Dminor - The Saddest of All Keys.

[vac4873]

Originally Posted by ljguitar

in response to cool licks that guitarists or pianists have been working out on their own that moved them - and when they are integrated into compositions and played they seem to move others as well...we call them hooks.

Try playing the chord progression to ''G-L-O-R-I-A'' in another key or on another instrument and it doesn't create the same response as those simple little licks played on the original version by Eddie And The Hotrods.

Great discussion. But I would suggest that "G-L-O-R-I-A" played in Eb by tuning down a half step and using the same chord shapes would create the same response (in fact few would notice the difference). It is more about the harmonic relationship, not the actual key. Playing the tune in E using chords up the neck doesn't sound right either (until later in the song when the changes are played up the neck)

As for sharp keys being more energetic than flat keys, Stevie Ray Vaughn tuned down a half step and played a lot of stuff in Eb and Ab. Pretty energetic IMHO. The Bonnie Raitt tune "Let's Give Them Something to Talk About" is in Eb and doesn't seem to lack energy. I'm sure there are dozens of other examples.

Anyway, great discussion, made me do some research because I had always thought that there were clear differences between keys. I do agree that this is very subjective and each individual has their own experience, what I was trying to find out was any scientific support for it. I was just playing "Joe Friday" (just the facts, ma'am).

Matt

[ParleyDee]

Originally Posted by vac4873

Great discussion. But I would suggest that "G-L-O-R-I-A" played in Eb by tuning down a half step and using the same chord shapes would create the same response (in fact few would notice the difference).

If that half-step is taken in piano tuning, you're right. But definitely not if you're talking historical tuning systems, in which case if you are talking an audience of professional musicians, it would make a difference as the width of the intervals changes from one key to the next and the chord shapes do not sound the same. I regularly work with expert players in this field and believe me, they would be able to tell.

I've always found it interesting that in our modern world we think it's automatically A Good Thing to be able to play our instruments in any key and it all works, and we think those Renaissance and Baroque people were so *limited* because they were only "able" to play in a restricted range of keys ... and then you find out that "piano tuning" has been around since about 1600 and no one used it because it was considered characterless.

[vac4873]

Originally Posted by ParleyDee

If that half-step is taken in piano tuning, you're right. But definitely not if you're talking historical tuning systems, in which case if you are talking an audience of professional musicians, it would make a difference as the width of the intervals changes from one key to the next and the chord shapes do not sound the same. I regularly work with expert players in this field and believe me, they would be able to tell.

I've always found it interesting that in our modern world we think it's automatically A Good Thing to be able to play our instruments in any key and it all works, and we think those Renaissance and Baroque people were so *limited* because they were only "able" to play in a restricted range of keys ... and then you find out that "piano tuning" has been around since about 1600 and no one used it because it was considered characterless.

Thanks, Parley
I was speaking about the modern (tempered) world that we happen to live (and perform) in. I am aware that historically there were differences in the tunings from one key to another. I think Mr. J.S. Bach was one of the first advocates for tempering ("Well Tempered Clavier"). There's a good discussion on one of the sites I referenced in my original post. It does appear that some of the character of the different keys was thrown out in the interest of tempering - don't know for sure, but I think making ensemble music was part of the reason for tempering the keys.
As far as my statement about hardly anyone noticing the difference, I was speaking about the average listening audience. I realize there are people that have the ability to sense even a few cents of pitch difference, but they are not a large percentage of the general population.

Matt

Matt

[Timothy Lawler]

Something to consider regarding older music - baroque and renaissance especially - is that there was no "offical pitch" standard in tuning. Wasn't until 1955 when the International Organization for Standardization officially set the A above middle C as 440 Hz. In Bach's time, for instance, it varied a lot. Organs from the period vary from around A = 410 to 450 Hz and technicians often raised organs in pitch over time as the pipes would be adjusted for wear.

Tim

[ParleyDee]

This is quite true - instruments did get carried from country to country and you could ask a maker to match the pitch of an instrument you gave as a model, but it wasn't as precise as it is these days.

There was some level of regional standardisation, however. Some Renaissance Italian instruments were as high as 466, most Baroque instruments were around 415 but France was at 392 - travelling flute players carried packing rings to fit to their flutes to match French pitch and even now flute players can find the stretch on a 392 flute difficult. But the low pitch gives that wonderful trumpet quality to the oboe-violin unison in a lot of French Baroque opera ... which of course only sounds like that if authentic instruments are used. From memory the local period instrument orchestra tunes to about 430 for Classical music. And in period instruments which do have different tonal palettes to the (IMO more bland) modern counterparts, these pitch changes do change the sound quality quite a lot in a way that they do not for tonally-even modern instruments.

But it certainly wasn't a case of wandering around with your Korg in your pocket.

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler

Something to consider regarding older music - baroque and renaissance especially - is that there was no "offical pitch" standard in tuning. Wasn't until 1955 when the International Organization for Standardization officially set the A above middle C as 440 Hz. In Bach's time, for instance, it varied a lot. Organs from the period vary from around A = 410 to 450 Hz and technicians often raised organs in pitch over time as the pipes would be adjusted for wear.

Hi Tim...
While that is partially true, music theoreticians were calculating tuning schemes out to 5 and 6 decimal places in the 1500s trying to come up with temperament schemes, so there was some standard being used to tune orchestras, harpsichords etc. other than ''by ear''.

I wonder what instrument tuners and owners of that period were using for a tuning reference? Does anyone know?

