Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)Why is C the base note of standard notation and keys?Should I learn to read standard notation?“Standard” drum notation alternativesStandard notation for an octaveWhy is the hexatonic scale that can be derived via a chain of perfect fifths so little-known?Shaped notes to standard notationWhy don't key signatures indicate the tonic?How to choose between Cdim and C#dim?Rhythm non-standard notation

Exam design: give maximum score per question or not?

Madrid to London w/ Expired 90/180 days stay as US citizen

Better way to obtain a smaller vertical line | scaled to math?

What is this WWII four-engine plane on skis?

Unpredictability of Stock Market

Should I inform my future product owner that there is a good chance that a team member will leave the company soon?

Plausibility and performance of a composite longbow

What's the purpose of autocorrelation?

Is the name of an interval between two notes unique and absolute?

What the did the controller say during my approach to land (audio clip)?

How would you design and build an American Civil War Steam Gun?

Amiga 500 OCS/ECS vs Mega Drive VDP

What is the maximum viable speed for a projectile within earth's atmosphere?

Is this adjustment to the Lucky feat underpowered?

Are all article combinations valid patterns for "the" ɴᴏᴜɴ of "the" ɴᴏᴜɴ?

Cemented carbide swords - worth it?

Statistical tests for benchmark comparison

The Google Earth Challenge: "A dangerous flower"

In Bb5 systems against the Sicilian, why does White exchange their b5 bishop without playing a6?

How often is duct tape used during crewed space missions?

Talk about Grandpa's weird talk: Who are these folks?

Hobby function generators

(How long) Should I indulge my new co-workers?

Who are the people reviewing far more papers than they're submitting for review?



Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)


Why is C the base note of standard notation and keys?Should I learn to read standard notation?“Standard” drum notation alternativesStandard notation for an octaveWhy is the hexatonic scale that can be derived via a chain of perfect fifths so little-known?Shaped notes to standard notationWhy don't key signatures indicate the tonic?How to choose between Cdim and C#dim?Rhythm non-standard notation






.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;








18















(Disclaimer: I don't know much about music theory but ...)



The notes A, B are a whole step apart, and B, C are a semitone apart, yet their distance in standard notation is the same visually (from a space to a line, ... etc). Why ?



It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds. Is it just a historical accident or is there a deeper reason behind it ?










share|improve this question





















  • 10





    I'm asking about intervals, not why C is the base note.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 3





    You shouldn't be identifying intervals by spatial separation in the first place. You'll have just as many errors w/ accidentals as you are attempting to avoid here. The reason for standard notation is to make it easy to play, not to "analyze"

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 2





    I would hope there's enough information at the linked question to provide you with, if nothing else, hints as to existing books on music notation and history.

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:43






  • 4





    I guess my intent with the intervals was phrased badly. What i intended was, wouldn't it be easier to identify chords of the same type (ex: minor chords, Am, Fm, etc ... would all look the same but just moved up or down, instead of only some having sharps/flats and some not) and other things aswell. Anyway, I'll have a look at the sources you gave.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:49







  • 8





    There is an alternative notation system called "Chromatic Staff Notation" that does something like what you're talking about, but it has never caught on. The traditional way just seems to work well-enough for most people. Here's some info: musicnotation.org

    – Peter
    Mar 28 at 12:54

















18















(Disclaimer: I don't know much about music theory but ...)



The notes A, B are a whole step apart, and B, C are a semitone apart, yet their distance in standard notation is the same visually (from a space to a line, ... etc). Why ?



It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds. Is it just a historical accident or is there a deeper reason behind it ?










share|improve this question





















  • 10





    I'm asking about intervals, not why C is the base note.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 3





    You shouldn't be identifying intervals by spatial separation in the first place. You'll have just as many errors w/ accidentals as you are attempting to avoid here. The reason for standard notation is to make it easy to play, not to "analyze"

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 2





    I would hope there's enough information at the linked question to provide you with, if nothing else, hints as to existing books on music notation and history.

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:43






  • 4





    I guess my intent with the intervals was phrased badly. What i intended was, wouldn't it be easier to identify chords of the same type (ex: minor chords, Am, Fm, etc ... would all look the same but just moved up or down, instead of only some having sharps/flats and some not) and other things aswell. Anyway, I'll have a look at the sources you gave.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:49







  • 8





    There is an alternative notation system called "Chromatic Staff Notation" that does something like what you're talking about, but it has never caught on. The traditional way just seems to work well-enough for most people. Here's some info: musicnotation.org

    – Peter
    Mar 28 at 12:54













18












18








18


3






(Disclaimer: I don't know much about music theory but ...)



The notes A, B are a whole step apart, and B, C are a semitone apart, yet their distance in standard notation is the same visually (from a space to a line, ... etc). Why ?



It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds. Is it just a historical accident or is there a deeper reason behind it ?










share|improve this question
















(Disclaimer: I don't know much about music theory but ...)



The notes A, B are a whole step apart, and B, C are a semitone apart, yet their distance in standard notation is the same visually (from a space to a line, ... etc). Why ?



It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds. Is it just a historical accident or is there a deeper reason behind it ?







theory notation






share|improve this question















share|improve this question













share|improve this question




share|improve this question








edited May 18 at 11:37







Polycrystal

















asked Mar 28 at 12:35









PolycrystalPolycrystal

931 silver badge7 bronze badges




931 silver badge7 bronze badges










  • 10





    I'm asking about intervals, not why C is the base note.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 3





    You shouldn't be identifying intervals by spatial separation in the first place. You'll have just as many errors w/ accidentals as you are attempting to avoid here. The reason for standard notation is to make it easy to play, not to "analyze"

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 2





    I would hope there's enough information at the linked question to provide you with, if nothing else, hints as to existing books on music notation and history.

