• TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
    Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
    Join freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

E#. Wait, what?

I'm positive this has been mentioned already, but here's the only time you HAVE to use something like E#, Cb, or B#...

You have to arrange scales in a certain order when doing musical notation, from what I remember of my music fundamentals course in college you have to arrange the notes a certain space apart depending on what key and scale you are in? Either way, it's a necessity in musical notation.

In practical use, it's absolutely stupid to say "E#" instead of "F". It would be akin to saying 4,000 grams instead of 4 Kilograms. Or 32 ounces instead of 2 pounds. It's technically the same thing, but an inefficient means of conveying it unless you have to do it that way. Saying that it's when you "Play an E and bend it up" was pretty ignorant and did make me laugh out loud. If the rest of the band agreed, they have no clue what they are talking about LOL.

Let me preface this by saying there are plenty of older gents and gals with hella experience who I could be schooled hardcore by. One of the issues I run into playing with some older musicians is the ones who cling to certain myths or wives tales and get FIGHTING mad when you try to correct them or can prove them wrong. You get the "listen here, sonny" attitude and have to listen to them get angry and yell for hours. I avoid playing with musicians who are much older than me for this reason, many will disregard your advice because you're young. To be fair though, many younger musicians or people my age with attitudes do the same thing, so it's not something isolated to older people. The people my age range will usually just throw their resume around and talk about some other things they feel qualifies them to belittle me. The E# bend just reeks of that to me, I'd steer clear of talks about anything music theory-related with them lol
 
It sounds like the guitarist messed-up. True that E# exists, though you have to go a long long way to find the word used, particularly in a standard band rock band.

It is possible the guitarist honestly thought the scale is E, E#, F. I played with a (seemingly) good guitarist the other day. I said that a particular song was in A and he said "Which fret is that?".

The impossible happens.

I play with a guy who has been shredding for years and doesnt know the names of the chords. He can play though.
 
Good thing there's no charge because otherwise you would be selling a bill of goods. E# is not F. There is no "F" in the key of F# Major. There is no E# in the key of F.

Strangely enough, there IS an F in the key of Gb Major. And I know this is going to blow your mind, but Gb Major IS F# Major.

Gb Major scale: G♭, A♭, B♭, C♭, D♭, E♭, and F. Six flats.
F# Major scale: F♯, G♯, A♯, B, C♯, D♯, and E♯. Six sharps.

Identical in every single way.

The Gb scale has the ridiculous note Cb. There really is no actual Cb. It's just B.

This type of theory snobbishness is exactly what turns musicians, (some of whom are quite talented) against LEARNING. In rock and roll, there is no Cb, and there sure as heck is no E#.

The first thing a good rocker does is throw most of his/her theory/training right out the window, and feel the groove.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BAG
...
It would be akin to saying 4,000 grams instead of 4 Kilograms. Or 32 ounces instead of 2 pounds. It's technically the same thing, but an inefficient means of conveying it unless you have to do it that way....

That's really not a good example. How you express 4,000 grams vs 4 kilograms carries additional meaning and speaks to the precision with which the mass was measured...but I digress.
 
I wonder how many of those arguing that E# is not correct under certain circumstances will be able to swallow a bit of pride and learn something before the thread gets closed. My prediction - nil.

Learn exactly WHAT? I don't think one person has said the notation of E# is not correct "under certain circumstances." I'm pretty sure they all said it is not correct IN THE CONTEXT OF THE OP.

And in that case, they would be correct.
 
You are spot on. He has 20+ years of playing experience, but no actual "theory" experience. I think he was trying to get me to bend the note, not ridicule me. He just wanted to me to "play the right note" as you said. Thanks!
Thank you. So now we know, after 7 pages of arguments about whether he might have correct in insisting that the note he wanted was "E#", that in fact he almost certainly wasn't.

Unfortunately, there no doubt will follow many more pages of arguments about the theoretical meaning of "E#", given how few people bother to read previous posts....
 
