Do you practise in all 30 keys?

[CameronJ]

5 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

I still stubbornly maintain that it would have been better to have each note with its own unique name, and forget about accidental altogether. It's only for historic reasons that we keep the old 'C', 'C#' thing, in the same way as we continue to use typewriter keyboards on computers. One day it will all be rationalised; it's just either a little too soon or a little too late. 

So A to L, then? I’m not sure if that would be easier or not 

[Dad3353]

17 minutes ago, CameronJ said:

So A to L, then? I’m not sure if that would be easier or not 

Maybe not if already steeped in the current system, but if starting from scratch, one would play the note written, each and every time. It's a bit like reforming spelling. We (the Old Folks...) are quite used to the anomalies, but how to explain the logic behind the pronunciation of Cholmondeley, for instance..? Those 'in the know' find it to be instinctive, but it's daft, really. Still, I'll be thanked for the idea only posthumously, I fear. 

[CameronJ]

2 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

Maybe not if already steeped in the current system, but if starting from scratch, one would play the note written, each and every time. It's a bit like reforming spelling. We (the Old Folks...) are quite used to the anomalies, but how to explain the logic behind the pronunciation of Cholmondeley, for instance..? Those 'in the know' find it to be instinctive, but it's daft, really. Still, I'll be thanked for the idea only posthumously, I fear. 

To be fair, you have a point. If there were no other system with which to compare, people would learn it no problem. Let me be first to thank you prehumously - is that a thing? 

[radiophonic]

Just to confuse matters further, I'm in band with players who learned the German notation system. So B is H and Bb is B. This caused considerable confusion when presented with the changes shorthanded as chord names! I live in a world of 'do we mean your B or mine?'

[chris_b]

VW has highlighted a difference between those like himself and most of us. They are learning to play as much music on their basses as they can. Many of the other bass players in the world learn to play tunes and songs. Not quite the same thing.

[snippet]I used to go to a club in Brussels called the Cbmoll. That's C flat minor.[/snippet]

[Dan Dare]

As most basses are fretted, the majority of us needn't worry about the difference between C# and Db because there ain't one for our purposes. 

[CameronJ]

Ok, so here’s another question. Each major key has a relative minor containing all of the same notes. E flat shares the same notes as C minor for example. They both contain the same three flats and look like this on a stave: 

So how exactly do you know, just by looking at that, whether the song is in E Flat Major or C minor?

Edited February 13, 2018 by CameronJ

[paul_c2]

21 minutes ago, CameronJ said:

Ok, so here’s another question. Each major key has a relative minor containing all of the same notes. E flat shares the same notes as C minor for example. They both contain the same three flats and look like this on a stave: 

So how exactly do you know, just by looking at that, whether the song is in E Flat Major or C minor?

Simple answer: you can't know, from the key signature alone, if a piece of music is in the major key or its relative minor. 

You'd need to see some notes, at least, to be able to deduce the actual key of the piece. And that's before you start getting into complexities like 1) pieces ending on a chord/note which isn't the same as the key of the previous music 2) picardy third 3) modulations/key changes, possibly at odd times (for example within the first few bars!) 4) atonal music, or music where there is a very loosely defined tone centre etc etc etc

Edited February 13, 2018 by paul_c2

[paul_c2]

On 2/7/2018 at 23:01, Dad3353 said:

I still stubbornly maintain that it would have been better to have each note with its own unique name, and forget about accidental altogether. It's only for historic reasons that we keep the old 'C', 'C#' thing, in the same way as we continue to use typewriter keyboards on computers. One day it will all be rationalised; it's just either a little too soon or a little too late. 

 

On 2/7/2018 at 23:07, CameronJ said:

So A to L, then? I’m not sure if that would be easier or not 

Most music is diatonic though. For diatonic scales, having 7 letters A-G makes a LOT of sense.

[paul_c2]

In answer to the original question, its probably worth practising (sight) reading in all 15/30 keys, even though 3/6 of them are enharmonically equivalent. I used to practice sight reading, but in a condensed version of the aforementioned, only in keys with 5, 6 or 7 sharps or flats.

[Dad3353]

6 hours ago, paul_c2 said:

...Most music is diatonic though...

Most..? Much modern pop, perhaps (but even then, perhaps not...), but I'd reckon that most music contains accidentals; often lots..! The music that I listen, to, compose and play certainly does..!

[paul_c2]

3 hours ago, Dad3353 said:

Most..? Much modern pop, perhaps (but even then, perhaps not...), but I'd reckon that most music contains accidentals; often lots..! The music that I listen, to, compose and play certainly does..!

Just for clarity, can you define what you think "diatonic" means?

[martthebass]

This is all well and good but will it help me play bass, sing backing vox and do the Mud Tiger Feet dance simultaneously without having a meltdown
 

[paul_c2]

27 minutes ago, martthebass said:

This is all well and good but will it help me play bass, sing backing vox and do the Mud Tiger Feet dance simultaneously without having a meltdown
 

Simple answer: yes

[Dad3353]

1 hour ago, paul_c2 said:

Just for clarity, can you define what you think "diatonic" means?

Just to humour you, diatonic means no accidentals (sharps or flats, in Western music...). Examples of diatonic instruments would be diatonic accordions and harmonicas, and the dulcimer.

[paul_c2]

Ok no worries. Do you want your system to be a universal standard (notation) across many musical instruments, or just something specific for (bass) guitar?