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:43






  • 4





    I guess my intent with the intervals was phrased badly. What i intended was, wouldn't it be easier to identify chords of the same type (ex: minor chords, Am, Fm, etc ... would all look the same but just moved up or down, instead of only some having sharps/flats and some not) and other things aswell. Anyway, I'll have a look at the sources you gave.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:49







  • 8





    There is an alternative notation system called "Chromatic Staff Notation" that does something like what you're talking about, but it has never caught on. The traditional way just seems to work well-enough for most people. Here's some info: musicnotation.org

    – Peter
    Mar 28 at 12:54












  • 10





    I'm asking about intervals, not why C is the base note.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 3





    You shouldn't be identifying intervals by spatial separation in the first place. You'll have just as many errors w/ accidentals as you are attempting to avoid here. The reason for standard notation is to make it easy to play, not to "analyze"

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:42






  • 2





    I would hope there's enough information at the linked question to provide you with, if nothing else, hints as to existing books on music notation and history.

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 12:43






  • 4





    I guess my intent with the intervals was phrased badly. What i intended was, wouldn't it be easier to identify chords of the same type (ex: minor chords, Am, Fm, etc ... would all look the same but just moved up or down, instead of only some having sharps/flats and some not) and other things aswell. Anyway, I'll have a look at the sources you gave.

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:49







  • 8





    There is an alternative notation system called "Chromatic Staff Notation" that does something like what you're talking about, but it has never caught on. The traditional way just seems to work well-enough for most people. Here's some info: musicnotation.org

    – Peter
    Mar 28 at 12:54







10




10





I'm asking about intervals, not why C is the base note.

– Polycrystal
Mar 28 at 12:42





I'm asking about intervals, not why C is the base note.

– Polycrystal
Mar 28 at 12:42




3




3





You shouldn't be identifying intervals by spatial separation in the first place. You'll have just as many errors w/ accidentals as you are attempting to avoid here. The reason for standard notation is to make it easy to play, not to "analyze"

– Carl Witthoft
Mar 28 at 12:42





You shouldn't be identifying intervals by spatial separation in the first place. You'll have just as many errors w/ accidentals as you are attempting to avoid here. The reason for standard notation is to make it easy to play, not to "analyze"

– Carl Witthoft
Mar 28 at 12:42




2




2





I would hope there's enough information at the linked question to provide you with, if nothing else, hints as to existing books on music notation and history.

– Carl Witthoft
Mar 28 at 12:43





I would hope there's enough information at the linked question to provide you with, if nothing else, hints as to existing books on music notation and history.

– Carl Witthoft
Mar 28 at 12:43




4




4





I guess my intent with the intervals was phrased badly. What i intended was, wouldn't it be easier to identify chords of the same type (ex: minor chords, Am, Fm, etc ... would all look the same but just moved up or down, instead of only some having sharps/flats and some not) and other things aswell. Anyway, I'll have a look at the sources you gave.

– Polycrystal
Mar 28 at 12:49






I guess my intent with the intervals was phrased badly. What i intended was, wouldn't it be easier to identify chords of the same type (ex: minor chords, Am, Fm, etc ... would all look the same but just moved up or down, instead of only some having sharps/flats and some not) and other things aswell. Anyway, I'll have a look at the sources you gave.

– Polycrystal
Mar 28 at 12:49





8




8





There is an alternative notation system called "Chromatic Staff Notation" that does something like what you're talking about, but it has never caught on. The traditional way just seems to work well-enough for most people. Here's some info: musicnotation.org

– Peter
Mar 28 at 12:54





There is an alternative notation system called "Chromatic Staff Notation" that does something like what you're talking about, but it has never caught on. The traditional way just seems to work well-enough for most people. Here's some info: musicnotation.org

– Peter
Mar 28 at 12:54










6 Answers
6






active

oldest

votes


















29

















Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)




It does, but I think you are probably not accustomed to reading it, or how it was developed.



Let's first make an analogy with something familiar: reading English.



What is the meaning of "right" versus "right?" I can read the words, but only reading the single word isn't going to tell me the meaning. Of course we all know we need to read the context around the word. "His answer is right." "I write with my right hand." (Couldn't resist mixing it up more with a homophone.)



Following the analogy I can ask "why doesn't written English preserve the meaning of words?"



The answer is: "it does." But it doesn't preserve the meaning with single words. Complete meaning is only communicated in context.



Back to music notation...



Visually, you are mistaking this...



enter image description here



...to mean lines to spaces are fixed sizes of whole-steps or half-steps.



That is not how it works. The line and space represent steps on a diatonic series. The diatonic series is an asymmetrical series of whole and half steps represented by letters A-G and the staff lines and spaces do not have fixed letter identities.



You must use clefs to know the letters of the staff lines and spaces and consequently the size of intervals between staff lines and spaces...



enter image description here



...where the middle line to the space above is B to C a half-step or...



enter image description here



...where the middle line to the space above is C to D a whole step.



I suppose the use of clefs is already understood by the OP. The question instead may have been "why use a system of clefs to know what the intervals and letter names of the staff?" It does seem to be a confusing system.



I think the reason for all the clefs is historical in two ways: 1) it evolved from notation for a single melodic vocal line (plainchant), and 2) it is harder to read ledger lines than a 4 or 5 line staff.



It's interesting to add that back during plainchant (Dark ages, Medieval era) there wasn't even a notion of absolute pitch for the tones of the staff. The tonic - or the selected range - was sung at whatever pitch was comfortable for the singer. A lot has changed with notation!



Depending on the range of the instrument a clef is selected that will put most of the notation on a 5 line staff, the clef gives a reference pitch like G or F and that let's you know where the diatonic whole and half steps lay. The system isn't immediately intuitive and requires study. That's the reality. You can look for some alternate notation system - they do exist. But you will need to learn that too, and there may not be much available music depending on the system. Going back to the language analogy you can compare to the idea of Esperanto versus English. Alternate systems might be more logical (debatable?) but not practical.




EDIT




...It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds.




One little addition about that.



The interval number will actually stay the same when counting lines and space regardless of clef, key signature, or accidentals. Ex. if you are on a line and consider that starting point 1 and then go up space 2, line 3, space 4, line 5. We have ascended to the 5th step and the interval number is a fifth, 5. Sames goes for spaces, but let's just stick to an example with lines. All of these are fifths...



enter image description here



...even with the various key signatures, placement of notes within the key, and the crazy accidentals of the third example they are all fifths.



