Music terminology - why are seven letters used to name scale tones [duplicate]












1
















This question already has an answer here:




  • Why are notes named the way they are?

    4 answers



  • Why does the scale have seven (or five) notes? Why not six?

    15 answers




Since the scale is logarithmic with each interval (half-step) being a constant multiple of the previous frequency, why didn't they just name the pitches A to F with each note having a half-step #/b in between?



You would then have a B#/Cb where C is currently, and E#/Fb would fall where F# is currently. Consequently there would be no need for G/G# in the nomenclature and everything would follow a logical progression. Having to adapt to B-C, and E-F being half-steps, but the other natural notes having a whole-step distance between them gets confusing when you first learn.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











marked as duplicate by topo morto, Richard, Dom 3 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • 1





    Hi Henry. Might this be a duplicate of Why are notes named the way they are?? music.stackexchange.com/questions/32971/… might also be helpful.

    – topo morto
    8 hours ago













  • They're not - in German.

    – Tim
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    "confusing when you first learn". Sure. Have you thought about other contexts? Not everyone who cares about music is a beginner right now like you are.

    – only_pro
    5 hours ago













  • A mother of ond of my pupils came into my lessons and asked me: why do you still practice the doremi when we ha today this c,d,e,f,g. Yes, we live in modern times, and still use these stupid roman numbers and arabic letters.

    – Albrecht Hügli
    3 hours ago
















1
















This question already has an answer here:




  • Why are notes named the way they are?

    4 answers



  • Why does the scale have seven (or five) notes? Why not six?

    15 answers




Since the scale is logarithmic with each interval (half-step) being a constant multiple of the previous frequency, why didn't they just name the pitches A to F with each note having a half-step #/b in between?



You would then have a B#/Cb where C is currently, and E#/Fb would fall where F# is currently. Consequently there would be no need for G/G# in the nomenclature and everything would follow a logical progression. Having to adapt to B-C, and E-F being half-steps, but the other natural notes having a whole-step distance between them gets confusing when you first learn.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











marked as duplicate by topo morto, Richard, Dom 3 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.














  • 1





    Hi Henry. Might this be a duplicate of Why are notes named the way they are?? music.stackexchange.com/questions/32971/… might also be helpful.

    – topo morto
    8 hours ago













  • They're not - in German.

    – Tim
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    "confusing when you first learn". Sure. Have you thought about other contexts? Not everyone who cares about music is a beginner right now like you are.

    – only_pro
    5 hours ago













  • A mother of ond of my pupils came into my lessons and asked me: why do you still practice the doremi when we ha today this c,d,e,f,g. Yes, we live in modern times, and still use these stupid roman numbers and arabic letters.

    – Albrecht Hügli
    3 hours ago














1












1








1









This question already has an answer here:




  • Why are notes named the way they are?

    4 answers



  • Why does the scale have seven (or five) notes? Why not six?

    15 answers




Since the scale is logarithmic with each interval (half-step) being a constant multiple of the previous frequency, why didn't they just name the pitches A to F with each note having a half-step #/b in between?



You would then have a B#/Cb where C is currently, and E#/Fb would fall where F# is currently. Consequently there would be no need for G/G# in the nomenclature and everything would follow a logical progression. Having to adapt to B-C, and E-F being half-steps, but the other natural notes having a whole-step distance between them gets confusing when you first learn.










share|improve this question









New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.













This question already has an answer here:




  • Why are notes named the way they are?

    4 answers



  • Why does the scale have seven (or five) notes? Why not six?

    15 answers




Since the scale is logarithmic with each interval (half-step) being a constant multiple of the previous frequency, why didn't they just name the pitches A to F with each note having a half-step #/b in between?



You would then have a B#/Cb where C is currently, and E#/Fb would fall where F# is currently. Consequently there would be no need for G/G# in the nomenclature and everything would follow a logical progression. Having to adapt to B-C, and E-F being half-steps, but the other natural notes having a whole-step distance between them gets confusing when you first learn.





This question already has an answer here:




  • Why are notes named the way they are?

    4 answers



  • Why does the scale have seven (or five) notes? Why not six?

    15 answers








notation terminology






share|improve this question









New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|improve this question









New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago









Richard

43.7k7102187




43.7k7102187






New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 9 hours ago









Henry WilliamsHenry Williams

92




92




New contributor




Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Henry Williams is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.




marked as duplicate by topo morto, Richard, Dom 3 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.









marked as duplicate by topo morto, Richard, Dom 3 hours ago


This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.










