Klarinet Archive - Posting 000277.txt from 2003/06

From: "Bill Semple" <wsemple@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Keys and their character
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2003 12:24:31 -0400

Then, Dan, explain to me the Blues.

William T. Semple
Office: 202-364-2466
Home: 540-364-4823
Cell: 540-903-6645
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Leeson" <leeson0@-----.net>
Subject: Re: [kl] Keys and their character

> Well for one thing, "f-minor" describes a mode of the key of A-flat
> major. And there is not one bloody thing of sadness built into that (or
> any) minor mode. Some of Bachs most joyous music is in the minor mode,
> and Mendelssohn's octet has a spritely, happy, joyous scherzo in the
> minor mode. So your coments about composers writing in f-minor for some
> emotional value have no substance, representing opinion and not
> supported by giving any facts.
>
> While it was believed for ever so long that each key had a particular
> emotional characteristic to it, your saying that it is true
> (particularly with respect to people with a well trained ear) does not
> make it so. Why is it so? Simply contradicting me does not establish a
> viable argument.
>
> Cite a single technical reason that establishes unequivocally that every
> (or any) key has a particular emotion inherently contained in it, and
> I'll give up the argument. But you are going to find it difficult to do
> that because the only articles on the subject assume that the statement
> about keys and emotions is true, and without the necessity to prove it.
>
> Of course, you are correct when you suggest that there are historical
> precedents for writing in various keys, but that had nothing to do with
> the emotions supposed contained in them. It was simply to avoid boredom
> of hearing the same key over and over again. Even in the classic
> period, the keys of the various movements were selected to be compatible
> with one another, with certain keys "not chaining." So one hears a key
> for the first movement and the a related key (4th or 5th higher) for the
> next and so on. To have one movement in C and the next in D and the
> next in E would be unheard of.
>
> So before you suggest that I am full of doo-doo, give me some facts
> about why your assertion is true, not opinions based on romantic ideas
> that keys carried emotions and which have NEVER been shown to be the case.
>
> The way argumentation works is this: a statement is said to be true (as
> you are saying). Someone opposes the idea (as I have done). That person
> doesn't have to do anything except say, "Prove it." For you to take the
> position that something is true requires you to make a factual
> contribution to the argument and, so far, I have not seen it from you.
> That business about Mozart "tapping into history" when he wrote in
> f-minor is not history or fact. It is your opinion. He also wrote in a
> pile of other keys, too, and except for principles of "chaining of
> keys," there is no way to explain why any key was selected.
>
> Dan Leeson
>
> Brash, Alexander wrote:
> > I disagree. While it IS true that we can't say that certain keys have a
> > definite personality, after all for hundreds of years there was no
> > standardization of pitch (ie Mozart's A vs Bach's A vs our A), and even
> > differences in pitch from region to region, Mr. Leeson ignroes the fact
that
> > there are historical precendents for writing in certain keys. When
> > Mendelsohn, for example, chose to write his f-minor string quartet in
> > f-minor, just following the death of his sister Fanny, he knew full well
the
> > implications of that key as one of introspection and sadness. Mendelsohn
was
> > fully aware of when Bach CHOSE to write in f minor, when Mozart, and
> > especially Beethoven in the string quartets, CHOSE to write in f minor.
He
> > was tapping into this history when he wrote his string quartet in f
minor,
> > consciously or not. The fact that these associations may be contrived is
> > irrelevant, they still exist, and have been built through three hundred
> > years of history. We have imbued certain keys with certain meanings,
it's
> > just a fact.
> > Also, talk to anyone with and an extremely trained ear, or someone
> > with absolute pitch and/or synthesisia. They'll most likely tell you
that
> > the keys have different associations for them.
> > Also consider the fact that string timbre actually does sound
> > different across different keys. A and E are "bright" because of the
open
> > strings, which, although not used as much in performance today, were
> > certainly a much larger part of the performance practice from Bach to
> > Mendelsohn (combine this with the fact that most string sections in
> > orchestra played WITHOUT vibrato, in some cases up until Brahms' time),
and
> > keys will indeed sound "brighter" or darker.
> > So there you go, I hope that's something put forward other than
> > opinion. And if you disagree, that's just fine, but I'll continue to
believe
> > my nonsense happily.
> >
> > Alexander Michael Brash
> > Education Dept, New York Philharmonic
> > 10 Lincoln Center Plaza, 5th Floor
> >
> > phone (212) 875 - 5735
> > cell (646) 284 - 0439
> > email brasha@-----.org
> >
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Dan Leeson [mailto:leeson0@-----.net]
> > Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2003 10:21 AM
> > To: klarinet@-----.org
> > Subject: [kl] Keys and their character
> >
> > The idea that each key had its own personality (with A and E being
> > bright) and D-flat, G-flat being serious (or whatever), is another
> > romantic assertion that doesn't have a leg to stand on. There has never
> > been anything put forward (other than opinion) that would allow any
> > thinking person to believe such nonsense.
> >
> > It is true that, prior to the days of the tempered scale, keys did have
> > specific characteristics because untempered tuning produced some weird
> > situations, particularly with keyboard instruments, but the idea that E
> > major (for example) is a key that produces brighter music (whatever the
> > hell that means) than C major is something that was believed and spoken
> > of in Victorian ballrooms, and had about as much sense as their sex
> > practices.
> >
> > It is nothing more than another impossibly silly idea on top of the
> > 10,000 silly ideas we have about music, playing it, composing for it,
> > and speaking about it, falling into the same category of blow out, dark
> > sounds, how to find the best piece, and which instrument is inherently
> > superior.
> >
> > And for Anne Lenoir waking up in Colorado, I am sorry that my inquiry
> > about what was so bright about E major caused you morning distress.
>
>
>
> --
> ***************************
> **Dan Leeson **
> **leeson0@-----.net **
> ***************************
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Klarinet is supported by Woodwind.Org, http://www.woodwind.org/

   
     Copyright © Woodwind.Org, Inc. All Rights Reserved    Privacy Policy    Contact charette@woodwind.org