Nope, perfect octaves, on the wide range of a piano, start making for problems... they are instead stretched, the ones going upward incrementally a bit higher than 'true,' the lower similarly a bit under.... then all the other notes are 'fit in using fifths and fourths as a sort of regulator. String players who are more used to playing a real G# and a real Ab (the G# is a hair lower than the Ab) often complain about having to play with a piano, where there is no difference between those two pitches, and having to adjust to its tuning.

Even for an orchestral group devoid of piano, harp, or fixed tuned mallet instruments, there is a constant disagreement between the wind players and the string players. There is a cliche joke that the only way you can get two oboists to agree on tuning and pitch is to shoot one of them dead 

A homogenous group of string players could agree upon pitch, but ultimately, the moment an instrument from one family is playing with an instrument from another family, for those who want real pitch accuracy and argue for one system over another, there is no real complete happiness, ever


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

brianvds said:


> Yes, but as I understand it, thanks to equal temperament those relations are now all identical across the keys, hence all major keys sound the same, unless you have perfect pitch. I for one cannot hear any difference in mood between different keys.


That is correct, I agree. Even if you have 'perfect pitch,' the keys are, internally, all the same. Perfect pitch can identify pitches, but as far as hearing 'color,' this would mean that color is spread over a range. I wouldn't define color, affect, or 'key character' that way, even if I did have perfect pitch. To me, the _QUALITY_ ('major/minor' or 'b7/natural 7') aspect of *internal relations* is what gives a chord its character; in other words, its internal relations, not its absolute position _(QUANTITY)_ on a 'number line' of pitch.



brianvds said:


> I remain a bit perplexed that it took equal temperament so long to develop. It would seem to me that in the absence of electronic tuners, it would be far easier to base one's tuning system on octaves rather than fifths, and if you have a good ear it shouldn't be too difficult to just chop up your octave into equal parts. Isn't that what musicians nowadays do quite routinely anyway, when they tune their instruments?


All sorts of tunings are based on octaves (2:1 or 1:2), including Thai 7-tone ET. The problem is that pitch is logarithmic. Note the frets on a guitar or mandolin, and notice how they get closer together as you go up to the next octave. It is not a quantitative, smooth, even transition; it is a logarithmic curve.

Mathematically, it can be stated this way. Scientific nomenclature uses frequency, which is 'cycles per second,' formerly c.p.s, now Hertz.

*A=220 Hz *and *A=440 Hz *are both "A"s, but an octave apart; the relation is *1:2, or 220/440.* But as you go up, more "cycles per second" get squeezed into each succeeding octave; the next is A=880.

Do the math: 440 minus 220 is a difference of 220 cycles; but 880 minus 440 is a bigger difference, of 440 cycles. If you put this on an even, uniform number line, the distances would get greater and greater, reflecting (inversely) the logarithmic curve.

So, if you divided the octave 'evenly,' as you said, your distances on the number line would be 'even' as well; starting at A=220, we get: 220 plus 220 is 440; 440 plus 220 (going up evenly, like you wanted) is 660. That's not correct; 440/660 is not a 2:1 relationship, so it's not an octave.

This is basic math, people; ratios are not quantities, so learn the difference.



schigolch said:


> Associations between 'keys' and 'moods' are...present in...India...
> 
> In my opinion, all this is basically a convention, within a common culture spanning centuries, and highly subjective, but from an acoustic point of view there is no real basis for it.


Indian music does not modulate to different key areas; it stays in one key, tied to that particular tonic note. That's why the frets on sitars are moveable, to accommodate playing in different scales, or even a different (fixed) key; this enables the adjustment of internal relations within a key or octave. The fifths in Indian music are pure 3:2s; they are not 2 cents flat, like ours are, because there is no need to modulate.

Also, the 'acoustic' flat seventh is used in India; known as a 'septimal seventh' (based on a seven ratio), this seventh is more consonant (and flatter) than our seventh; unlike our seventh (used in dominant V7 chords and wanting to resolve to I), this septimal seventh is more consonant and stable acoustically, so it can be used in a raga with a flat seven scale, and not give the restless urge to resolve; it's 'happy' as a flat-7 in its home key, with the tonic.

The short, pithy answer is that Western music is restless and 'uptight,' reflecting our war-like, dominating, colonial uptight culture; Indian music is a music of repose and centeredness. Interpret this as you will, Westerners: passive equals weakness, right?



PetrB said:


> Nope, perfect octaves, on the wide range of a piano, start making for problems... they are instead stretched, the ones going upward incrementally a bit higher than 'true,' the lower similarly a bit under...


"Stretch" tuning has nothing to do with temperament of internal relations of pitch. Stretch tuning of pianos is done because of the steel strings on a piano; acoustically speaking, they are halfway between strings and metal bars. The longer bass strings are solid-core with a 'winding' around them. This produces unnatural harmonics, unlike a true string. The harmonics gradually get more out of tune, so the fundamental pitch is adjusted. Pianos with shorter strings are more susceptible, sp that's why grand pianos sound better, and spinet pianos don't. Uprights are better than spinets, because they have longer bass strings.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I've modified my position somewhat after reading the book* Perfect Pitch: Color Hearing for Expanded Musical Awareness *by *David L. Burge*. You may remember his ads in* Keyboard Magazine*, grinning while balancing a tuning fork on his index finger, like a "Harlem Globetrotter of the ear." _Yes, you too can have a set of ears like mine!

_First, let's discuss and define some terms to clear-up any possible confusions which I'm sure will arise anyway. Burge relates perception of timbre (pitch color) to *perfect pitch *(the ability to instantly recognize and name a pitch, regardless of context).