  • 1





    Hi Henry. Might this be a duplicate of Why are notes named the way they are?? music.stackexchange.com/questions/32971/… might also be helpful.

    – topo morto
    8 hours ago













  • They're not - in German.

    – Tim
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    "confusing when you first learn". Sure. Have you thought about other contexts? Not everyone who cares about music is a beginner right now like you are.

    – only_pro
    5 hours ago













  • A mother of ond of my pupils came into my lessons and asked me: why do you still practice the doremi when we ha today this c,d,e,f,g. Yes, we live in modern times, and still use these stupid roman numbers and arabic letters.

    – Albrecht Hügli
    3 hours ago














  • 1





    Hi Henry. Might this be a duplicate of Why are notes named the way they are?? music.stackexchange.com/questions/32971/… might also be helpful.

    – topo morto
    8 hours ago













  • They're not - in German.

    – Tim
    7 hours ago






  • 1





    "confusing when you first learn". Sure. Have you thought about other contexts? Not everyone who cares about music is a beginner right now like you are.

    – only_pro
    5 hours ago













  • A mother of ond of my pupils came into my lessons and asked me: why do you still practice the doremi when we ha today this c,d,e,f,g. Yes, we live in modern times, and still use these stupid roman numbers and arabic letters.

    – Albrecht Hügli
    3 hours ago








1




1





Hi Henry. Might this be a duplicate of Why are notes named the way they are?? music.stackexchange.com/questions/32971/… might also be helpful.

– topo morto
8 hours ago







Hi Henry. Might this be a duplicate of Why are notes named the way they are?? music.stackexchange.com/questions/32971/… might also be helpful.

– topo morto
8 hours ago















They're not - in German.

– Tim
7 hours ago





They're not - in German.

– Tim
7 hours ago




1




1





"confusing when you first learn". Sure. Have you thought about other contexts? Not everyone who cares about music is a beginner right now like you are.

– only_pro
5 hours ago







"confusing when you first learn". Sure. Have you thought about other contexts? Not everyone who cares about music is a beginner right now like you are.

– only_pro
5 hours ago















A mother of ond of my pupils came into my lessons and asked me: why do you still practice the doremi when we ha today this c,d,e,f,g. Yes, we live in modern times, and still use these stupid roman numbers and arabic letters.

– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago





A mother of ond of my pupils came into my lessons and asked me: why do you still practice the doremi when we ha today this c,d,e,f,g. Yes, we live in modern times, and still use these stupid roman numbers and arabic letters.

– Albrecht Hügli
3 hours ago










4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















3














While this might make some logical sense now, I see three possible problems:



One is the historical perspective: that musical notation developed over several centuries, and as such we didn't sit down to develop the most logical, efficient system. Many of these issues are amply covered in Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale? and Why are notes named the way they are?



But perhaps more importantly, your system results in an oddity when we consider that most basic element of Western music: the scale. Most scales are heptatonic, meaning they are comprised of seven note names. In your six-step musical system, a music scale would therefore require two types of one note name. The A scale in your system, for instance, would be A B C C♯ D♯ E♯ F♯ A or A B C D♭ E♭ F♭ A♭ A. It's much more intuitive to have a heptatonic scale include just one of each note name.



Lastly, there's the practical reason: who is going to translate centuries worth of music into this new form of notation?






share|improve this answer

































    2














    If I understand your meaning, the natural letters A B C D E F in your system would all be one whole steps apart and create a whole tone scale.



    That might seem logical, but it doesn't reflect the fact that the whole tone scale is not the basis for western music.



    Western music is largely based on the diatonic scale...



    W W H W W W H



    ...where W means whole step and H means half step.



    The letters were assigned to the tones of that asymmetrical pattern of whole/half steps.



    Sharps and flats are used to transpose that pattern to various starting tones. The system can get messy.



    I try to think of it as a combination of two series of tones - one in base 7 counting and the other in base 12. If the clock - using base 60 and 24 - gets a little confusing when calculating times, then music gets a bit confusing using base 7 and 12 and transposing asymmetrical patterns. You can translate the crazy music patterns from letters and sharps and flats to purely numeric sequences (like in a computer program) and that may feel more like pure logical patterns, but I don't think it helps with reading staff notation. You can add music to the list of crazy systems evolved in our culture like the clock, the calendar, and the entire English language!






