Is F Major the most hateful chord? (AKA what chords do you least like to use...)

[Frantz]

Which chords do you seldom use?

I try to avoid extension chords since they are a fire hazard.

[jancivil]

But formants are way beyond the scope of this discussion.

While discussion of the reality of instruments exceeds your objectivity of ET, an instrument tends to have things going on that take us away from this abstraction.

- and I believe I granted the points you bring in in the first place. I don't disagree with you for the most part. But:

I am agnostic per whether or not the transposition itself 'all things being equal' makes a different color. A lot of the sort of poetical language about chord or key personality happened since 12-equal-to-the-octave holds sway. I don't know why 12ET is that persuasive in itself, making 'chord color' impossible in it. I would need to understand it technically and I'm afraid I do not. It seems to me a matter of overtones closer together per higher fundamental and I just don't know why that does nothing to 'color'. Maybe I'm dense?

[ http://scholarworks.umass.edu/cgi/viewc ... ext=theses ]

A few scholars in the early century gave definitive counter arguments against validity of key characteristics. Johann Kuhnau (1660-1722) showed his surprise in the sheer number of knowledgeable musicians who blindly continued to consider the notion of key characteristics without adequate physical proof.121 Others, such as F.G. Drewis and G. C. Kellner, who were originally advocates of key characteristics, were challenged by the characters of compositions that were uninfluenced by transpositions, slight differences in tuning between instruments and the multitude of standard pitch employed in different regions of Europe.122
While they were widely recognized as a phenomenon and many scholars continued to give their own hypothesis, it appears that the search for the cause of the affective properties of keys never met a satisfactory conclusion. Francesco Galeazzi (1738-1819) was convinced that equal temperament would destroy key characteristics due to the equal sized semitone intervals in the all scales. He was one of many who still provided his interpretations of keys in great detail despite adopting equal temperament.123

- the whole impetus for ET was to get a useful key on every of the 12 tones! Why.[/rhetoric]

there was an objection by numerous writers when this came into prominence, that it got rid of these affective qualities of key. However:

According to Mattheson, keys are one of the musical elements along with meter, intervals, tempo and rhythm to which composers should pay attention in order to write music affectingly.82 Making the appropriate choice of keys enabled composers to provoke the desired emotions in the souls of audiences. In his first treatises, Das Neu-Eröffnete Orchestre (1713), Mattheson provided the earliest and most extensive discussion of the characterization of keys as written by a German theorist. 83
To an anonymous article in Journal de Trevoux (1718), Matteson claimed that the affective properties of keys were caused by two elements: 1) the pitch level (higher or lower pitch) and 2) a slight difference in the size of intervals due to unequal temperament systems. The latter theory had been supported by many scholars until equal temperament ended it in the eighteenth century. Mattheson, however, insisted that the former was the primary cause of key characteristics because the latter argument could easily be defeated by a number of different circumstances: the slight difference in the sizes of intervals
81 Mattheson (1958), 54-56. 82 Ibid., 47. 83 Steblin, 40.
24
could easily be disturbed by mistuning, or by the natural variation between instruments. Experienced ears were also required to perceive the minute diversities. 84
--------
This association of certain qualities with sharp and flat keys developed into what Rita Steblin calls "the sharp-flat principle." Under any name, it was widely discussed in the descriptions of keys by numerous scholars of music: when keys have a greater number of sharps and flats, the intensity of the corresponding characteristics increases. For example, starting from C major with no sharps or flats, the key, once removed to G major with one sharp, takes on a brilliant quality, and when twice removed to D major with two sharps, this brilliance becomes even more intense. On the flat side, if F major with one flat is characterized as calm, then B flat major with two flats might be characterized as somber or sad. Georg Joseph Vogler stated in his Deutsche Encyclopedie (1779) that going through keys by fifths would always the increase the intensity of their inherent qualities.96
The sharp-flat principle was not actually new to the nineteenth century, having been discussed as early as the Baroque period.

<Rita Steiblin> https://www.google.com/search?q=A+Histo ... hannel=rcs

[Numanoid]

well, I don't know. but I wonder how many of the people with a strong feeling for a chord will consistently identify it in blind tests. Give them a Gb major, see if they don't call it F major given suggestion.

+1

Those who manage to do it, got perfect pitch, and that is not all good:

"Musicians with absolute perception may experience difficulties which do not exist for other musicians. Because absolute listeners are capable of recognizing that a musical composition has been transposed from its original key, or that a pitch is being produced at a nonstandard frequency (either sharp or flat), a musician with absolute pitch may become distressed upon perceiving tones they believe to be "wrong" or hearing a piece of music "in the wrong key"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_p ... e_problems

[jancivil]

Yes, if you gave them something halfway between F and Gb, for instance.

[jancivil]

specifying that the abstract notion of a chord in ET is the same in all keys isn't a statement that everything sounds the same when transposed.

