# Why isn't there E# and Cb?



## same3chords

I know that, technically speaking, F is E# and B is Cb, but I'd like to know why. Why aren't the twelve notes lettered "A, A#, B, B#, C, C#, D, D#, E, E#, F, F#"? Changing keys in piano would be a lot easier because you would simply learn what the finger positions were for a major and minor chord, and then you'd be able to play in any key just by moving those chords up or down. The way pianos are build right now, a C minor chord looks completely different from an F# minor.

It just doesn't seem like it makes life easier for anyone to only have five sharps/flats instead of six.


----------



## Rondo

The rule of enharmonics makes E# the same as F-natural and Cb the same as B-natural. You can write E#, but it sounds the same as F. Just redundancy.


----------



## meschman

*why no e# and Cb?*

well, there is an e# and a Cb. the best explanation of this i have found is in Hindemith's "the craft of musical composition".

if you spend about 20 hours in the first 5 to seven chapters, the issues should be clear to you.


----------



## same3chords

Rondo said:


> The rule of enharmonics makes E# the same as F-natural and Cb the same as B-natural. You can write E#, but it sounds the same as F. Just redundancy.


This seems to be the only answer anyone involved in music can give me. I don't understand why the keyboard isn't laid out and labeled like this?









Here's what pitches those keys would play:


----------



## Weston

This is really interesting and I'd like to try it as an experiment. However, I think the concept of the circle of fifths would be messed up with that keyboard -- and it would be truely hard to tell where"C" or any other key is because all look alike in relation to each other --

in th es am ew ay it 's ha rd er to re ad se nt en ce sw it ht oo re gu la rs pa ci ng. 

If we should someday have 24 tone (or microtonal) keyboards though, you should design them.


----------



## david johnson

the ionian mode (our major scale) is set up as 2 whole steps followed by a half step, then 3 whole steps followed by a half step.
the C major scale follows that pattern naturally, hence it works by using only the white keys. the piano is 'built in that key' and the white keys are laid out that way.
utilizing E#/Fb or B#/Cb as written pitches serves well in music theory - an F chord is F A C. the same sound occurs when one writes it as E# A C, but the implication of that spelling is an Aminor chord with a sharp 5th in the bass.
to me it's like to, too, and two. they all sound the same but are used in different contexts.

dj


----------



## meschman

*there is a Cb and an e#*

Hindemith, in "The Craft of Musical Composition" actually constructs a chromatic scale from the overtone series, and in the process finds Cb and E#, which are at a different frequency than B or F.

it would take 40 or more pages to outline the procedure here, and i'm not game for that. but if you have genuine curosity - buy the book and hammer it out


----------



## Frasier

Rondo said:


> The rule of enharmonics makes E# the same as F-natural and Cb the same as B-natural. You can write E#, but it sounds the same as F. Just redundancy.


Try to write a scale of F# - major or minor. Or a scale in G-flat major - would you write it Gb Ab Bb Bnatural Db etc.


----------



## Rondo

Frasier said:


> Try to write a scale of F# - major or minor. Or a scale in G-flat major - would you write it Gb Ab Bb Bnatural Db etc.


It depends. If I'm going up, I would write sharps, and flats going down. As far as _which_ sharps and flats, depends on how the half-step, whole-step pattern unique to the scale emerges while going in the usual sequence from A to G. In other words, two Bs in a row may confuse some. *In the writing* I would change B-nat to C-flat.


----------



## Frasier

Well, I'll say this much: write a II with a 9th or IV with a 7th in Gb. I mean, IV7a: Bnatural, Eb, Gb, Bb? With the key signature of Gflat, that would be B with a natural sign, E(flat) G(flat) B with a flat sign to distinguish it from the natural. Well, it you're Ferneyhough it would help make the music look even more complicated!

But it's to do with preserving the contours to make the music easier to read (and particularly sight read) so the appearance of a chord sequence in Gflat maj would look the same as the same sequence in G maj (allowing for chromatic accidentals), so anyone experienced in playing in all keys would KNOW what's happening. This is why we have double sharps and double flats - to make things easier for the accomplished keyboardist or composer, when working in keys and often when atonal.