    share|improve this answer


























    • This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

      – Todd Wilcox
      8 hours ago











    • @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

      – Tim
      8 hours ago











    • @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

      – Todd Wilcox
      8 hours ago













    • @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

      – Tim
      7 hours ago











    • @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

      – Todd Wilcox
      7 hours ago



















    0














    Actually, based on overlapping hexachords, the letter "A" does (in some sense) represent the lowest tone (it does on an 88-key piano, but not necessarily on others.) The "modes" were rotated major scale patterns starting on D, E, F, or G. Each mode had a "plagal" version (lower range) using the same interval pattern but starting a fifth lower; "hypodorian" had A-A to a range. If these are overlapped, the A of the D-mode is the lowest note. Thus the pattern starts with A. Later a lower note "G" was added (probably because some singer had a good low voice) below the other notes and given the name G-ut or Gamma-ut in Greek and using "ut" and older version of "do" givies the word "gamut."



    A music developed the (unnamed) modes on C (and A) became more prevalent (and got the names Ionian and Aeolian) so modern theory describes things in terms of the C-scale.






    share|improve this answer































      0














      Your scale ignores the relationship between sound and the overtone spectrum.



      If you have a string vibrating at 100Hz, it's actually also vibrating at 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz, and so on. Now you know that music is perceived as the logarithm of frequency, and doubling the frequency is equivalent to going up one octave. So, for the first few overtones, you get the following:



      0: 100Hz = Base
      1: 200Hz = Octave
      2: 300Hz = Octave * 3/2
      3: 400Hz = 2 Octaves
      4: 500Hz = 2 Octaves * 5/4
      5: 600Hz = 2 Octaves * 3/2
      6: 700Hz = 2 Octaves * 7/4
      7: 800Hz = 3 Octaves


      You see, all perfect quotients. And those perfect quotients sound pleasing. Now, 3/2 = 1.5, which is pretty damn near to 2^(7/12) = 1.498. Also, you find
      5/4 = 1.25 ~ 1.260 = 2^(4/12). We have names for these ratios:



      Overtone 1 to 2: 3/2 ~ 2^(7/12) = perfect fifth
      Overtone 2 to 3: 4/3 ~ 2^(5/12) = perfect fourth
      Overtone 3 to 4: 5/4 ~ 2^(4/12) = large third
      Overtone 4 to 5: 6/5 ~ 2^(3/12) = small third


      You know what's missing on that table? It's the factor 2^(6/12). This factor is not close to any nice, small fraction, and cannot be found in the overtone spectrum. The associated interval sounds quite displeasing, and it's very rarely used in music.



      So, any music notating system that's usable must contain those nice sounding 2^(5/12) and 2^(7/12) intervals, but should exclude the 2^(6/12) interval as much as possible. And that's exactly what our usual scale does. The major scale looks like this



      2^(0/12) = 1
      2^(2/12) = 3/2 / 4/3 = 9/8
      2^(4/12) = 5/4
      2^(5/12) = 4/3
      2^(7/12) = 3/2
      2^(9/12) = 4/3 * 5/4 = 5/3
      2^(11/12) = 3/2 * 5/4 = 15/8
      2^(12/12) = 2


      You see, this scale is fully built upon the factors 3/2, 4/3, and 5/4. The minor scale, and the other common modes like the dorian, use the same factors between the notes, they just change which note is perceived as the base note.





      TL;DR: A scale with constant spacing between the named nodes is deeply impractical because it excludes the most important intervals (perfect fourth and fifth), but includes the most glaring interval (tritone).






      share|improve this answer
































        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes








        4 Answers
        4






        active

        oldest

        votes









        active

        oldest

        votes






        active

        oldest

        votes









        3














        While this might make some logical sense now, I see three possible problems:



        One is the historical perspective: that musical notation developed over several centuries, and as such we didn't sit down to develop the most logical, efficient system. Many of these issues are amply covered in Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale? and Why are notes named the way they are?



        But perhaps more importantly, your system results in an oddity when we consider that most basic element of Western music: the scale. Most scales are heptatonic, meaning they are comprised of seven note names. In your six-step musical system, a music scale would therefore require two types of one note name. The A scale in your system, for instance, would be A B C C♯ D♯ E♯ F♯ A or A B C D♭ E♭ F♭ A♭ A. It's much more intuitive to have a heptatonic scale include just one of each note name.



        Lastly, there's the practical reason: who is going to translate centuries worth of music into this new form of notation?






        share|improve this answer






























          3














          While this might make some logical sense now, I see three possible problems:



          One is the historical perspective: that musical notation developed over several centuries, and as such we didn't sit down to develop the most logical, efficient system. Many of these issues are amply covered in Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale? and Why are notes named the way they are?



