I tried playing it both ways, up and down, of course. But I am not talking about it in relation to any other key. I am talking about beginning with that key, and no previous key to judge it by. Of course if you want something to sound brighter or more powerfull, you just transpose it up, or down for darker. But I am talking about all keys in relation to each other, yet completely on their own. I don't claim to have anything near what they call "perfect pitch", but I think I can hear a differance (though maybe I am only imagining it). Try both keys on there own. Maybe even play a song in between in a completely unrelated key so as to get previous concepts of the key out of your head.

By the way, I am not trying to make fun of you. I have seen the way you will argue a point, and I don't want to be on the other end of it [:)] (though I certainly don't mind some friendly discussion).

P.S. Someone else must have some views on this. I know there are plenty of opinions out there. Anyone want to share some of their's?

Hi.
I think you are making this too complicated because the answer is simple [;)]

"Db Major being a much 'darker' key, while G Major is a much brighter key"

This "feel" dates back to baroque period when I guess composers had much more interaction with real musicians than contemporary composer (just how many pieces did Bach have performed!)

What these composers heard is just plain physics.

The open strings resonate with notes with same frequnecy!

So in G major you have alot of notes g, d, c, and a which are the same notes as the open strings.

This is the same law as with the indian Sitar which has many strings not to be played on but only to resonate with the music.

What do you mean, "open strings"? Aren't all strings open on a piano?

...in strings (violin, viola etc.).
So if you have ensemble with many strings this resonance will be very audible.

OK, but I notice the differance on the piano by itself. I do know a little about sympathetic harmonics (a very little, because I mostly play piano), but I can hear the differance on other instruments, too. Don't tell me everyone here thinks that all keys are exactly the same, and the only reason to choose one above another is what the singing voice can do, or what individual instruments can do. There must be more than that.

@ColinThomson said:

Don't tell me everyone here thinks that all keys are exactly the same, and the only reason to choose one above another is what the singing voice can do, or what individual instruments can do. There must be more than that.

[H]

Congratulation, you got it. In twelve-tone equal temperament all keys are equal!

In todays music where the equal temperament is in use, all keys are equal, or in other words, they can only be darker or brigther by range, pitch, instrumentation etc., but not different in timbre by having in each key different interval proportions.

In the times of Johann Sebastian Bach, that was not the case. With the temperament he was using, each key had another timbre, and was used accordingly. When you play Bach’s composition on a keyboard tuned to the tempreament he composed with, you can hear the dramatic’s when modulating to the most far away keys from the pure center key the instrument is tuned to, and certainly he made use of that in absolute perfectionism. There are sad keys, joyful keys, keys for the Lord, keys for requiems, keys for blondes and brunettes etc. etc..

.

Sorry, but I didn't even know that Bach used a differantly tuned keyboard. Fascinating. Where can I fined more info on this? Why aren't these techniques used in modern music?

Also, I understand the theory behind all keys being equal. My ears just tell me that it is not true. I used to think that the chord G sounded differant than the chord A when playing in the key of D because of the key, but the G would sound the same in the key of C as the A in the key of D. In other words, I, ii, iii, IV V vi viidim sound the same in any key no matter which chords (or notes) happen to fall on that progression because of the key. But I don't think it is so. I think it is far more complicated than that, and I thought that I was not the only one to think so. But maybe I am. Interasting.

Because I am not (yet) into professional music, I don't know very many people who I can discuss this sort of thing with without going way over their heads. So I am glad I found you people to try and sort this sort of thing out with.

Wendy Carlos is a master at this stuff, applying different tunings at different times (even in the same composition).

Equal temperment notwithstanding, certain notes on every instrument will sound different. On piano, as you move up or down the keyboard notes will have one, two or three strings, the direction the strings stretch across the piano frame changes, sympathetic resonances are more or less pronounced in different sized pianos, etc.

On the clarinet, for instance, the chalumeau register is quite narrow so to have a melody transposed out of that range will result in a markedly different sound.