Of course, it will make no difference to someone unable to read music well - but then they shouldn't be playing in Cb Ab minor, F# or F# minor or C# (maj), should they?


----------



## same3chords

I actually play guitar, not piano. I've gotten used to the fact that F is only one half step above E, but it didn't make sense to me. I play in a band with a keyboardist, and he doesn't like in whenever I capo because it makes it harder for him to play.
So excuse my ignorance. The only music theory I know pertains to guitar.

Frasier, I don't understand what you're getting at. are you saying that you can see chord progressions easier in the current system?


----------



## same3chords

And why do people keep answering my question as if I'm saying F# and Cb don't exist?
All I'm asking is why we don't use those two symbols. Why, when going up half steps on a keyboard, does it go "A, A#, B, C..." instead of "A, A#, B, B#..."

I can't figure out how to edit my posts. can anyone help me?


----------



## Guest

same3chords said:


> I can't figure out how to edit my posts. can anyone help me?


Once some one has posted after your post you can not edit, you have to be quick


----------



## Frasier

same3chords said:


> And why do people keep answering my question as if I'm saying F# and Cb don't exist?
> All I'm asking is why we don't use those two symbols. Why, when going up half steps on a keyboard, does it go "A, A#, B, C..." instead of "A, A#, B, B#..."


Well, I don't think I was saying they don't exist. It's all about scales and keys. A diatonic scale has 7 steps before reaching the octave. These steps all have successive letter names depending on the note on which they start - just to preserve uniformity particularly with the intervals expressed in their traditional way; and to make harmony easier to follow.

For example C to C' is an octave. But C to B# is an augmented 7th and doesn't occur in the KEY of C (major or minor) even if they sound the same. In harmony, the interval C-B# is possible, depending on what comes next... if preparing for, say, a change to the "remote" key of C# (remote, in that C# isn't a "related chord" in C major, but it would be permissible in chromatic harmony).

The example you gave was a chromatic scale where either version would be ok though the first a-a#-b-c is simpler to follow.


----------



## Frasier

same3chords said:


> I can't figure out how to edit my posts. can anyone help me?


It's been explained a couple of posts up - a weird system and why I don't post here often. I get worried about time-outs so I don't post until I'm ready - that means short posts. Then I give a quick read-through to check spelling etc with minor edits if need be.


----------



## Lisztfreak

So in fact, it's quite the same whether we call Mahler's 5th a symphony in C sharp minor or in D flat minor? No?


----------



## Lang

In fact in vocal and string music, Cb is not the same as B, and F is not the same as E#. It is only on the keyboard, where the tuning is adjusted to approximate the intervals, that the notes are the same.


----------



## Yagan Kiely

> The rule of enharmonics makes E# the same as F-natural and Cb the same as B-natural. You can write E#, but it sounds the same as F. Just redundancy.


No, the rules of enharmonics makes E# slightly high than F, and the reverse for Cb/B. As said above it is only the keyboard that makes the notes the same so that it can, effectively, be actually used. The piano is out of tune, if you sing an actual major third above a note then play the third on a piano they are differencve and will clash.


----------



## Guest

Very briefly on the practical side with out going into the theory side, it is _Just Temperament_ which was used and still is with certain 'original instrument ens" as opposed to _Equal Temperament_ which is what the keyboard can play [and also a lot of other mod instruments] I have both a baroque and a boehm flute and the difference is easy to hear the fingering for Just temperament is a little more complex.


----------



## danae

david johnson said:


> to me it's like to, too, and two. they all sound the same but are used in different contexts.dj


Very effective example. I'm stealing it for my theory and harmony lessons. You don't mind do you?


----------



## woodwind_fan

Lisztfreak said:


> So in fact, it's quite the same whether we call Mahler's 5th a symphony in C sharp minor or in D flat minor? No?


Actually, Mahler himself objected to giving a key for his 5th symphony - "From the order of the movements (where the usual first movement now comes second) it is difficult to speak of a key for the 'whole Symphony', and to avoid misunderstandings the key should best be omitted."