Why? Because the lines and spaces represent the diatonic letters and we count those steps to first get the interval number: E to G, G to D, B to F. Count them all on the letter series and you will see they are all 5 steps.



After the interval number we determine the interval quality. Those qualities are major, minor, augmented, and diminished. You can also have double diminished, and other complex intervals. At this point you do need to read the key signature and accidentals to know the specific quality.



But, rest assured that a fifth is always a fifth - of some quality - by the staff/letter counting. The three examples above are...




  • E to Bb a diminished fifth d5


  • G to D a perfect fifth P5


  • B♮ to Fb a double-diminished fifth dd5 (sorry, that's really ugly, enharmonically it's a perfect fourth! I did it on purpose to illustrate the point, it's not very normal)

The same idea will apply with all the other intervals.



Key signatures with many sharps or flats and highly chromatic chords are difficult to read. The resulting enharmonic spellings like Gbb which is enharmonically F♮ are difficult, no doubt. But that is the extreme end of difficult notation.



If you really want to work on reading skills, work up gradually from simpler music. Mozart minuets or Czerny's Recreations are a good starting place. Simple key signature, mostly diatonic harmony. Schubert's various dances for piano would be a nice step up in complexity.






share|improve this answer



























  • I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

    – Paŭlo Ebermann
    Mar 30 at 18:40











  • I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 31 at 6:11


















20
















It DOES preserve intervals (visually). What it does NOT tell you is whether those intervals are major or minor (or augmented or diminished). The distance of a space to its adjacent line will always be a second of some sort. This is because in part of history (which requires a discussion of Church modes and the history of notation), and partly because the notes on the staff change depending on what clef I give it as well as what key signature I give it. I will always know that a line to the next line, or a space to the next space, will be a third of some sort, but I only know what kind of third (and also what the notes are) if I am given more information, namely clef and key signature.






share|improve this answer




















  • 2





    How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

    – Tim
    Mar 28 at 13:25






  • 2





    Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

    – LSM07
    Mar 28 at 13:31






  • 3





    @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

    – Michael Curtis
    Mar 28 at 14:01


















9
















A shallow answer as to why standard notation does not preserve intervals visually in terms of numbers of semitones is that modern standard notation has evolved to encompass the ideas that:



  • the octave is split into 12 identifiable notes, each a semitone apart

  • every particular piece of music would be based around a diatonic scale, which represents a 7-note subset of those 12 identifiable notes in the octave in a particular pattern which itself has uneven sizes of intervals.

The stave in standard notation without a key signature depicts the C major scale and its modes (all of which are Diatonic scales). Adding a key signature allows it to depict other diatonic scales, and the use of accidentals allows all possibilities in the 12-note (chromatic) scale.






share|improve this answer



























  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – Doktor Mayhem
    Mar 28 at 18:43






  • 2





    This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

    – 11684
    Mar 28 at 22:29






  • 2





    @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

    – topo morto
    Mar 28 at 22:42



















5
















It's actually easier to find 3rds and 5ths. 3rds are on the next line or space, and 5ths are on the next but one. As in F is on bottom space in treble clef, A (3rd higher) is on the next space. In key E, with 4#, E is on the bottom line, G# (3rd) is on the nexy line up, and B (5th) is on the next line up from that. (Next but one from E). Once the key signature is established - it's at the beginning of each line - there's no problem. I think if there was always a problem for the last few hundred years, something would have been changed.






share|improve this answer




















  • 1





    I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:59







  • 5





    "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 13:00






  • 3





    @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

    – Tim
    Mar 28 at 13:06


















1
















I like to think of it as all being relative to C major and really the the fundamental thing is the major scale. So in some ways its like a mapping to the white keys of the piano and you get pretty routine at associating lines and spaces of treble clef to section of piano, and then you have little notation for sharps and flats pretty nicely, and even little "valves" to hold the note sharp and flat per say.



What youd like is a bit closer to the metal, just strait diatonic, 12 notes. This is nice but in music (western, tonal) were after something a abstracted from that, the major scale and really circle of fifths. So when you abstract you usually remove unnecessary things. So instead of dealing with things in terms of notes, now we use 12 entire major keys and their notes. But what's better is you still get all twelve diatonic notes, but it's hard on the notation with sharps and flats everywhere. But it's okay because too much chromaticism and you begin to lose a tonal center.



How tonal centers play a role in music is complicated and matters for separate discussion. Point is most music can be viewed as being in some key, with modulation to different keys for desired effect relating to modes. I like to think of keys as absolute things in relation to other keys, with their own moods and feeling. Thus F major is different then E major even though they share the same pattern. C major is the most familiar key for many reason and so it acts like the foundation. It makes sense to annotate and analyze music relative to C major which is the choice taken by standard music notation.






share|improve this answer
































    0
















    If you look at a "piano roll" display in a sequencer or other MIDI program, I believe looks like the system you're describing, ie, the visual distance is always analagous to a particular interval






    share|improve this answer

























    • While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 30 at 14:49














    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function()
    var channelOptions =
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "240"
    ;
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
    createEditor();
    );

    else
    createEditor();

    );

    function createEditor()
    StackExchange.prepareEditor(
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader:
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/"u003ecc by-sa 4.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    ,
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    );



    );














    draft saved

    draft discarded
















    StackExchange.ready(
    function ()
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f82054%2fwhy-does-standard-notation-not-preserve-intervals-visually%23new-answer', 'question_page');

    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes








    6 Answers
    6






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    29

















    Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)




    It does, but I think you are probably not accustomed to reading it, or how it was developed.



    Let's first make an analogy with something familiar: reading English.



    What is the meaning of "right" versus "right?" I can read the words, but only reading the single word isn't going to tell me the meaning. Of course we all know we need to read the context around the word. "His answer is right." "I write with my right hand." (Couldn't resist mixing it up more with a homophone.)