[Dad3353]

Modest as I am, I'd suggest starting with all music and working out from there. One rule to bind 'em, or something. A real standard that, once learned (which would be much easier for all...) would be useful for all musicians, worldwide and for ever. That'll do for starting out, I reckon.
Generous as I am, I'll not even be patenting nor copyrighting the genial idea. I humble statue in a prominent location of most capital cities will be enough reward, probably. 

[paul_c2]

1 hour ago, Dad3353 said:

Modest as I am, I'd suggest starting with all music and working out from there. One rule to bind 'em, or something. A real standard that, once learned (which would be much easier for all...) would be useful for all musicians, worldwide and for ever. That'll do for starting out, I reckon.
Generous as I am, I'll not even be patenting nor copyrighting the genial idea. I humble statue in a prominent location of most capital cities will be enough reward, probably. 

I admire your determination in sticking with the idea, and on analysis some of the points have some validity. I'd take issue with the "which would be much easier for all..." statement though. I simply don't think you have the breadth of experience across musical instruments other than bass guitar, or other musical genres to say that it would be much easier. I don't think its up to me to prove this, I think its up to you to demonstrate how it would be easier for eg violinists, french horn players, musical directors, session musicians etc who regularly use, and are happy with, standard notation as-is. I can only use my own personal experience of musical genres and playing other instruments to say "yeah but no thanks" to the concept.

Also - and probably a bigger issue you would pragmatically face - there is a huge catalogue of music, stretching back a number of centuries, which is already written in "standard notation" (in its various forms/variations, as it has evolved over the years), which would inevitibly need converting to a different system at some point. And it would not be enough merely to take everything that is today published, and convert it, monumental that would be on its own. There are millions of people and organisations which have amassed a library or collection of written music in some form or another. For example, an orchestra I know has a library of its own, of ~300 pieces. For each of these, there are approx 30 parts + conductor's full score; and for each of those parts, there will be a number of copies (for example, there might be 12x 1st violin parts); and for each of these, the piece might be over 2, 3, 4 or more pages. Each 'piece' struggles to fit into a document folder, and the library of 300 fills 2x filing cabinets where they rehearse and a significant amount stored offsite in an archive. And that's one orchestra/group. There's thousands of them up and down the UK, and there's probably millions worldwide with a similar amount of printed music.

And I've not even mentioned how much written music an individual might personally own, be it in books, studies, pieces they've bought etc etc

If ever such a revolutionary change to how music is written were to be adopted, it would need the pragmatic willingness of all the above to "convert", and inevitably it would need to occur over a period of time (during which both styles of notation would probably need to be kept). And in the interim period (which would pragmatically span an average person's lifetime) people would need to be familiar with both systems - ie they'd need to learn two, not one, which would be more difficult, not easier!

That's not to say that standard notation is fossilised in time, for ever. It evolves - as any living language does, since its a musical equivalent - and has done so in the past. This evolution has been widely documented and understood and continues to this day, but as a widespread/universal system, it would need the widespread support of those who create music, publish it, read it and use it to adopt such evolutionary changes - otherwise it would just be a cul-de-sac of an idea which would inevitibly fade away over time.

At the end of the day, standard notation isn't really a bunch of rules; rather its a de facto standard which is governed by those who create, purchase, use, read it.

[Dad3353]

16 minutes ago, paul_c2 said:

I admire your determination in sticking with the idea...

But let's not forget that French was once the official language in England, that the Swedes used to drive on the left, and that VHS was the 'standard' of its time. The inertia of the status quo is only that; inertia. One day I'll be thanked; one day... 

[paul_c2]

18 minutes ago, Dad3353 said:

The inertia of the status quo is only that; inertia. One day I'll be thanked; one day... 

I know! And I agree that "standard notation" and/or "music theory" as it is today, is not perfect and is by no means universally applicable - people who are fans of it should be aware of its limitations or assumptions, and be prepared to think for themselves "outside the box". 

However that inertia of the status quo is undeniably present.

[scalpy]

16 hours ago, CameronJ said:

Ok, so here’s another question. Each major key has a relative minor containing all of the same notes. E flat shares the same notes as C minor for example. They both contain the same three flats and look like this on a stave: 

So how exactly do you know, just by looking at that, whether the song is in E Flat Major or C minor?

The easy answer I was taught is look at the last chord. 

[BigRedX]

I practice the songs I'm going to play, each in the key I am going to play them.

The rest of the time I work on writing new songs. History and experience have shown me that the musicians who do well out of the music business are the ones with songwriting credits on popular songs. My songs might not be popular (yet) but I'm earning PRS royalties from stuff I wrote back in the early 80s. Because the songs and the recordings last long after the band that originally played them has ceased to exist, their earning potential goes on pretty much forever.

[CameronJ]

41 minutes ago, scalpy said:

The easy answer I was taught is look at the last chord. 

Except that if you listen to any Jazz, Neo Soul, R&B etc (as I do) that method will often not work 😒

[paul_c2]

1 hour ago, scalpy said:

The easy answer I was taught is look at the last chord. 

 

27 minutes ago, CameronJ said:

Except that if you listen to any Jazz, Neo Soul, R&B etc (as I do) that method will often not work 😒

As above (CameronJ's comment), it can't be relied upon. It will apply in the majority of cases, but certainly there's enough exceptions for it to be unreliable. Other examples include the picardy third (when a minor piece ends on the major instead), and pieces where everyone plays the same note at the end - thus being unable to define if it were major or minor.

[EssentialTension]

I'm in a band where we love to end on a non-tonic chord so nobody knows what key we were in - sometimes even I don't know what key we were in.