So they would both be incorrect names for Mahler's 5th Symphony


----------



## Lisztfreak

woodwind_fan said:


> Actually, Mahler himself objected to giving a key for his 5th symphony - "From the order of the movements (where the usual first movement now comes second) it is difficult to speak of a key for the 'whole Symphony', and to avoid misunderstandings the key should best be omitted."
> 
> So they would both be incorrect names for Mahler's 5th Symphony


OK, I've heard about that quote in the meantime. However, I would still like to know whether it would be the same to say C sharp minor or D flat minor.


----------



## Rasa

No. Since there is still no truly egal temperament (due to instrument construction), each different key (including the enharmonical ones) will have it's own character. 

In the baroque, when equal temp wasn't even considered, some Keys were associated with certain emotions/properties. Because the further they went from a certain key the more "off pitch" certain notes were. This radically altered the feel of the key.


----------



## ECGainer

Keyboards, without the ability to tune individual notes without a 'wrench', couldn't adhere to the tuning systems in use in the renaissance and early baroque days, where an E-sharp truly was a different pitch from F-natural. There were some interesting instruments that were constructed with the black keys halved where one could play an F-sharp and G-flat by hitting a different key. A bit difficult to play, though...

It seems like the question is really, why is there only a half step between E & F, and B & C. The answer to that lies far back in the misty times of the early christian church and before them, the greeks. I think Pythagoras might have something to offer there.


----------



## skrjablin

You could have a piano built for you that looked like that. JUst don't change the names of the notes, because then you won't be able to read any music from the past 1000 years.

So your keyboard could have two whole tone scales per octave, one on the 6 white keys and one on the 6 black keys. It would be cool in a way. Maybe it would be easier for small hands to reach certain chords. The names of the white keys would be: C, D, E, F sharp/G flat, G sharp/A flat, A sharp/B flat. And the names of the black keys would be C sharp/D flat, D sharp/E flat, F, G, A, B.

Don't get me started about enharmonics. Keyboards have looked like that from back when there were no pianos, just organs and stuff. It's all about tradition.


----------



## Huilunsoittaja

Lisztfreak said:


> OK, I've heard about that quote in the meantime. However, I would still like to know whether it would be the same to say C sharp minor or D flat minor.


It would be, but it would be much harder to read, because there would be a double-flat in the key signature: 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-flat_minor

And to complicate things, the relative major of D flat minor is F flat major. 
I'd choose C# minor with the relative E major so that the performers don't go too mad.


----------



## ECGainer

But then there would be no pattern of black keys to guide you, would there? Stickers with the note names might become a necessity.


----------



## doramide7

david johnson said:


> the ionian mode (our major scale) is set up as 2 whole steps followed by a half step, then 3 whole steps followed by a half step.
> the C major scale follows that pattern naturally, hence it works by using only the white keys. the piano is 'built in that key' and the white keys are laid out that way.
> utilizing E#/Fb or B#/Cb as written pitches serves well in music theory - an F chord is F A C. the same sound occurs when one writes it as E# A C, but the implication of that spelling is an Aminor chord with a sharp 5th in the bass.
> to me it's like to, too, and two. they all sound the same but are used in different contexts.
> 
> dj


Hindemith, in "The Craft of Musical Composition" actually constructs a chromatic scale from the overtone series, and in the process finds Cb and E#, which are at a different frequency than B or F.

it would take 40 or more pages to outline the procedure here, and I'm not game for that. but if you have genuine curiosity - buy the book and hammer it out


----------



## gdfo

The answer is that keyboards are 'well tempered'. Some unstruments can play c flat and even c double flat, strings for instance. Some instruments are 'keyed' that is they have a native range in a given key. The strings on a piano are actually averaged out or tempered.


----------



## Edward Elgar

When talking in terms of the circle of fifths, E# and Cb would be a shock to the system.

C G D A E *Cb* F# Db Ab Eb Bb *E#* C G D

Yuk! Disgusting!


----------



## Romantic Geek

ECGainer said:


> But then there would be no pattern of black keys to guide you, would there? Stickers with the note names might become a necessity.


Exactly what I was thinking. Who the heck would want to play on a piano like that? It would be so confusing!