    Following the analogy I can ask "why doesn't written English preserve the meaning of words?"



    The answer is: "it does." But it doesn't preserve the meaning with single words. Complete meaning is only communicated in context.



    Back to music notation...



    Visually, you are mistaking this...



    enter image description here



    ...to mean lines to spaces are fixed sizes of whole-steps or half-steps.



    That is not how it works. The line and space represent steps on a diatonic series. The diatonic series is an asymmetrical series of whole and half steps represented by letters A-G and the staff lines and spaces do not have fixed letter identities.



    You must use clefs to know the letters of the staff lines and spaces and consequently the size of intervals between staff lines and spaces...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is B to C a half-step or...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is C to D a whole step.



    I suppose the use of clefs is already understood by the OP. The question instead may have been "why use a system of clefs to know what the intervals and letter names of the staff?" It does seem to be a confusing system.



    I think the reason for all the clefs is historical in two ways: 1) it evolved from notation for a single melodic vocal line (plainchant), and 2) it is harder to read ledger lines than a 4 or 5 line staff.



    It's interesting to add that back during plainchant (Dark ages, Medieval era) there wasn't even a notion of absolute pitch for the tones of the staff. The tonic - or the selected range - was sung at whatever pitch was comfortable for the singer. A lot has changed with notation!



    Depending on the range of the instrument a clef is selected that will put most of the notation on a 5 line staff, the clef gives a reference pitch like G or F and that let's you know where the diatonic whole and half steps lay. The system isn't immediately intuitive and requires study. That's the reality. You can look for some alternate notation system - they do exist. But you will need to learn that too, and there may not be much available music depending on the system. Going back to the language analogy you can compare to the idea of Esperanto versus English. Alternate systems might be more logical (debatable?) but not practical.




    EDIT




    ...It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds.




    One little addition about that.



    The interval number will actually stay the same when counting lines and space regardless of clef, key signature, or accidentals. Ex. if you are on a line and consider that starting point 1 and then go up space 2, line 3, space 4, line 5. We have ascended to the 5th step and the interval number is a fifth, 5. Sames goes for spaces, but let's just stick to an example with lines. All of these are fifths...



    enter image description here



    ...even with the various key signatures, placement of notes within the key, and the crazy accidentals of the third example they are all fifths.



    Why? Because the lines and spaces represent the diatonic letters and we count those steps to first get the interval number: E to G, G to D, B to F. Count them all on the letter series and you will see they are all 5 steps.



    After the interval number we determine the interval quality. Those qualities are major, minor, augmented, and diminished. You can also have double diminished, and other complex intervals. At this point you do need to read the key signature and accidentals to know the specific quality.



    But, rest assured that a fifth is always a fifth - of some quality - by the staff/letter counting. The three examples above are...




    • E to Bb a diminished fifth d5


    • G to D a perfect fifth P5


    • B♮ to Fb a double-diminished fifth dd5 (sorry, that's really ugly, enharmonically it's a perfect fourth! I did it on purpose to illustrate the point, it's not very normal)

    The same idea will apply with all the other intervals.



    Key signatures with many sharps or flats and highly chromatic chords are difficult to read. The resulting enharmonic spellings like Gbb which is enharmonically F♮ are difficult, no doubt. But that is the extreme end of difficult notation.



    If you really want to work on reading skills, work up gradually from simpler music. Mozart minuets or Czerny's Recreations are a good starting place. Simple key signature, mostly diatonic harmony. Schubert's various dances for piano would be a nice step up in complexity.






    share|improve this answer



























    • I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

      – Paŭlo Ebermann
      Mar 30 at 18:40











    • I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 31 at 6:11















    29

















    Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)




    It does, but I think you are probably not accustomed to reading it, or how it was developed.



    Let's first make an analogy with something familiar: reading English.



    What is the meaning of "right" versus "right?" I can read the words, but only reading the single word isn't going to tell me the meaning. Of course we all know we need to read the context around the word. "His answer is right." "I write with my right hand." (Couldn't resist mixing it up more with a homophone.)



    Following the analogy I can ask "why doesn't written English preserve the meaning of words?"



    The answer is: "it does." But it doesn't preserve the meaning with single words. Complete meaning is only communicated in context.



    Back to music notation...



    Visually, you are mistaking this...



    enter image description here



    ...to mean lines to spaces are fixed sizes of whole-steps or half-steps.



    That is not how it works. The line and space represent steps on a diatonic series. The diatonic series is an asymmetrical series of whole and half steps represented by letters A-G and the staff lines and spaces do not have fixed letter identities.



    You must use clefs to know the letters of the staff lines and spaces and consequently the size of intervals between staff lines and spaces...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is B to C a half-step or...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is C to D a whole step.



    I suppose the use of clefs is already understood by the OP. The question instead may have been "why use a system of clefs to know what the intervals and letter names of the staff?" It does seem to be a confusing system.



    I think the reason for all the clefs is historical in two ways: 1) it evolved from notation for a single melodic vocal line (plainchant), and 2) it is harder to read ledger lines than a 4 or 5 line staff.



    It's interesting to add that back during plainchant (Dark ages, Medieval era) there wasn't even a notion of absolute pitch for the tones of the staff. The tonic - or the selected range - was sung at whatever pitch was comfortable for the singer. A lot has changed with notation!



    Depending on the range of the instrument a clef is selected that will put most of the notation on a 5 line staff, the clef gives a reference pitch like G or F and that let's you know where the diatonic whole and half steps lay. The system isn't immediately intuitive and requires study. That's the reality. You can look for some alternate notation system - they do exist. But you will need to learn that too, and there may not be much available music depending on the system. Going back to the language analogy you can compare to the idea of Esperanto versus English. Alternate systems might be more logical (debatable?) but not practical.




    EDIT




    ...It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds.




    One little addition about that.



