• 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.

Here’s A Dumb Question For You (Enharmonics)

Bryan R. Tyler

TalkBass: Usurping My Practice Time Since 2002
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Supporting Member
Supporting Member
May 3, 2002
28,949
20,940
Connecticut
www.bryanrtyler.com
Disclosures
Reviewer: Bass Player Magazine
Something probably most of you know but I've never had a clue- is there a benefit to having five enharmonics rather than a system of twelve distinct notes (A-L for example), or is it just a traditional thing based on a piano's setup?
 
It has to do with the fact that the music western ears are used to is made in an 8 note scale. Having chords, arpeggios, etc. together on consecutive lines or spaces is easier to see and distinguish.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HolmeBass
Enharmonic. Learn something new every day.
My music theory sucks so I looked it up.

When I read the title I thought this was a thread about a dating site. :roflmao:

Well, I did do a little pastel many years ago with two people coupling that I titled "Enharmonic," so maybe you're not that far off.
 
I think getting lost on the keyboard maybe more of a problem :smug:
main-qimg-a392665e250e01d6b8f8672a73dbfa58.jpg
 
Until you have to read choral music over the shoulder or the pianist.

Conductor scores would get ugly too.

It's neither here nor there as far as enharmonics go as you could still use a five line staff without them by just changing the symbol. You could probably change a lot about standard notation to make it easier to read anyway. Color coded notes anyone? :)
 
Something probably most of you know but I've never had a clue- is there a benefit to having five enharmonics rather than a system of twelve distinct notes (A-L for example), or is it just a traditional thing based on a piano's setup?

In the IT world, the explanation for anything that seems incredibly inefficient or unnecessarily complex is: "Things are the way they are because they got to be that way."

Tradition (in this case Pythagorus's way of thinking about music and 2000+ years of theorizing, nomenclature, and teaching based on that) forms a gravity well that effectively prevents such changes.

It's much like spelling American English. Our language has 24 distinct consonant and 20 distinct vowel phenomes for a total of 44 unique sounds. Our alphabet only has 26 letters. And although our spelling is now "standardized," that standardization is arbitrary and based mostly on tradition and convention rather than on any sytematic approach to spelling. And while it would make more sense to just create a better alphabet (several already have been created) it's a hard sell when everyone is already used to the dumb system we currently use. In the Hungarian language each letter has only one sound and all words are spelled phonetically. If you hear a Hungarian word you know how to spell it. If you see a Hungarian word you know how to pronounce it. Sweet system. And one reason why you'll never see a spelling bee in Hungary - or have a child ask "What's this word?" when learning how to read. Small wonder their adult literacy rate is 99.4%. Better notation systems, such as alphabets, are a big help.

So yes, shoehorning a chromatic well tempered twelvetone scale into a diatonic just tempered eight note theoretical framework (because the number eight had a mystical significance) makes little sense. If each tone had its own note, sharps and flats and all the confusion they create would go away. Key signatures would become unnecessay. And…the list of benefits goes on. But it ain't gonna happen.

:laugh:
 
Last edited:
In the IT world, the explanation for anything that seems incredibly inefficient or unnecessarily complex is: "Things are the way they are because they got to be that way."

Tradition (in this case Pythagorus's way of thinking about music and 2000+ years of theorizing, nomenclature, and teaching based on that) forms a gravity well that effectively prevents such changes.

It's much like spelling American English. Our language has 24 distinct consonant and 20 distinct vowel phenomes for a total of 44 unique sounds. Our alphabet only has 26 letters. And although our spelling is now "standardized," that standardization is arbitrary and based mostly on tradition and convention rather than on any sytematic appriach to spelling. And while it would make more sense to just create a better alphabet (several already have been created) it's a hard sell when everyone is already used to the dumb system we currently use.

So yes, shoehorning a chromatic well tempered twelvetone scale into a diatonic just tempered eight note theoretical framework (because the number eight had a mystical significance) makes little sense. If each tone had its own note, sharps and flats and all the confusion they create would go away. Key signatures would become unnecessay. And…the list of benefits goes on. But it ain't gonna happen.

:laugh:
Well written. I like that trick of well formed and grammatically correct until the last sentence.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 40Hz