          But perhaps more importantly, your system results in an oddity when we consider that most basic element of Western music: the scale. Most scales are heptatonic, meaning they are comprised of seven note names. In your six-step musical system, a music scale would therefore require two types of one note name. The A scale in your system, for instance, would be A B C C♯ D♯ E♯ F♯ A or A B C D♭ E♭ F♭ A♭ A. It's much more intuitive to have a heptatonic scale include just one of each note name.



          Lastly, there's the practical reason: who is going to translate centuries worth of music into this new form of notation?






          share|improve this answer




























            3












            3








            3







            While this might make some logical sense now, I see three possible problems:



            One is the historical perspective: that musical notation developed over several centuries, and as such we didn't sit down to develop the most logical, efficient system. Many of these issues are amply covered in Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale? and Why are notes named the way they are?



            But perhaps more importantly, your system results in an oddity when we consider that most basic element of Western music: the scale. Most scales are heptatonic, meaning they are comprised of seven note names. In your six-step musical system, a music scale would therefore require two types of one note name. The A scale in your system, for instance, would be A B C C♯ D♯ E♯ F♯ A or A B C D♭ E♭ F♭ A♭ A. It's much more intuitive to have a heptatonic scale include just one of each note name.



            Lastly, there's the practical reason: who is going to translate centuries worth of music into this new form of notation?






            share|improve this answer















            While this might make some logical sense now, I see three possible problems:



            One is the historical perspective: that musical notation developed over several centuries, and as such we didn't sit down to develop the most logical, efficient system. Many of these issues are amply covered in Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale? and Why are notes named the way they are?



            But perhaps more importantly, your system results in an oddity when we consider that most basic element of Western music: the scale. Most scales are heptatonic, meaning they are comprised of seven note names. In your six-step musical system, a music scale would therefore require two types of one note name. The A scale in your system, for instance, would be A B C C♯ D♯ E♯ F♯ A or A B C D♭ E♭ F♭ A♭ A. It's much more intuitive to have a heptatonic scale include just one of each note name.



            Lastly, there's the practical reason: who is going to translate centuries worth of music into this new form of notation?







            share|improve this answer














            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer








            edited 8 hours ago

























            answered 9 hours ago









            RichardRichard

            43.7k7102187




            43.7k7102187























                2














                If I understand your meaning, the natural letters A B C D E F in your system would all be one whole steps apart and create a whole tone scale.



                That might seem logical, but it doesn't reflect the fact that the whole tone scale is not the basis for western music.



                Western music is largely based on the diatonic scale...



                W W H W W W H



                ...where W means whole step and H means half step.



                The letters were assigned to the tones of that asymmetrical pattern of whole/half steps.



                Sharps and flats are used to transpose that pattern to various starting tones. The system can get messy.



                I try to think of it as a combination of two series of tones - one in base 7 counting and the other in base 12. If the clock - using base 60 and 24 - gets a little confusing when calculating times, then music gets a bit confusing using base 7 and 12 and transposing asymmetrical patterns. You can translate the crazy music patterns from letters and sharps and flats to purely numeric sequences (like in a computer program) and that may feel more like pure logical patterns, but I don't think it helps with reading staff notation. You can add music to the list of crazy systems evolved in our culture like the clock, the calendar, and the entire English language!






                share|improve this answer


























                • This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago











                • @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

                  – Tim
                  8 hours ago











                • @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago













                • @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

                  – Tim
                  7 hours ago











                • @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  7 hours ago
















                2














                If I understand your meaning, the natural letters A B C D E F in your system would all be one whole steps apart and create a whole tone scale.



                That might seem logical, but it doesn't reflect the fact that the whole tone scale is not the basis for western music.



                Western music is largely based on the diatonic scale...



                W W H W W W H



                ...where W means whole step and H means half step.



                The letters were assigned to the tones of that asymmetrical pattern of whole/half steps.



                Sharps and flats are used to transpose that pattern to various starting tones. The system can get messy.



                I try to think of it as a combination of two series of tones - one in base 7 counting and the other in base 12. If the clock - using base 60 and 24 - gets a little confusing when calculating times, then music gets a bit confusing using base 7 and 12 and transposing asymmetrical patterns. You can translate the crazy music patterns from letters and sharps and flats to purely numeric sequences (like in a computer program) and that may feel more like pure logical patterns, but I don't think it helps with reading staff notation. You can add music to the list of crazy systems evolved in our culture like the clock, the calendar, and the entire English language!






                share|improve this answer


























                • This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago











                • @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

                  – Tim
                  8 hours ago











                • @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago













                • @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

                  – Tim
                  7 hours ago











                • @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  7 hours ago














                2












                2








                2







                If I understand your meaning, the natural letters A B C D E F in your system would all be one whole steps apart and create a whole tone scale.