Furthermore, Burge states that this perception of pitch has nothing to do with the instrument it is played on, or what octave it is in: it is dependent on pitch only. He does concede that higher octaves of the same pitch sound brighter, and lower octaves sound darker, but this is not what defines the perception of the pitch as "unique" unto itself as a "tone color" or timbre.

From page 16: *"Musicians often use the term tone color when referring to the characteristic quality of a tone which enables one to tell different instruments apart. "Tone color," or timbre (pronounced "tam-ber"), is the characteristic pattern of overtones unique to every instrument, which gives an instrument its own distinct sound."

*From page 19: *"The point here is to make the distinction between "tone color" (which is really tone texture) and other general uses of the word color, and color hearing, which is the ear's perception of pitch color."

From Chapter V, "Color Hearing and Synesthesia," page 20-21: "Some people have a perception of musical tones which extends beyond the sense of hearing and "overflows" into other senses, particularly the sense of sight. That is, when they hear a musical tone, they may simultaneously see an actual visual color. This extremely rare and peculiar phenomenon is called synesthesia, which means that one of the five senses is stimulated through a different sense outside its own field of perception. The synesthetic individual literally "sees" a color when he hears a tone."

"This situation has no direct connection with the ability of perfect pitch. A person with perfect pitch does not see a visual color when he hears a tone; rather, he hears the sound color (pitch color) of the tone. Visual color and pitch color can both be referred to as color because they both mean a certain quality which allows one to discriminate among wave frequencies."

"Further, individuals with the sense of color hearing (perfect pitch) do not see colors when tones are played (this is synesthesia), but rather dicriminate between colors which are heard."

*From page 23:* "It should be clear by this analysis that color hearing (perfect pitch) is completely separate from any kind of visual color association to music. Perfect pitch is the perception of pitch color and has no concern with any kind of visual color experience or association. Pitch color is a quality which is heard and is merely analogous to the way the eye sees and discriminates between visual colors."*


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Burge mentions vague descriptions of 'tone color' in his book: F# is described as "twangy" compaired to the softer Bb; another person uses temperature analogies, citing Eb as "warmer" than C, which is cold.

Apparently, these people "know it when they hear it." Describing it is the problem.

But anybody who can instantly recognize and name an F# and distinguish it from an F natural has my respect.

This identification occurs regardless of register or octave. Imagine that: being able to instantly recognize an F# by its "F-sharpness" alone! This facility relies completely on pitch, and pitch only.

The only close analogy I can come up with is the fact of "pitch equivalency," which means that we hear a 'G' as a 'G,' no mater how high or low it is, because it's a 'G'.

This is based on the 2:1 or 1:2 ratio of the octave. This is the way our ears hear. Amazing, when you consider it.

Burge says that perfect pitch can be developed. I'm beginning to think this is true.


----------



## Chordalrock (Jan 21, 2014)

brianvds said:


> I remain a bit perplexed that it took equal temperament so long to develop.


If the music isn't very chromatic, you will get a better sounding tuning with some other than equal temperament, if you stick to certain keys.


----------



## Op.123 (Mar 25, 2013)

Thanks for you long and informative posts millionrainbows


----------



## hpowders (Dec 23, 2013)

Some of my favorite pieces seem to be hanging around A Major: Beethoven's 5th string quartet, Mozart's clarinet concerto, 12th and 23rd piano concertos, 18th string quartet, etc;

A nice sunny, optimistic key.


----------



## BaronScarpia (Apr 2, 2014)

I love this topic!!!

C major - HAPPY!; jubilant and convivial

G major - simple yet cheerful
D major - glory; 'divinity'
A major - amorous

F major - 'young'; springy and vibrant
B-flat major - homely and pleasant; rustic
E-flat major - grandiose; majestic


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Burroughs said:


> Thanks for you long and informative posts millionrainbows


Well, I'm trying. Subjective reactions to different key areas is still a problem for me to accept, except in the old tunings I described, where the internal relations are *physically* different from key to key.

The "Perfect Pitch Color Hearing" thing deals only with specific pitches, not different key areas, and is concerned only with instant recognition of each pitch. It doesn't get specific about why each pitch is different, but only that the person is somehow able to know an "F#" as an F#, no matter what octave it's in. This has to do with frequency, and being able to "hear" the frequencies as unique, whether they are multiplied by 1, 2, or 4, up the octaves. This is pretty astounding when you think about it. Then again, we can, with our eyes, distinguish frequencies of light, as color.

So perfect pitch is like trying to describe "red" if no one had ever heard it or named it. Sure, we call it "F#" because it is that note on the piano, but the "absolute" frequency has changed from A=440 all the way down to A=425 over the years.

So what it is, these people are able to "latch on" to whatever is currently called F# and are able to identify it. And they can't describe what they are hearing, they just know it. And they can prove it by instant recognition.

I admit, I can't do that.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

When I play the piano, I like key areas for what the chords call for, not for how that note/tonic sounds. If it's too bassy, it sounds muddy.

But I can hear no difference in notes by themselves. All the key areas sound the same to me, especially the closer ones. Bb sounds no different than C or Ab to me, as pitches.

The instrument they are played on might make it sound different, like if it's a guitar with open strings. Then E resonates longer, or A or D. But this has nothing to do with the pitch itself.

I can hear a change of mood when something modulates to a new key, but this is caused by contrast, not the key area itself as a pitch-centered note.

I'm working on developing perfect pitch. I have good relative pitch, and a good ear.* Hindemith *said it can be developed, too.

Try this exercise: have a friend play a whole octave at once, as a big cluster, like from C to C. 
You know what octave it is, and what notes are on bottom and top of the 13 notes. 
Then leave out one note, and play the whole cluster again. Can you tell which note was left out?

This will tell you if you have a "good ear," but is not a test to prove perfect pitch.

For that, you must be able to hear a random car-horn honking, and know what pitch it is, instantly.


----------

