I was wondering why B and E don't have a sharp?

[JansenW]

B and E both have the next note up (with the same spacing as all the other notes) for them. It's just not normally called B#(aka C) and E#(aka F) because of how western music sounds and it's notation.

Otherwise, how would you explain the piano?

 

[Dogbertday]

I'm just guessing. I'm quite limited in my early music history. But wasn't early (gregorian chant) music just modal, not chromatic? Let me explain better:

It's my (perhaps false) understanding that early musicians just used different modes within the same key to change tonality, so their entire scale would be all natural, or the C major and all of its related modes. So there wouldn't be a need for sharps or flats would there?

Now when "keys" started developing, people had to obviously name semitones in between the established CDEFGABC scale, and so they placed the sharps where they fit, and therefore leaving E and F without a semitone in between, and B and C. Does that make any sense? It's just kind of a theory I have... Don't flame too bad!!

This is probably it.

the reason that the notes aren't A A# B B# C C#... F F# is because of the way they are in a tonal context. it's the same reason that in some pieces you'll see a Db instead of a C#... all has to do with context and function/key.

 

[seanm]

Try this: play the C scale. Now try playing all the notes 2 semitones apart. Which sounds better?

Note: This is for western music.

 

[Bluesy Soul]

Otherwise, how would you explain the piano?

This is actually a very good question that leads you to the answer: It was done to make it easier to locate scales within the keyboard and notes within the scales.

Think of a keyboard made up entirely of alternating white and black keys. How would you quickly find any note--or group of notes like a scale? Simply by being able to instantly identify the B-C and E-F half steps, recognition and navigation become infinitely easier, both visually and by touch.

Bluesy Soul

 

[mccartneyman]

Depends on the key signature. For example, the key of Gb has six flats, the key of F# has six sharps. If you're playing in F#, there IS an E#.

 

[HaVIC5]

True. It was J.S. Bach who introduced the equal temperament. Remember his 'das wohltemperierte Klavier' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Well_temperament)?

Indeed, the reason behind why the major scale sounds good is to find in the overtones. Actually, the lydian scale is the most stable, then follows the ionian (= major) scale. The stability of a scale depends on where the half steps are. This also influences the atmosphere / color of the scale. The more in front the half steps lay, the darker / more unstable a scale becomes. From bright to dark, stable to unstable: lydian, ionian, mixolydian, dorian, aeolian, phrygian, locrian.

Anyway, the lydian scale is the most stable 'cause: if you take all the overtones of C, you get:

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

Of course not in this order, but if you re-order them, you'll get this. George Russell wrote a book about this: "Lydian Chromatic Concept of Tonal Organisation".

Several misconceptions here. Bach didn't "invent" equal temperament, he didn't even invent well-temperament. They're two different things - equal temperament is the exact logarithmic division of the octave into 12 "equal" steps, well-temperament is an approximation of this that lies somewhere in between just intonation and equal intonation. Well-temperament was an exciting new development in Bach's time, and he wrote the well-tempered clavier to fully express the possibilities of playing in all those keys, which until that time was impossible. If you ever actually hear the well-tempered clavier played on a period instrument with period tuning, it sounds significantly different than if you play it on a modern tuned piano - each key sounds RADICALLY different, since all half steps aren't quite equal.

I'm quite sure you know little about the overtone series, nor the half-baked "science" behind the lydian chromatic concept, so here's a correction. The overtone series is infinite - it doesn't line up in a nice little scale. Theoretically, it goes on forever. Even if you arbitrarily stopped at some point to get a full scale, no stretch of the imagination leads to a convincing argument for it in our tuning system. Here are the first 13 partials of the harmonic series (and the wikipedia article to go with them.

C | C (8va) | G | C | E | G | Bb (very flat) | C | D | E | note that lies almost exactly in between F# and F | G | Ab (kinda) | etc...

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed])

If you notice, a lot of those notes are significantly out of tune with our current system. That F# that a lot of people like to think means "the overtone system is lydian!" is 49 cents away from our actual F#, which means its 51 cents from F. That's a BIG different. Even the major third is off by 14 cents. The A that would need to be included as part of the system doesn't even occur in any reasonable form until way up beyond the 20th partial, and by that point, you have all sorts of weird half-intervals. Organizing the harmonic series into a scale isn't scientific at all. It can be useful as a compositional device, but thinking its more "valid" than any other system is stupid.

George Russell doesn't do this explicitly in his system, though, I'll give him that. It's a lot more nuanced, but fails just the same. I would suggest you read the concept before you make any conclusions or assumptions about any "higher order" in music.

 

[John Wentzien]

+1 Very good explanation!

 

[EADG mx]

Two things to think about:

The most common scale in Western tonality by far is the Major (Ionian). Where are the semi-tones?

C D E-F G A B-C

From studying harmony and counterpoint we find these two common resolutions: 4-3 (F-E) and 7-8 (B-C).

These are arguably indicative of cadences, in particular the (very common) Plagal (IV-I) and Perfect (V-I).