----------



## Steve M

As an aside, I am a pianist/keyboardist, and get hired for a lot of recording sessions, often with small orchestra groups. Few things can turn the head inside out as quick as an arranger who substitutes chords or notes that he thinks will be easier to read enharmonically than written correctly. For example, in the key of B with a progression such as B G#/B# C#m where the arranger changes the G#/B# to an Ab/C, thank you very much. At times my hands simply refuse to play the offending chord (actually of course it's the brain that shorts out). It's more common when double sharps or double flats are the correct choice.


----------



## Dont

I think everyone explained many good points. But I want to explain with my point of view.

It looks like this question is coming from the fact that you are playing guitar. In guitar its not important what note you play. It is the patterns. When you do a major pattern, no matter what note you play(or which fret), it becomes major or minor or whatever. Your hands stand still, just your position moving. 
So for you the name doesnt matter, it can be E flat or Cb, you just know where to put your fingers on. But for pianists its more complicated than that and you just want a workaround.
Let me tell you, there isnt one.
I think it is the one of the few the moments that you should say "guitar rocks". Because with just a pattern, you can create any harmonic structure with ease.

It was the physical side now to the other one:

I think you are forgetting that music is a sophisticated thing, a language with many grammatical rules. Its not about making a chord or scale you think instantenously. 
Its more like finding the meaning in between those notes. It would be less meaningful to read a book without grammar wouldnt it? 
Dont just think about the piano, think about the score. You can rearrange a piece and change the notes, like, B to Cb, or anything, but it will be harder to grasp, just like any language with grammar properties.

I think everything is beautiful as it is, thats my opinion


----------



## gdfo

OK if you are calling a chord an F chord then it is written with the F not E#. Like I stated before, some instruments are not 'tempered'. A chord written as E# A C is not an F chord.


----------



## Argus

gdfo said:


> OK if you are calling a chord an F chord then it is written with the F not E#. Like I stated before, some instruments are not 'tempered'. A chord written as E# A C is not an F chord.


Most people automatically think in 12 tone equal temperament but what you say is true for all unequal intonations like JI, Pythagorean, Meantone etc. Instead of tones in the relationship of 4:5:6 in the F chord, an E# chord will be a far more complex relationship depending upon the tuning employed.

For example, in Pythagorean tuning where the fifths are just, 12 perfect fifths (3/2's) does not equal 7 octaves (2/1). The difference is the Pythagorean comma. There are loads of different commas arising from tuning intervals in different ways but I don't think this is what the OP was getting at.

The reason for the keyboard layout is due to the diatonic scale. The 7 white keys being the scale in C major. Originally the unequal (Ptolemaic) sequence was 1/1, 9/8, 5/4, 4/3, 3/2, 5/3, 15/8, 2/1 for the 5-limit scale, which is now tempered to give equal semitones. Why this genus was chosen over the other Greek ones I don't really know, but it was already well established by the time of the organ keyboards in the 14th and 15th centuries. It _can_ be found between the 24th and 40th overtones, but the 24th overtone is not as closely related to the 'tonic' as it is to the 'dominant', so that doesn't really give it much acoustical credit. However, the minor scale with it's 6/5 third is still a lot harder to explain.

The 7 white, 5 black key layout works really for the system that it's used for so I can't see any reason to change it. Some of the attempts at getting keyboards to play more truer scales in either JI or ET by Bosanquets, Brown and Thompson look incredibly complex and unnecessary for the kind of music that was being written at the time.

So to answer the question succintly, there isn't an E# and a Cb because most music that uses that lettering system of notation doesn't want or need them other than as enharmonic theoretical figures to better relate the notes to the current tonality. Look at Ben Johnston's 'microtonal' notation to see how standard notation can be adapted for various tunings.


----------



## Comus

The modern harp is tuned to Cb major, I mean it is enharmonic to B natural, but is considered C flat. I have no idea why. If a harp played with an orchestra in B major, the harp part would be written in C flat major.

This Wikipedia article states that C flat is the only non-theoretical key with an accidental in the name whose tonic note is enharmonically equivalent to a natural note.


----------