                That might seem logical, but it doesn't reflect the fact that the whole tone scale is not the basis for western music.



                Western music is largely based on the diatonic scale...



                W W H W W W H



                ...where W means whole step and H means half step.



                The letters were assigned to the tones of that asymmetrical pattern of whole/half steps.



                Sharps and flats are used to transpose that pattern to various starting tones. The system can get messy.



                I try to think of it as a combination of two series of tones - one in base 7 counting and the other in base 12. If the clock - using base 60 and 24 - gets a little confusing when calculating times, then music gets a bit confusing using base 7 and 12 and transposing asymmetrical patterns. You can translate the crazy music patterns from letters and sharps and flats to purely numeric sequences (like in a computer program) and that may feel more like pure logical patterns, but I don't think it helps with reading staff notation. You can add music to the list of crazy systems evolved in our culture like the clock, the calendar, and the entire English language!






                share|improve this answer















                If I understand your meaning, the natural letters A B C D E F in your system would all be one whole steps apart and create a whole tone scale.



                That might seem logical, but it doesn't reflect the fact that the whole tone scale is not the basis for western music.



                Western music is largely based on the diatonic scale...



                W W H W W W H



                ...where W means whole step and H means half step.



                The letters were assigned to the tones of that asymmetrical pattern of whole/half steps.



                Sharps and flats are used to transpose that pattern to various starting tones. The system can get messy.



                I try to think of it as a combination of two series of tones - one in base 7 counting and the other in base 12. If the clock - using base 60 and 24 - gets a little confusing when calculating times, then music gets a bit confusing using base 7 and 12 and transposing asymmetrical patterns. You can translate the crazy music patterns from letters and sharps and flats to purely numeric sequences (like in a computer program) and that may feel more like pure logical patterns, but I don't think it helps with reading staff notation. You can add music to the list of crazy systems evolved in our culture like the clock, the calendar, and the entire English language!







                share|improve this answer














                share|improve this answer



                share|improve this answer








                edited 8 hours ago

























                answered 9 hours ago









                Michael CurtisMichael Curtis

                10.4k637




                10.4k637













                • This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago











                • @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

                  – Tim
                  8 hours ago











                • @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago













                • @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

                  – Tim
                  7 hours ago











                • @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  7 hours ago



















                • This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago











                • @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

                  – Tim
                  8 hours ago











                • @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  8 hours ago













                • @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

                  – Tim
                  7 hours ago











                • @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

                  – Todd Wilcox
                  7 hours ago

















                This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

                – Todd Wilcox
                8 hours ago





                This reminds me that there are some instruments that are purely diatonic (e.g., harmonica, recorder, bagpipes). Their note name and notation logics would suffer under the proposed system.

                – Todd Wilcox
                8 hours ago













                @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

                – Tim
                8 hours ago





                @ToddWilcox - bagpipes - diatonic? Don't even think they use 12tet.

                – Tim
                8 hours ago













                @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

                – Todd Wilcox
                8 hours ago







                @Tim Fair point, I incorrectly used the word "diatonic" to mean "not chromatic". I think my larger point still stands. That said, I'm not sure whether the temperament of an instrument alone determines whether it's diatonic or not. I think there's a case to be made that at least the Scottish Highland pipes could be called diatonic.

                – Todd Wilcox
                8 hours ago















                @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

                – Tim
                7 hours ago





                @ToddWilcox - it's my feeling that bagpipes play in Mixolydian. Whether that constitutes diatonic is another issue.

                – Tim
                7 hours ago













                @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

                – Todd Wilcox
                7 hours ago





                @Tim Looks like they are played in mixolydian exactly like harmonicas are played ionian - often but not remotely always.

                – Todd Wilcox
                7 hours ago











                0














                Actually, based on overlapping hexachords, the letter "A" does (in some sense) represent the lowest tone (it does on an 88-key piano, but not necessarily on others.) The "modes" were rotated major scale patterns starting on D, E, F, or G. Each mode had a "plagal" version (lower range) using the same interval pattern but starting a fifth lower; "hypodorian" had A-A to a range. If these are overlapped, the A of the D-mode is the lowest note. Thus the pattern starts with A. Later a lower note "G" was added (probably because some singer had a good low voice) below the other notes and given the name G-ut or Gamma-ut in Greek and using "ut" and older version of "do" givies the word "gamut."