    The interval number will actually stay the same when counting lines and space regardless of clef, key signature, or accidentals. Ex. if you are on a line and consider that starting point 1 and then go up space 2, line 3, space 4, line 5. We have ascended to the 5th step and the interval number is a fifth, 5. Sames goes for spaces, but let's just stick to an example with lines. All of these are fifths...



    enter image description here



    ...even with the various key signatures, placement of notes within the key, and the crazy accidentals of the third example they are all fifths.



    Why? Because the lines and spaces represent the diatonic letters and we count those steps to first get the interval number: E to G, G to D, B to F. Count them all on the letter series and you will see they are all 5 steps.



    After the interval number we determine the interval quality. Those qualities are major, minor, augmented, and diminished. You can also have double diminished, and other complex intervals. At this point you do need to read the key signature and accidentals to know the specific quality.



    But, rest assured that a fifth is always a fifth - of some quality - by the staff/letter counting. The three examples above are...




    • E to Bb a diminished fifth d5


    • G to D a perfect fifth P5


    • B♮ to Fb a double-diminished fifth dd5 (sorry, that's really ugly, enharmonically it's a perfect fourth! I did it on purpose to illustrate the point, it's not very normal)

    The same idea will apply with all the other intervals.



    Key signatures with many sharps or flats and highly chromatic chords are difficult to read. The resulting enharmonic spellings like Gbb which is enharmonically F♮ are difficult, no doubt. But that is the extreme end of difficult notation.



    If you really want to work on reading skills, work up gradually from simpler music. Mozart minuets or Czerny's Recreations are a good starting place. Simple key signature, mostly diatonic harmony. Schubert's various dances for piano would be a nice step up in complexity.






    share|improve this answer



























    • I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

      – Paŭlo Ebermann
      Mar 30 at 18:40











    • I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 31 at 6:11













    29














    29










    29










    Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)




    It does, but I think you are probably not accustomed to reading it, or how it was developed.



    Let's first make an analogy with something familiar: reading English.



    What is the meaning of "right" versus "right?" I can read the words, but only reading the single word isn't going to tell me the meaning. Of course we all know we need to read the context around the word. "His answer is right." "I write with my right hand." (Couldn't resist mixing it up more with a homophone.)



    Following the analogy I can ask "why doesn't written English preserve the meaning of words?"



    The answer is: "it does." But it doesn't preserve the meaning with single words. Complete meaning is only communicated in context.



    Back to music notation...



    Visually, you are mistaking this...



    enter image description here



    ...to mean lines to spaces are fixed sizes of whole-steps or half-steps.



    That is not how it works. The line and space represent steps on a diatonic series. The diatonic series is an asymmetrical series of whole and half steps represented by letters A-G and the staff lines and spaces do not have fixed letter identities.



    You must use clefs to know the letters of the staff lines and spaces and consequently the size of intervals between staff lines and spaces...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is B to C a half-step or...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is C to D a whole step.



    I suppose the use of clefs is already understood by the OP. The question instead may have been "why use a system of clefs to know what the intervals and letter names of the staff?" It does seem to be a confusing system.



    I think the reason for all the clefs is historical in two ways: 1) it evolved from notation for a single melodic vocal line (plainchant), and 2) it is harder to read ledger lines than a 4 or 5 line staff.



    It's interesting to add that back during plainchant (Dark ages, Medieval era) there wasn't even a notion of absolute pitch for the tones of the staff. The tonic - or the selected range - was sung at whatever pitch was comfortable for the singer. A lot has changed with notation!



    Depending on the range of the instrument a clef is selected that will put most of the notation on a 5 line staff, the clef gives a reference pitch like G or F and that let's you know where the diatonic whole and half steps lay. The system isn't immediately intuitive and requires study. That's the reality. You can look for some alternate notation system - they do exist. But you will need to learn that too, and there may not be much available music depending on the system. Going back to the language analogy you can compare to the idea of Esperanto versus English. Alternate systems might be more logical (debatable?) but not practical.




    EDIT




    ...It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds.




    One little addition about that.



    The interval number will actually stay the same when counting lines and space regardless of clef, key signature, or accidentals. Ex. if you are on a line and consider that starting point 1 and then go up space 2, line 3, space 4, line 5. We have ascended to the 5th step and the interval number is a fifth, 5. Sames goes for spaces, but let's just stick to an example with lines. All of these are fifths...



    enter image description here



    ...even with the various key signatures, placement of notes within the key, and the crazy accidentals of the third example they are all fifths.



    Why? Because the lines and spaces represent the diatonic letters and we count those steps to first get the interval number: E to G, G to D, B to F. Count them all on the letter series and you will see they are all 5 steps.



    After the interval number we determine the interval quality. Those qualities are major, minor, augmented, and diminished. You can also have double diminished, and other complex intervals. At this point you do need to read the key signature and accidentals to know the specific quality.



    But, rest assured that a fifth is always a fifth - of some quality - by the staff/letter counting. The three examples above are...




    • E to Bb a diminished fifth d5


    • G to D a perfect fifth P5


    • B♮ to Fb a double-diminished fifth dd5 (sorry, that's really ugly, enharmonically it's a perfect fourth! I did it on purpose to illustrate the point, it's not very normal)

    The same idea will apply with all the other intervals.



    Key signatures with many sharps or flats and highly chromatic chords are difficult to read. The resulting enharmonic spellings like Gbb which is enharmonically F♮ are difficult, no doubt. But that is the extreme end of difficult notation.



    If you really want to work on reading skills, work up gradually from simpler music. Mozart minuets or Czerny's Recreations are a good starting place. Simple key signature, mostly diatonic harmony. Schubert's various dances for piano would be a nice step up in complexity.






    share|improve this answer
















    Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)




    It does, but I think you are probably not accustomed to reading it, or how it was developed.



    Let's first make an analogy with something familiar: reading English.



    What is the meaning of "right" versus "right?" I can read the words, but only reading the single word isn't going to tell me the meaning. Of course we all know we need to read the context around the word. "His answer is right." "I write with my right hand." (Couldn't resist mixing it up more with a homophone.)



    Following the analogy I can ask "why doesn't written English preserve the meaning of words?"