Chord voicings have effective ranges, as well. Certain note combinations will lose their power or color when moved, chords can become muddy and less distinguished when lowered. The more chromatic a voicing becomes the more pronounced this effect that registration and orchestration will have. What I mean by this is chromatic in a non-diatonic context, NOT "dissonant cluster of notes." The voicings I refer to would be more spread out.

Clark

@clarkcontrol said:

... certain notes on every instrument will sound different.

"Nicht immer, aber immer öfter"

(engl. "not always, but always more often")

.

@Another User said:

Where can I fined more info on this?

The "Book Smart" composer in me did not prolong the license who permitted me to give away information on this matters ---> please ask "Street Smart" composer Clark.

.

OK, well than, Clark, where can I find more information on this?

So, Angelo, it would appear from what you said that you believe that some techniques of the past should be left in the past. But aren't some of the greatest works those which combine the old with the new? I guess I have just never stumbled upon the onformation you are laying out to me, and the idea is intriguing to say the least.

So, to make sure I understand you. Bach would tune his keyboard so that it was not in half-step intervals. But (maybe) they were still all even intervals. Therefore when he got further away from the predetermined (pure) note, the dissonance increased, and therefore the tension? Is that the idea? Fascinating.

Why was this techniques discontinued? Did pianists become lazy and want an easy 'one size fits all' tuning for the piano (or whichever of the names the keyboard had at the time)? Or was it a thought through decision? It seems like usually technique does not become simpler over time, except for this case.

I'll have to spend some time thinking about this. Thanks you.

This is interasting:

http://www.larips.com/

@ColinThomson said:

Why was this techniques discontinued?

It's all about modulation possibilities and freedom of key. It is Bach who hated too pure tuning and very much welcomed Andreas Werckmeister with his well-tempered tuning approach, the predecessor of today's equal tempered system. Bach loved modulating and the more pure tunings didn't allow him that too freely.
On the other hand they really got strong criticised by the "pure tuners" who hated that well-tempered destroys the individual sonic characteristics of the keys (what again was the topic title?).

Colin Thomson - what grade are you on the piano?

Why? Are my questions too naive? Well, OK then. I am actually 17 years old, and there you have it. But I am trying to learn stuff as fast as possible [:)]

Please don't disregard everything I say just because of my age, though.

@ColinThomson said:

Why aren't these techniques used in modern music?

The “Well-Tempered Clavier" (German: Das wohltemperierte Clavier), was the first music composed using all 24 keys. Colin, notice, Bach composed this piano music for applying 24 keys on the piano, this would be all major and minor key, and all progressions and degrees thereof, this is what we call "diatonic system" today.

But a composer today uses a by far larger reservoir of keys, and modulates in progression who are not part of the diatonic system. I personally for example have not composed anything diatonic for orchestra since over twenty years.

Bach was composing in the diatonic system, there was nothing else at that time, it was not before 150 years later, that the first composers started to compose in other harmonic systems.

Also notice that Bach's piano cahier is piano music only. The whole subject of temperament applied to a full ensemble requires an even larger expertise.

.

OK. I guess I need to do more research on my music history.

Just so everyone knows, I do understand the obvious theory behind all keys being equal. I just thought that I had read different elsewhere, and heard differant. But probably what Clark said about the different number of strings and so on was what I was hearing.

Just trying to learn more.

@ColinThomson said:

Why? Are my questions too naive? Well, OK then. I am actually 17 years old, and there you have it. But I am trying to learn stuff as fast as possible [:)]

Please don't disregard everything I say just because of my age, though.

WHAT GRADE ARE YOU ON THE PIANO??????

Well, that is a good question. I take piano lessons from someone, but I am not doing anything like a college course. I have taken piano lessons for about 8 years. I have gone through the six Alfred books. I am working on one of Chopin's waltzes. Does that give you an idea? Sorry I didn't answer you correctly the first time, but I don't know what 'grade' I am in one the piano. So, why the question?

@ColinThomson said:

I have gone through the six Alfred books.

Which Alfred?

Alfred Bauberger as wanderer in Wagner's "Tristan and Isolde"?

http://www.lotz-verlag.de/Liste22/P1240%20Alfred%20Bauberger.JPG">


or this Alfred?




or that one, the absolute super size genius" Alfredo el Loco"?



.