                A music developed the (unnamed) modes on C (and A) became more prevalent (and got the names Ionian and Aeolian) so modern theory describes things in terms of the C-scale.






                share|improve this answer




























                  0














                  Actually, based on overlapping hexachords, the letter "A" does (in some sense) represent the lowest tone (it does on an 88-key piano, but not necessarily on others.) The "modes" were rotated major scale patterns starting on D, E, F, or G. Each mode had a "plagal" version (lower range) using the same interval pattern but starting a fifth lower; "hypodorian" had A-A to a range. If these are overlapped, the A of the D-mode is the lowest note. Thus the pattern starts with A. Later a lower note "G" was added (probably because some singer had a good low voice) below the other notes and given the name G-ut or Gamma-ut in Greek and using "ut" and older version of "do" givies the word "gamut."



                  A music developed the (unnamed) modes on C (and A) became more prevalent (and got the names Ionian and Aeolian) so modern theory describes things in terms of the C-scale.






                  share|improve this answer


























                    0












                    0








                    0







                    Actually, based on overlapping hexachords, the letter "A" does (in some sense) represent the lowest tone (it does on an 88-key piano, but not necessarily on others.) The "modes" were rotated major scale patterns starting on D, E, F, or G. Each mode had a "plagal" version (lower range) using the same interval pattern but starting a fifth lower; "hypodorian" had A-A to a range. If these are overlapped, the A of the D-mode is the lowest note. Thus the pattern starts with A. Later a lower note "G" was added (probably because some singer had a good low voice) below the other notes and given the name G-ut or Gamma-ut in Greek and using "ut" and older version of "do" givies the word "gamut."



                    A music developed the (unnamed) modes on C (and A) became more prevalent (and got the names Ionian and Aeolian) so modern theory describes things in terms of the C-scale.






                    share|improve this answer













                    Actually, based on overlapping hexachords, the letter "A" does (in some sense) represent the lowest tone (it does on an 88-key piano, but not necessarily on others.) The "modes" were rotated major scale patterns starting on D, E, F, or G. Each mode had a "plagal" version (lower range) using the same interval pattern but starting a fifth lower; "hypodorian" had A-A to a range. If these are overlapped, the A of the D-mode is the lowest note. Thus the pattern starts with A. Later a lower note "G" was added (probably because some singer had a good low voice) below the other notes and given the name G-ut or Gamma-ut in Greek and using "ut" and older version of "do" givies the word "gamut."



                    A music developed the (unnamed) modes on C (and A) became more prevalent (and got the names Ionian and Aeolian) so modern theory describes things in terms of the C-scale.







                    share|improve this answer












                    share|improve this answer



                    share|improve this answer










                    answered 6 hours ago









                    ttwttw

                    9,001932




                    9,001932























                        0














                        Your scale ignores the relationship between sound and the overtone spectrum.



                        If you have a string vibrating at 100Hz, it's actually also vibrating at 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz, and so on. Now you know that music is perceived as the logarithm of frequency, and doubling the frequency is equivalent to going up one octave. So, for the first few overtones, you get the following:



                        0: 100Hz = Base
                        1: 200Hz = Octave
                        2: 300Hz = Octave * 3/2
                        3: 400Hz = 2 Octaves
                        4: 500Hz = 2 Octaves * 5/4
                        5: 600Hz = 2 Octaves * 3/2
                        6: 700Hz = 2 Octaves * 7/4
                        7: 800Hz = 3 Octaves


                        You see, all perfect quotients. And those perfect quotients sound pleasing. Now, 3/2 = 1.5, which is pretty damn near to 2^(7/12) = 1.498. Also, you find
                        5/4 = 1.25 ~ 1.260 = 2^(4/12). We have names for these ratios:



                        Overtone 1 to 2: 3/2 ~ 2^(7/12) = perfect fifth
                        Overtone 2 to 3: 4/3 ~ 2^(5/12) = perfect fourth
                        Overtone 3 to 4: 5/4 ~ 2^(4/12) = large third
                        Overtone 4 to 5: 6/5 ~ 2^(3/12) = small third


                        You know what's missing on that table? It's the factor 2^(6/12). This factor is not close to any nice, small fraction, and cannot be found in the overtone spectrum. The associated interval sounds quite displeasing, and it's very rarely used in music.