    The answer is: "it does." But it doesn't preserve the meaning with single words. Complete meaning is only communicated in context.



    Back to music notation...



    Visually, you are mistaking this...



    enter image description here



    ...to mean lines to spaces are fixed sizes of whole-steps or half-steps.



    That is not how it works. The line and space represent steps on a diatonic series. The diatonic series is an asymmetrical series of whole and half steps represented by letters A-G and the staff lines and spaces do not have fixed letter identities.



    You must use clefs to know the letters of the staff lines and spaces and consequently the size of intervals between staff lines and spaces...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is B to C a half-step or...



    enter image description here



    ...where the middle line to the space above is C to D a whole step.



    I suppose the use of clefs is already understood by the OP. The question instead may have been "why use a system of clefs to know what the intervals and letter names of the staff?" It does seem to be a confusing system.



    I think the reason for all the clefs is historical in two ways: 1) it evolved from notation for a single melodic vocal line (plainchant), and 2) it is harder to read ledger lines than a 4 or 5 line staff.



    It's interesting to add that back during plainchant (Dark ages, Medieval era) there wasn't even a notion of absolute pitch for the tones of the staff. The tonic - or the selected range - was sung at whatever pitch was comfortable for the singer. A lot has changed with notation!



    Depending on the range of the instrument a clef is selected that will put most of the notation on a 5 line staff, the clef gives a reference pitch like G or F and that let's you know where the diatonic whole and half steps lay. The system isn't immediately intuitive and requires study. That's the reality. You can look for some alternate notation system - they do exist. But you will need to learn that too, and there may not be much available music depending on the system. Going back to the language analogy you can compare to the idea of Esperanto versus English. Alternate systems might be more logical (debatable?) but not practical.




    EDIT




    ...It's unnecessarily difficult to identify intervals like fifths or thirds.




    One little addition about that.



    The interval number will actually stay the same when counting lines and space regardless of clef, key signature, or accidentals. Ex. if you are on a line and consider that starting point 1 and then go up space 2, line 3, space 4, line 5. We have ascended to the 5th step and the interval number is a fifth, 5. Sames goes for spaces, but let's just stick to an example with lines. All of these are fifths...



    enter image description here



    ...even with the various key signatures, placement of notes within the key, and the crazy accidentals of the third example they are all fifths.



    Why? Because the lines and spaces represent the diatonic letters and we count those steps to first get the interval number: E to G, G to D, B to F. Count them all on the letter series and you will see they are all 5 steps.



    After the interval number we determine the interval quality. Those qualities are major, minor, augmented, and diminished. You can also have double diminished, and other complex intervals. At this point you do need to read the key signature and accidentals to know the specific quality.



    But, rest assured that a fifth is always a fifth - of some quality - by the staff/letter counting. The three examples above are...




    • E to Bb a diminished fifth d5


    • G to D a perfect fifth P5


    • B♮ to Fb a double-diminished fifth dd5 (sorry, that's really ugly, enharmonically it's a perfect fourth! I did it on purpose to illustrate the point, it's not very normal)

    The same idea will apply with all the other intervals.



    Key signatures with many sharps or flats and highly chromatic chords are difficult to read. The resulting enharmonic spellings like Gbb which is enharmonically F♮ are difficult, no doubt. But that is the extreme end of difficult notation.



    If you really want to work on reading skills, work up gradually from simpler music. Mozart minuets or Czerny's Recreations are a good starting place. Simple key signature, mostly diatonic harmony. Schubert's various dances for piano would be a nice step up in complexity.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Mar 31 at 21:00

























    answered Mar 28 at 13:55









    Michael CurtisMichael Curtis

    17.6k12 silver badges59 bronze badges




    17.6k12 silver badges59 bronze badges















    • I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

      – Paŭlo Ebermann
      Mar 30 at 18:40











    • I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 31 at 6:11

















    • I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

      – Paŭlo Ebermann
      Mar 30 at 18:40











    • I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 31 at 6:11
















    I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

    – Paŭlo Ebermann
    Mar 30 at 18:40





    I (and many other people speaking Esperanto) disagree about your assertion that Esperanto is not practical.

    – Paŭlo Ebermann
    Mar 30 at 18:40













    I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 31 at 6:11





    I don't think that was he was saying Esperanto is impractical, but the hypothetical notation I was talking about. Though he is probably comparing it because both are esoteric in comparison to a popular alternative (ex: English and standard notation) and as a result are less likely to be adopted

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 31 at 6:11













    20
















    It DOES preserve intervals (visually). What it does NOT tell you is whether those intervals are major or minor (or augmented or diminished). The distance of a space to its adjacent line will always be a second of some sort. This is because in part of history (which requires a discussion of Church modes and the history of notation), and partly because the notes on the staff change depending on what clef I give it as well as what key signature I give it. I will always know that a line to the next line, or a space to the next space, will be a third of some sort, but I only know what kind of third (and also what the notes are) if I am given more information, namely clef and key signature.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 2





      How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:25






    • 2





      Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

      – LSM07
      Mar 28 at 13:31






    • 3





      @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

      – Michael Curtis
      Mar 28 at 14:01















    20
















    It DOES preserve intervals (visually). What it does NOT tell you is whether those intervals are major or minor (or augmented or diminished). The distance of a space to its adjacent line will always be a second of some sort. This is because in part of history (which requires a discussion of Church modes and the history of notation), and partly because the notes on the staff change depending on what clef I give it as well as what key signature I give it. I will always know that a line to the next line, or a space to the next space, will be a third of some sort, but I only know what kind of third (and also what the notes are) if I am given more information, namely clef and key signature.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 2





      How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:25






    • 2





      Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

      – LSM07
      Mar 28 at 13:31






    • 3





      @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

      – Michael Curtis
      Mar 28 at 14:01













    20














    20










    20









    It DOES preserve intervals (visually). What it does NOT tell you is whether those intervals are major or minor (or augmented or diminished). The distance of a space to its adjacent line will always be a second of some sort. This is because in part of history (which requires a discussion of Church modes and the history of notation), and partly because the notes on the staff change depending on what clef I give it as well as what key signature I give it. I will always know that a line to the next line, or a space to the next space, will be a third of some sort, but I only know what kind of third (and also what the notes are) if I am given more information, namely clef and key signature.