Then the whole point of ET in the discussion is limited to that? That doesn't address chord color at all. 'F vis a vis something contextually' is another matter than 'does F have its own color in its very F-ness'.

"chord colour"

Sometimes I think I'm too stupid to know, yet very time I think about it, I'm up against the basic physics. Does a difference in the distance between harmonics not affect 'color'? Evidently you're not saying that and have granted that things sound different in different keys.

For me the absurdity of the claims is their specificity.

C Minor
Declaration of love and at the same time the lament of unhappy love. All languishing, longing, sighing of the love-sick soul lies in this key.

Db Major
A leering key, degenerating into grief and rapture. It cannot laugh, but it can smile; it cannot howl, but it can at least grimace its crying.--Consequently only unusual characters and feelings can be brought out in this key.

holy crap

[Sendy]

Jan, we've probably reached the limit of my ability to discuss this properly.

Does the spreading out of harmonics that comes with raising pitch height affect timbre? I would automatically say 'no' on the grounds that our hearing closes these gaps because our perception of pitch is not linear. If you have a cluster of harmonics and you pitch shift them, they don't change their colour if their relations are all multiplied or divided by a fixed amount. The other points you've raised I'll need more time to reply to, if indeed I can think of anything meaningful to say at all . I do enjoy this subject greatly, though, so thanks for your input.

I think we agree on the original point, though. To say "chord x" has property Y, without specifying in what context, is pretty meaningless, regardless of the vagaries of words like "happy", "sad", "sweet", etc, because it's the little details such as deviations from pitch, tuning, formants, etc that have the final say in tone colour.

When someone says things like "F minor is the saddest key" I just feel the need to speak out

[Numanoid]

When someone says things like "F minor is the saddest key" I just feel the need to speak out

Yeah, it's like that ad line: Carlsberg, probably the best beer in the world

[ariston]

Esoterically minded folk, who look for the origins of our perception of music in natural occurrences, certainly make a big deal out of the characteristics of specific frequencies. And, thinking back to the essays contained in the sleeve notes of the classical records in my father's collection: there was a lot of that drivel similar to the stuff quoted by Jan.

My perception is that context is everything. I'm also acutely aware of the man's innate ability to fool her or himself, to the point that black can become white and celery with peanut butter a delicacy ("you sniffed the reeking buns of angel, and acted like it was cocaine" - Zappa) All of which boils down to: if F Maj makes you feel bad, then don't use it. Avoiding it can be a part of your "signature sound". But do realize you're kidding yourself, and don't take it too seriously.

[Hink]

Esoterically minded folk, who look for the origins of our perception of music in natural occurrences, certainly make a big deal out of the characteristics of specific frequencies. And, thinking back to the essays contained in the sleeve notes of the classical records in my father's collection: there was a lot of that drivel similar to the stuff quoted by Jan.

My perception is that context is everything. I'm also acutely aware of the man's innate ability to fool her or himself, to the point that black can become white and celery with peanut butter a delicacy ("you sniffed the reeking buns of angel, and acted like it was cocaine" - Zappa) All of which boils down to: if F Maj makes you feel bad, then don't use it. Avoiding it can be a part of your "signature sound". But do realize you're kidding yourself, and don't take it too seriously.

what I posted (the link) was about keys and not frequencies and as I said whether or not it really holds water is not something that matters. Certainly different keys have different feels but I am of the opinion that feel is highly subjective and surely we could also listen to the same song and have a different perception of the feel. I have brought this up many times but when people say they express themselves through their art I dont see it as having to be conveying any expressions to others. I liken it to stubbing your toe when you are all alone and yelling out "ouch". No one is there to hear you but I know when I stub my toe I do express myself, so te same holds true imo for "feel". That is from the early 1800s as I recall and it is pretty goofy but those were the times then, but if it provides me with some inspiration that can only be a good thing. SO again it doesn't matter if any of those things a real as they are real for me.

That's why I said it's a good exercise, it's probably just a placebo effect but that's okay because I play for me. If I can capture a feel that sticks with me then as far as I am concerned that piece is a success (or the exercise), it doesn't matter if I ever listen to it again, it doesn't matter if I play it for others because once it is done it has done what it was intended for...personal growth. For years my sig was something like {i]the measure of talent is not a measure against the talents of others but a measure of one's own growth as a musician[/i]...my music is very personal to me and I try to keep it that way. I try to avoid using negative terms for music I dislike because taste is personal as well and my tastes could be considered unthinkable to many and that's okay.

As far as the chord again, that's what alternate tunings are for, but I think I'll post more about that in a new thread

[JumpingJackFlash]

I don't know why 12ET is that persuasive in itself, making 'chord color' impossible in it. I would need to understand it technically and I'm afraid I do not. It seems to me a matter of overtones closer together per higher fundamental and I just don't know why that does nothing to 'color'. Maybe I'm dense?

It's not so much about the harmonics - those will be a factor, but primarily it is much simpler.
In equal temperament, all semitones are exactly the same size. Therefore all major keys are mathematically equal, all minor keys are mathematically equal and so on.