                        So, any music notating system that's usable must contain those nice sounding 2^(5/12) and 2^(7/12) intervals, but should exclude the 2^(6/12) interval as much as possible. And that's exactly what our usual scale does. The major scale looks like this



                        2^(0/12) = 1
                        2^(2/12) = 3/2 / 4/3 = 9/8
                        2^(4/12) = 5/4
                        2^(5/12) = 4/3
                        2^(7/12) = 3/2
                        2^(9/12) = 4/3 * 5/4 = 5/3
                        2^(11/12) = 3/2 * 5/4 = 15/8
                        2^(12/12) = 2


                        You see, this scale is fully built upon the factors 3/2, 4/3, and 5/4. The minor scale, and the other common modes like the dorian, use the same factors between the notes, they just change which note is perceived as the base note.





                        TL;DR: A scale with constant spacing between the named nodes is deeply impractical because it excludes the most important intervals (perfect fourth and fifth), but includes the most glaring interval (tritone).






                        share|improve this answer






























                          0














                          Your scale ignores the relationship between sound and the overtone spectrum.



                          If you have a string vibrating at 100Hz, it's actually also vibrating at 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz, and so on. Now you know that music is perceived as the logarithm of frequency, and doubling the frequency is equivalent to going up one octave. So, for the first few overtones, you get the following:



                          0: 100Hz = Base
                          1: 200Hz = Octave
                          2: 300Hz = Octave * 3/2
                          3: 400Hz = 2 Octaves
                          4: 500Hz = 2 Octaves * 5/4
                          5: 600Hz = 2 Octaves * 3/2
                          6: 700Hz = 2 Octaves * 7/4
                          7: 800Hz = 3 Octaves


                          You see, all perfect quotients. And those perfect quotients sound pleasing. Now, 3/2 = 1.5, which is pretty damn near to 2^(7/12) = 1.498. Also, you find
                          5/4 = 1.25 ~ 1.260 = 2^(4/12). We have names for these ratios:



                          Overtone 1 to 2: 3/2 ~ 2^(7/12) = perfect fifth
                          Overtone 2 to 3: 4/3 ~ 2^(5/12) = perfect fourth
                          Overtone 3 to 4: 5/4 ~ 2^(4/12) = large third
                          Overtone 4 to 5: 6/5 ~ 2^(3/12) = small third


                          You know what's missing on that table? It's the factor 2^(6/12). This factor is not close to any nice, small fraction, and cannot be found in the overtone spectrum. The associated interval sounds quite displeasing, and it's very rarely used in music.



                          So, any music notating system that's usable must contain those nice sounding 2^(5/12) and 2^(7/12) intervals, but should exclude the 2^(6/12) interval as much as possible. And that's exactly what our usual scale does. The major scale looks like this



                          2^(0/12) = 1
                          2^(2/12) = 3/2 / 4/3 = 9/8
                          2^(4/12) = 5/4
                          2^(5/12) = 4/3
                          2^(7/12) = 3/2
                          2^(9/12) = 4/3 * 5/4 = 5/3
                          2^(11/12) = 3/2 * 5/4 = 15/8
                          2^(12/12) = 2


                          You see, this scale is fully built upon the factors 3/2, 4/3, and 5/4. The minor scale, and the other common modes like the dorian, use the same factors between the notes, they just change which note is perceived as the base note.





                          TL;DR: A scale with constant spacing between the named nodes is deeply impractical because it excludes the most important intervals (perfect fourth and fifth), but includes the most glaring interval (tritone).






                          share|improve this answer




























                            0












                            0








                            0







                            Your scale ignores the relationship between sound and the overtone spectrum.



                            If you have a string vibrating at 100Hz, it's actually also vibrating at 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz, and so on. Now you know that music is perceived as the logarithm of frequency, and doubling the frequency is equivalent to going up one octave. So, for the first few overtones, you get the following:



                            0: 100Hz = Base
                            1: 200Hz = Octave
                            2: 300Hz = Octave * 3/2
                            3: 400Hz = 2 Octaves
                            4: 500Hz = 2 Octaves * 5/4
                            5: 600Hz = 2 Octaves * 3/2
                            6: 700Hz = 2 Octaves * 7/4
                            7: 800Hz = 3 Octaves


                            You see, all perfect quotients. And those perfect quotients sound pleasing. Now, 3/2 = 1.5, which is pretty damn near to 2^(7/12) = 1.498. Also, you find
                            5/4 = 1.25 ~ 1.260 = 2^(4/12). We have names for these ratios:



                            Overtone 1 to 2: 3/2 ~ 2^(7/12) = perfect fifth
                            Overtone 2 to 3: 4/3 ~ 2^(5/12) = perfect fourth
                            Overtone 3 to 4: 5/4 ~ 2^(4/12) = large third
                            Overtone 4 to 5: 6/5 ~ 2^(3/12) = small third


                            You know what's missing on that table? It's the factor 2^(6/12). This factor is not close to any nice, small fraction, and cannot be found in the overtone spectrum. The associated interval sounds quite displeasing, and it's very rarely used in music.