Next, try to imagine playing a piano with every key alternating white and black.


As for historical reasons I'm not sure, this is just evidence as to how and why the system works.

 

[Musicfreak1988]

Several misconceptions here. Bach didn't "invent" equal temperament, he didn't even invent well-temperament. They're two different things - equal temperament is the exact logarithmic division of the octave into 12 "equal" steps, well-temperament is an approximation of this that lies somewhere in between just intonation and equal intonation. Well-temperament was an exciting new development in Bach's time, and he wrote the well-tempered clavier to fully express the possibilities of playing in all those keys, which until that time was impossible. If you ever actually hear the well-tempered clavier played on a period instrument with period tuning, it sounds significantly different than if you play it on a modern tuned piano - each key sounds RADICALLY different, since all half steps aren't quite equal.

I realize I should've been more detailed here. I didn't know the English exact term for what we in Dutch call gelijkzwevend (well temp. I think) and gelijkgestemd (thus, equal temp.). I'm also aware that Bach didn't actually really invent the concept, but at least he was the one who brought it to the public, if you can put it that way...


I'm quite sure you know little about the overtone series, nor the half-baked "science" behind the lydian chromatic concept, so here's a correction. The overtone series is infinite - it doesn't line up in a nice little scale. Theoretically, it goes on forever. Even if you arbitrarily stopped at some point to get a full scale, no stretch of the imagination leads to a convincing argument for it in our tuning system. Here are the first 13 partials of the harmonic series (and the wikipedia article to go with them.

C | C (8va) | G | C | E | G | Bb (very flat) | C | D | E | note that lies almost exactly in between F# and F | G | Ab (kinda) | etc...

[Invalid or Expired Link Removed])

If you notice, a lot of those notes are significantly out of tune with our current system. That F# that a lot of people like to think means "the overtone system is lydian!" is 49 cents away from our actual F#, which means its 51 cents from F. That's a BIG different. Even the major third is off by 14 cents. The A that would need to be included as part of the system doesn't even occur in any reasonable form until way up beyond the 20th partial, and by that point, you have all sorts of weird half-intervals. Organizing the harmonic series into a scale isn't scientific at all. It can be useful as a compositional device, but thinking its more "valid" than any other system is stupid.

George Russell doesn't do this explicitly in his system, though, I'll give him that. It's a lot more nuanced, but fails just the same. I would suggest you read the concept before you make any conclusions or assumptions about any "higher order" in music.

Well, that's just what they taught us in school during jazzharmony and -analysis class in conservatory. I'm glad to learn that there's something more going on.

 

[Rudreax]

B and E have no apparent sharps because the creators of Western Music wanted to mess with our puny heads for centuries.

 

[Nick Kay]

It's mostly because standard notation and Western music theory developed from the modal music of the early Christian church. If Gregorian chants were chromatic, we'd have twelve separated notes instead of seven notes and their accidental friends. Of course, chromatic music isn't as naturally pleasing to our ears, so it isn't likely to be the first widespread form of music for any given culture or society.

You could always rebel and go with alternative music theory on a chromatic staff, but good luck trying to communicate with most other musicians. Kinda defeats the point of a language, doesn't it?

 

[Michael Campbel]

Fb = E

Fb = MC^2

Just as f = ma...

 

[hall1k]

I always wondered why we even have accidentals... I mean, it could just be A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, & L for the 12 notes of the chromatic scale, then we wouldnt need sharps or flats.

 

[EADG mx]

I always wondered why we even have accidentals... I mean, it could just be A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, & L for the 12 notes of the chromatic scale, then we wouldnt need sharps or flats.

Draw the staff this way.

Also like I said, it helps to identify the semi-tones.

 

[Ric5]

I was wondering why B and E don't have a sharp?

actually they do

 

[kb9wyz]

This has to do more with how musical notation cam to be than anything else, from what I've been led to understand. (Which could be wrong) The Gregorian Monks are credited with developing the first musical notation in the west. They did things very modally, so it makes sense that the notes got named A,B,C,D,E,F,G. The later introduction of accidentals added the sharps and flats. And as it has been stated above, B#=C & E#=F. But the key signatures that use E#, Fb, B#, and Cb seem to be considered less desirable for composition anyhow, and the keys of C# and Cb (which use E# & F# and Cb & Fb respectively) are considered archaic at this point. But this is all from the standpoint of notation. The notes are the notes are the notes.

 

[Slevage]

In wester music, twelve tone scales they are called

"naturally occurring half steps".

john

 

[totallyfrozen]

I was wondering why B and E don't have a sharp? Any ideas?

Quick answer: They DO.
Longer answer: you usually won't see it written that way unless you are playing in the keys of F# and C#.

 

[Tom Servo]

Quick answer: They DO.
Longer answer: you usually won't see it written that way unless you are playing in the keys of F# and C#.

...and if you're playing in F# or C#, the wind section is tearing their hair out.

 

[seanm]

...and if you're playing in F# or C#, the wind section is tearing their hair out.

+1 Luckily I never had to play in F#, but I always practiced that scale just in case.