  • Like
Reactions: comatosedragon
Uh, just for the record, this makes no sense, since no one would know what you intended to be playing and the note is the same physically in a tempered system. The only place the distinction is necessary is in communication about music, not the playing of it. As many have correctly noted, E# is not only legitimate, but correct in certain keys, notwithstanding that it is the equivalent/same note as F. Therefore, it would disrupt the theoretical (and yes, certainly annoying, especially in certain styles of music) context to notate it as an F in those keys.

However, what makes the most sense, and is the most annoying, is for anyone to give two poops or argue about it in the context of learning a non-classical tune in a regular old band. Some theory has its place in this context for sure, but this is stupid (plus as many have noted, this guy was wrong anyway - sharp means a half step, which is the note on the first fret of your E string (hehehe) no matter whatchoo call it)....

You made the exact same point I did, only with different words.

You and I both agree that E# is F.

And those who argue that there is a tiny little tonal difference, as in "E# is a slightly brighter E," are not playing fretted instruments.

If the guitarist wanted the OP to bend an E just a tiny bit, he should have said, "bend your E a tiny bit. Not an entire half tone; just a bit. If it's the low, open E on the bass, you can push on the string, just above the nut, and get this elusive "E#" the guitarist is moaning about.

The point to all my posts on this thread are to simply tell the musicians who aren't all "into" theory that they are just fine, and not to let snobs look down at them. Many a player knows far less theory than I, and can play me right off a stage.

Not that it's a contest, anyway. If I'm playing the right notes in the right time, I'm already doing quite well enough.
 
This whole topic is crazy. The thread is a total waste of time.
Everyone know that E# is really C######.
In the new world of digital musical notation everything begins with middle C and everything else is simply some number of sharps above that.
Unless, of course, you want to play notes that are lower than middle C in which case it is all about flats, and the number of flats below middle C.
Sure, at first it's hard to count the sharps and flats (especially if there are more than a dozen or so) and do the mental math, but it is just a matter of time and training.
This is just the first step toward the conversion of musical notation to the binary system of ones (1) and zeros (0).
Just think of it as an extension of the roll-out of the metric system.
But first thing first and one step at a time please.
The ones and zeros will come soon but please be patient.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lermgalieu
I took an online course of Music Theory with University of Edinburgh & it was great, but I got to the part about Modulation & raised my tone deaf ears in the air in surrender.

Modulation is simple really. Just add a couple of sharps to the one chord and start over.
People just think that it is difficult because it changes key.
In the new world of everything is a number of sharps and flats relative to middle C it is easy.
Sort of...
Instead of playing 1-4-5 just play a 1##-4##-5##
 
In practical use, it's absolutely stupid to say "E#" instead of "F". It would be akin to saying 4,000 grams instead of 4 Kilograms. Or 32 ounces instead of 2 pounds. It's technically the same thing, but an inefficient means of conveying it unless you have to do it that way.

See, that's a common misconception. Yes when the notation calls for an E# you would play what is normally an F on your instrument, but you are in fact playing E# not F.

The reason it's an E# is you are in a sharp key that contains an F#...you can't have both an F and F# in any scale, so if the key calls for a note a half step below F#, that note is E#. Period. The same logic applies to B#.

The key of C# major contains an E# (in fact all the notes in the key are sharped, including B#) but many players will simply call the key as Db major instead. Db major does contain an F natural (flat keys only contain flatted notes, never sharped; the opposite is true for sharp keys).

When I go around the circle of fifths I usually name the keys this way, by flats rather than sharps:

C -> F -> Bb -> Eb -> Ab -> Db -> Gb -> B -> E -> A -> D -> G -> C

That avoids having to use E#, B#, etc. but you will find that in Gb major you have a Cb :roflmao:

That's the one major key where you're screwed either way... Whether you call it F# major or Gb major you get an oddball note:

Gb Ab Bb Cb Db Eb F

F# G# A# B C# D# E#

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:
 

Latest posts