                            So, any music notating system that's usable must contain those nice sounding 2^(5/12) and 2^(7/12) intervals, but should exclude the 2^(6/12) interval as much as possible. And that's exactly what our usual scale does. The major scale looks like this



                            2^(0/12) = 1
                            2^(2/12) = 3/2 / 4/3 = 9/8
                            2^(4/12) = 5/4
                            2^(5/12) = 4/3
                            2^(7/12) = 3/2
                            2^(9/12) = 4/3 * 5/4 = 5/3
                            2^(11/12) = 3/2 * 5/4 = 15/8
                            2^(12/12) = 2


                            You see, this scale is fully built upon the factors 3/2, 4/3, and 5/4. The minor scale, and the other common modes like the dorian, use the same factors between the notes, they just change which note is perceived as the base note.





                            TL;DR: A scale with constant spacing between the named nodes is deeply impractical because it excludes the most important intervals (perfect fourth and fifth), but includes the most glaring interval (tritone).






                            share|improve this answer















                            Your scale ignores the relationship between sound and the overtone spectrum.



                            If you have a string vibrating at 100Hz, it's actually also vibrating at 200Hz, 300Hz, 400Hz, and so on. Now you know that music is perceived as the logarithm of frequency, and doubling the frequency is equivalent to going up one octave. So, for the first few overtones, you get the following:



                            0: 100Hz = Base
                            1: 200Hz = Octave
                            2: 300Hz = Octave * 3/2
                            3: 400Hz = 2 Octaves
                            4: 500Hz = 2 Octaves * 5/4
                            5: 600Hz = 2 Octaves * 3/2
                            6: 700Hz = 2 Octaves * 7/4
                            7: 800Hz = 3 Octaves


                            You see, all perfect quotients. And those perfect quotients sound pleasing. Now, 3/2 = 1.5, which is pretty damn near to 2^(7/12) = 1.498. Also, you find
                            5/4 = 1.25 ~ 1.260 = 2^(4/12). We have names for these ratios:



                            Overtone 1 to 2: 3/2 ~ 2^(7/12) = perfect fifth
                            Overtone 2 to 3: 4/3 ~ 2^(5/12) = perfect fourth
                            Overtone 3 to 4: 5/4 ~ 2^(4/12) = large third
                            Overtone 4 to 5: 6/5 ~ 2^(3/12) = small third


                            You know what's missing on that table? It's the factor 2^(6/12). This factor is not close to any nice, small fraction, and cannot be found in the overtone spectrum. The associated interval sounds quite displeasing, and it's very rarely used in music.



                            So, any music notating system that's usable must contain those nice sounding 2^(5/12) and 2^(7/12) intervals, but should exclude the 2^(6/12) interval as much as possible. And that's exactly what our usual scale does. The major scale looks like this



                            2^(0/12) = 1
                            2^(2/12) = 3/2 / 4/3 = 9/8
                            2^(4/12) = 5/4
                            2^(5/12) = 4/3
                            2^(7/12) = 3/2
                            2^(9/12) = 4/3 * 5/4 = 5/3
                            2^(11/12) = 3/2 * 5/4 = 15/8
                            2^(12/12) = 2


                            You see, this scale is fully built upon the factors 3/2, 4/3, and 5/4. The minor scale, and the other common modes like the dorian, use the same factors between the notes, they just change which note is perceived as the base note.





                            TL;DR: A scale with constant spacing between the named nodes is deeply impractical because it excludes the most important intervals (perfect fourth and fifth), but includes the most glaring interval (tritone).







                            share|improve this answer














                            share|improve this answer



                            share|improve this answer








                            edited 4 hours ago

























                            answered 4 hours ago









                            cmastercmaster

                            1113




                            1113















                                Popular posts from this blog

                                A CLEAN and SIMPLE way to add appendices to Table of Contents and bookmarks

                                Calculate evaluation metrics using cross_val_predict sklearn

                                Insert data from modal to MySQL (multiple modal on website)