Howard Goodall (British composer) thinks the accordian had the largest effect in spreading tempered tuning around Europe, because it was a fixed reed instrument and it was loud, so everyone in the group had to tune to it.

Also, organists from large churches duirng those primitive periods (on the sly and in secret) were some of the first to partially temper church organs to rid them of wolf tones when playing in more than one key. They just did it and didn't talk about it to anybody.

I think there are bar bands today who don't tune to standard and play standards. And some folks don't notice, but I've heard things played that I have thought ''There is something not quite right with that song'' then to find out later the person was down tuned or had tuned by ear and wasn't even close to A=440.

On a subconscious level, people do respond differently to different keys. I know when I'm working on fingerstyle arrangements sometimes I end up choosing the key for the effect it has on the tonal texture of the music rather than the ease of fingerings.

[Timothy Lawler]

While that is partially true, music theoreticians were calculating tuning schemes out to 5 and 6 decimal places in the 1500s trying to come up with temperament schemes, so there was some standard being used to tune orchestras, harpsichords etc. other than ''by ear''.

Have to disagree... not just partially true. Perhaps you're confusing standardization of overall tuning level with tuning schemes like equal temperment, meantone tuning, just intonation, etc.. My comment was about overall tuning level.

I don't think many would consider music of the 1700s primitive, but I imagine you just meant "historical" or "older".

Tim

[Timothy Lawler]

Originally Posted by ParleyDee

This is quite true - instruments did get carried from country to country and you could ask a maker to match the pitch of an instrument you gave as a model, but it wasn't as precise as it is these days.

There was some level of regional standardisation, however. Some Renaissance Italian instruments were as high as 466, most Baroque instruments were around 415 but France was at 392 - travelling flute players carried packing rings to fit to their flutes to match French pitch and even now flute players can find the stretch on a 392 flute difficult. But the low pitch gives that wonderful trumpet quality to the oboe-violin unison in a lot of French Baroque opera ... which of course only sounds like that if authentic instruments are used. From memory the local period instrument orchestra tunes to about 430 for Classical music. And in period instruments which do have different tonal palettes to the (IMO more bland) modern counterparts, these pitch changes do change the sound quality quite a lot in a way that they do not for tonally-even modern instruments.

But it certainly wasn't a case of wandering around with your Korg in your pocket.

Good comments ParleyDee.

Tim

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler

Have to disagree... not just partially true. Perhaps you're confusing standardization of overall tuning level with tuning schemes like equal temperment, meantone tuning, just intonation, etc.. My comment was about overall tuning level.

I don't think many would consider music of the 1700s primitive, but I imagine you just meant "historical" or "older".

Hi Tim...
I wan't thinking of the 1500s or the 1700s as ''primitive'' in a tribal sense. I think a better wording would have been ''early attempts'' and I was referring to the attempts to come up with temperament schemes not an official tuning standard.

And you are correct there was no official A=any particular frequency. But local groups did have to agree on some tuning reference. I'm wondering what that was. It could have been as simple as ''we all tune to the oboe'' or any other less adjustable member of the local orchestra.

[HereIGoAgain]

Originally Posted by Johnny X

What member?


.

That would be our own Nigel Tufnel, of course.

I'll post more when I have more time.

[Bern]

Originally Posted by HereIGoAgain

That would be our own Nigel Tufnel, of course.

I'll post more when I have more time.

Of course, Nigel's song title is even sadder...

[Timothy Lawler]

As far as reference pitches for musicians to tune to, the tuning fork was invented in the early 1700s.

Interesting article with some info on pitch references used by orchestras:

http://www.oboeclassics.com/Burgess.htm



This other page, half way down, has a great chart of tuning standard frequencies through history as used in England.

http://www.mcgee-flutes.com/eng_pitch.html

Tim

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler

As far as reference pitches for musicians to tune to, the tuning fork was invented in the early 1700s.

Hey Tim...
Thanks for the links. It is fun to learn more about our history.

I'm still interested in the tuning standards employed from the mid 1500s, because I had just never thought about what they used to calibrate the tunings until we were discussing this. Even if you tune to a recorder or other fixed or less adjustable instrument, it had to be calibrated as it was being built.

I'm curious as to what the builders and players of that era used as a standard. Was it all done with math?

[Timothy Lawler]

Well, the lute was a (OK, "the") big instrument in the 1500s and it was tuned basically by tightening the first string as high as possible before it would break, then tuning the other strings from that. How's that for scientific, heh-heh? Wikipedia has a pretty good article on the lute regarding tuning. And this thread has some cool stuff about fret placement with the tied-on gut frets of the time and how one could control the subtleties of intonation by pushing the frets around.

Tim

[ljguitar]

Originally Posted by Timothy Lawler

Well, the lute was a (OK, "the") big instrument in the 1500s and it was tuned basically by tightening the first string as high as possible before it would break, then tuning the other strings from that. How's that for scientific, heh-heh? Wikipedia has a pretty good article on the lute regarding tuning. And this thread has some cool stuff about fret placement with the tied-on gut frets of the time and how one could control the subtleties of intonation by pushing the frets around.

Hi Tim...
In doing research on some of Julian Bream's stuff I came across tunings for the Guitarra from the 1500s that list definite pitches for tunings for both four course double strung (8 string) D-G-B-e if I remember right and 5 course instrument that was tuned to A-D-G-B-E.

Julian plays some reproductions of both versions of the early instruments from that period with the tied on frets. They really sounded very nice. The video is titled ''Guitarra - A Musical Journey Through Spain'' and is a great 3 1/2 hour documentary shot in 30 minute segments by the BBC with Julian.