    share|improve this answer













    It DOES preserve intervals (visually). What it does NOT tell you is whether those intervals are major or minor (or augmented or diminished). The distance of a space to its adjacent line will always be a second of some sort. This is because in part of history (which requires a discussion of Church modes and the history of notation), and partly because the notes on the staff change depending on what clef I give it as well as what key signature I give it. I will always know that a line to the next line, or a space to the next space, will be a third of some sort, but I only know what kind of third (and also what the notes are) if I am given more information, namely clef and key signature.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered Mar 28 at 12:54









    LSM07LSM07

    1,3191 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges




    1,3191 gold badge5 silver badges17 bronze badges










    • 2





      How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:25






    • 2





      Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

      – LSM07
      Mar 28 at 13:31






    • 3





      @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

      – Michael Curtis
      Mar 28 at 14:01












    • 2





      How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:25






    • 2





      Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

      – LSM07
      Mar 28 at 13:31






    • 3





      @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

      – Michael Curtis
      Mar 28 at 14:01







    2




    2





    How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

    – Tim
    Mar 28 at 13:25





    How can a different clef affect anything except which notes are where?

    – Tim
    Mar 28 at 13:25




    2




    2





    Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

    – LSM07
    Mar 28 at 13:31





    Because the notes decide whether the intervals are major/minor/aug/dim. From the center line on the staff to the first space above it always measures a second. In treble clef, it's a minor second (B -> C), but in bass and alto clef it's a major second (D -> E and C -> D respectively). If we change the key sig to, for example, A major, the previous intervals become a major second (B -> C#), major second (D -> E), and minor second (C# -> D).

    – LSM07
    Mar 28 at 13:31




    3




    3





    @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

    – Michael Curtis
    Mar 28 at 14:01





    @Tim. Yes, changing the clef changes the letter assignments to lines and spaces, but you might also think of it as changing the interval size between a line to space. Ex. middle line to space above: with G clef it is a half step, with a C clef it is a whole step. Of course this is just rewording the idea, but perhaps a different explanation helps someone who does understand.

    – Michael Curtis
    Mar 28 at 14:01











    9
















    A shallow answer as to why standard notation does not preserve intervals visually in terms of numbers of semitones is that modern standard notation has evolved to encompass the ideas that:



    • the octave is split into 12 identifiable notes, each a semitone apart

    • every particular piece of music would be based around a diatonic scale, which represents a 7-note subset of those 12 identifiable notes in the octave in a particular pattern which itself has uneven sizes of intervals.

    The stave in standard notation without a key signature depicts the C major scale and its modes (all of which are Diatonic scales). Adding a key signature allows it to depict other diatonic scales, and the use of accidentals allows all possibilities in the 12-note (chromatic) scale.






    share|improve this answer



























    • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

      – Doktor Mayhem
      Mar 28 at 18:43






    • 2





      This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

      – 11684
      Mar 28 at 22:29






    • 2





      @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

      – topo morto
      Mar 28 at 22:42
















    9
















    A shallow answer as to why standard notation does not preserve intervals visually in terms of numbers of semitones is that modern standard notation has evolved to encompass the ideas that:



    • the octave is split into 12 identifiable notes, each a semitone apart

    • every particular piece of music would be based around a diatonic scale, which represents a 7-note subset of those 12 identifiable notes in the octave in a particular pattern which itself has uneven sizes of intervals.

    The stave in standard notation without a key signature depicts the C major scale and its modes (all of which are Diatonic scales). Adding a key signature allows it to depict other diatonic scales, and the use of accidentals allows all possibilities in the 12-note (chromatic) scale.






    share|improve this answer



























    • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

      – Doktor Mayhem
      Mar 28 at 18:43






    • 2





      This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

      – 11684
      Mar 28 at 22:29






    • 2





      @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

      – topo morto
      Mar 28 at 22:42














    9














    9










    9









    A shallow answer as to why standard notation does not preserve intervals visually in terms of numbers of semitones is that modern standard notation has evolved to encompass the ideas that:



    • the octave is split into 12 identifiable notes, each a semitone apart

    • every particular piece of music would be based around a diatonic scale, which represents a 7-note subset of those 12 identifiable notes in the octave in a particular pattern which itself has uneven sizes of intervals.

    The stave in standard notation without a key signature depicts the C major scale and its modes (all of which are Diatonic scales). Adding a key signature allows it to depict other diatonic scales, and the use of accidentals allows all possibilities in the 12-note (chromatic) scale.






    share|improve this answer















    A shallow answer as to why standard notation does not preserve intervals visually in terms of numbers of semitones is that modern standard notation has evolved to encompass the ideas that:



    • the octave is split into 12 identifiable notes, each a semitone apart

    • every particular piece of music would be based around a diatonic scale, which represents a 7-note subset of those 12 identifiable notes in the octave in a particular pattern which itself has uneven sizes of intervals.

    The stave in standard notation without a key signature depicts the C major scale and its modes (all of which are Diatonic scales). Adding a key signature allows it to depict other diatonic scales, and the use of accidentals allows all possibilities in the 12-note (chromatic) scale.







    share|improve this answer














    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer








    edited Mar 28 at 22:39

























    answered Mar 28 at 12:58









    topo mortotopo morto

    34.3k2 gold badges54 silver badges130 bronze badges




    34.3k2 gold badges54 silver badges130 bronze badges















    • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

      – Doktor Mayhem
      Mar 28 at 18:43






    • 2





      This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

      – 11684
      Mar 28 at 22:29






    • 2





      @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

      – topo morto
      Mar 28 at 22:42


















    • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

      – Doktor Mayhem
      Mar 28 at 18:43






    • 2





      This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

      – 11684
      Mar 28 at 22:29






    • 2





      @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

      – topo morto
      Mar 28 at 22:42

















    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – Doktor Mayhem
    Mar 28 at 18:43





    Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.