Only over the past 100 years or so has this become the universal standard it is today. Older music could be in various tuning systems where the semitones were not necessarily all the same size. Thus, C to E could be a larger interval than G to B for example, even though both are major thirds. - A system such as this will naturally make different keys sound different, and all the people who write stuff about one key being particularly sad or particularly jolly (for example) are invariably talking about a system other than equal temperament.

However, I do agree that natural instrumental timbre can have a huge (often unintended) influence over how a key sounds. Many real world instruments do tend to favour particular keys and on some instruments, even in equal temperament, it is entirely possible that one key might sound more "sad" than another, although often only very slightly, and this does become somewhat subjective. A skilful player might be able to either compensate for such an effect, or perhaps take advantage of it. Either way, changing things like tempo and dynamics are always going to produce a much more obvious effect.

[jancivil]

Jan, we've probably reached the limit of my ability to discuss this properly.

Does the spreading out of harmonics that comes with raising pitch height affect timbre? I would automatically say 'no' on the grounds that our hearing closes these gaps because our perception of pitch is not linear.:

A Harmonic Spectral Analysis of Various Instruments

[jancivil]

I don't know why 12ET is that persuasive in itself, making 'chord color' impossible in it. I would need to understand it technically and I'm afraid I do not. It seems to me a matter of overtones closer together per higher fundamental and I just don't know why that does nothing to 'color'. Maybe I'm dense?

It's not so much about the harmonics - those will be a factor, but primarily it is much simpler.
In equal temperament, all semitones are exactly the same size. Therefore all major keys are mathematically equal, all minor keys are mathematically equal and so on.

On the same instrument, a pedal tone of a different frequency will have a differently spaced harmonic series, belonging to that. Unless I'm missing something, you are not addressing 'color' at all there. Why did you in the same move grant "those will be a factor" and then go to simplify that into dust?

I will grant it's trivial, or negligible to a certain extent.

[jancivil]

If you have a cluster of harmonics and you pitch shift them, they don't change their colour if their relations are all multiplied or divided by a fixed amount.

True. On what instrument does this happen.

The abstraction that is equal temperament doesn't happen either. If this is a troublesome remark, become a piano tuner and get back to us.
Maybe I have yet to be clear on where I'm coming from. I fully understand 'all things equal = all things equal'.

I think I understand everything I quoted from that thesis. At the end of the day, he came away with this:
it appears that the search for the cause of the affective properties of keys never met a satisfactory conclusion.

I'm real good with being convinced there's nothing to it, but I haven't. Beyond being able to address the components of 'red', the concept of <this color> is one of these QUALIA situations, isn't it?

[ariston]

SO again it doesn't matter if any of those things a real as they are real for me.

That's why I said it's a good exercise, it's probably just a placebo effect but that's okay because I play for me. If I can capture a feel that sticks with me then as far as I am concerned that piece is a success (or the exercise), it doesn't matter if I ever listen to it again, it doesn't matter if I play it for others because once it is done it has done what it was intended for...personal growth. For years my sig was something like {i]the measure of talent is not a measure against the talents of others but a measure of one's own growth as a musician[/i]...my music is very personal to me and I try to keep it that way. I try to avoid using negative terms for music I dislike because taste is personal as well and my tastes could be considered unthinkable to many and that's okay.

I wasn't replying directly to you, but I completely agree with what you said here. It doesn't stop there, though. The "interesting" things always happen when you take your stuff out there - and when tastes collide. If I were in a band, and one of my band mates absolutely refused to play an F major chord that I would insist upon, we would have an interesting situation.

My wife used to sing Jazz in a duo with a pianist. He loved Thelonious Monk and was always sneaking those off notes into his playing, which disturbed her singing to a point where she could no longer do it. So he had to stop - at least until it came to his solos. She always cringed a little at that point, because some dissonances sound really harsh to her.

Anyway, I've become kind of a bedroom musician as well, because I don't have time for anything else. I love the self-expression part of that, but isn't it also one of the points of music to communicate something to others? For that, you need to expand your view and take their perception into account. You can, of course, say: "here's what I do, take it or leave it", but that strikes me as a bit self-centered. Communication is a two-way street (or, sometimes it's a congested six-lane highway).

[Sendy]

If you have a cluster of harmonics and you pitch shift them, they don't change their colour if their relations are all multiplied or divided by a fixed amount.

True. On what instrument does this happen.

Synth patches (the more boring ones)

Yes, pianos use stretch tuning because their harmonics are skewed from the "ideal", so you will totally get different keys sounding different ways, I've already acknowledged that pianos and many other accoustic and well-programmed electronic instruments have this property.

However these properties are local and somewhat random to each instrument, that is my point, and on average they resemble the "generic wireframe abstraction" of E.T. with "ideal" harmonics and "ideal" scale spacing... but nothing you can say about instrument A has any import for instrument B, hence my objection to "E minor is the saddest key" or whatever.