    – Doktor Mayhem
    Mar 28 at 18:43




    2




    2





    This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

    – 11684
    Mar 28 at 22:29





    This is not true. Standard notation did not evolve around the notion of a twelve-division of the octave. For the majority of music history, enharmonics (e.g. D# and Eb) were different pitches. The first occurrences of enharmonically equivalent notes being purposely used as the same pitch occur (as rare exceptions with explicit instructions) in the nineteenth century by which time standard notation was already fully developed.

    – 11684
    Mar 28 at 22:29




    2




    2





    @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

    – topo morto
    Mar 28 at 22:42






    @11684 use of the words "evolved around" was perhaps bad phrasing, as I very much didn't want to focus on the history, but the state we've got to now with modern standard notation (combined with, perhaps, something of a presumption towards equal temperament). I've tweaked the wording slightly.

    – topo morto
    Mar 28 at 22:42












    5
















    It's actually easier to find 3rds and 5ths. 3rds are on the next line or space, and 5ths are on the next but one. As in F is on bottom space in treble clef, A (3rd higher) is on the next space. In key E, with 4#, E is on the bottom line, G# (3rd) is on the nexy line up, and B (5th) is on the next line up from that. (Next but one from E). Once the key signature is established - it's at the beginning of each line - there's no problem. I think if there was always a problem for the last few hundred years, something would have been changed.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 1





      I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 28 at 12:59







    • 5





      "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

      – Carl Witthoft
      Mar 28 at 13:00






    • 3





      @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:06















    5
















    It's actually easier to find 3rds and 5ths. 3rds are on the next line or space, and 5ths are on the next but one. As in F is on bottom space in treble clef, A (3rd higher) is on the next space. In key E, with 4#, E is on the bottom line, G# (3rd) is on the nexy line up, and B (5th) is on the next line up from that. (Next but one from E). Once the key signature is established - it's at the beginning of each line - there's no problem. I think if there was always a problem for the last few hundred years, something would have been changed.






    share|improve this answer




















    • 1





      I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 28 at 12:59







    • 5





      "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

      – Carl Witthoft
      Mar 28 at 13:00






    • 3





      @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:06













    5














    5










    5









    It's actually easier to find 3rds and 5ths. 3rds are on the next line or space, and 5ths are on the next but one. As in F is on bottom space in treble clef, A (3rd higher) is on the next space. In key E, with 4#, E is on the bottom line, G# (3rd) is on the nexy line up, and B (5th) is on the next line up from that. (Next but one from E). Once the key signature is established - it's at the beginning of each line - there's no problem. I think if there was always a problem for the last few hundred years, something would have been changed.






    share|improve this answer













    It's actually easier to find 3rds and 5ths. 3rds are on the next line or space, and 5ths are on the next but one. As in F is on bottom space in treble clef, A (3rd higher) is on the next space. In key E, with 4#, E is on the bottom line, G# (3rd) is on the nexy line up, and B (5th) is on the next line up from that. (Next but one from E). Once the key signature is established - it's at the beginning of each line - there's no problem. I think if there was always a problem for the last few hundred years, something would have been changed.







    share|improve this answer












    share|improve this answer



    share|improve this answer










    answered Mar 28 at 12:47









    TimTim

    114k12 gold badges113 silver badges289 bronze badges




    114k12 gold badges113 silver badges289 bronze badges










    • 1





      I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 28 at 12:59







    • 5





      "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

      – Carl Witthoft
      Mar 28 at 13:00






    • 3





      @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:06












    • 1





      I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

      – Polycrystal
      Mar 28 at 12:59







    • 5





      "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

      – Carl Witthoft
      Mar 28 at 13:00






    • 3





      @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

      – Tim
      Mar 28 at 13:06







    1




    1





    I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:59






    I'm not saying that its a huge issue; more rather it's missed a chance to make the intervals visually uniform (including the sharps and flats).

    – Polycrystal
    Mar 28 at 12:59





    5




    5





    "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 13:00





    "...if there was a ... problem for the last few hundred years..." hah. Have you seen how humanity solves other long-standing problems? :-( .

    – Carl Witthoft
    Mar 28 at 13:00




    3




    3





    @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

    – Tim
    Mar 28 at 13:06





    @CarlWitthoft - ah, but musos, being part of deity rather than humanity, work at a different level...

    – Tim
    Mar 28 at 13:06











    1
















    I like to think of it as all being relative to C major and really the the fundamental thing is the major scale. So in some ways its like a mapping to the white keys of the piano and you get pretty routine at associating lines and spaces of treble clef to section of piano, and then you have little notation for sharps and flats pretty nicely, and even little "valves" to hold the note sharp and flat per say.



    What youd like is a bit closer to the metal, just strait diatonic, 12 notes. This is nice but in music (western, tonal) were after something a abstracted from that, the major scale and really circle of fifths. So when you abstract you usually remove unnecessary things. So instead of dealing with things in terms of notes, now we use 12 entire major keys and their notes. But what's better is you still get all twelve diatonic notes, but it's hard on the notation with sharps and flats everywhere. But it's okay because too much chromaticism and you begin to lose a tonal center.



    How tonal centers play a role in music is complicated and matters for separate discussion. Point is most music can be viewed as being in some key, with modulation to different keys for desired effect relating to modes. I like to think of keys as absolute things in relation to other keys, with their own moods and feeling. Thus F major is different then E major even though they share the same pattern. C major is the most familiar key for many reason and so it acts like the foundation. It makes sense to annotate and analyze music relative to C major which is the choice taken by standard music notation.






    share|improve this answer





























      1
















      I like to think of it as all being relative to C major and really the the fundamental thing is the major scale. So in some ways its like a mapping to the white keys of the piano and you get pretty routine at associating lines and spaces of treble clef to section of piano, and then you have little notation for sharps and flats pretty nicely, and even little "valves" to hold the note sharp and flat per say.



      What youd like is a bit closer to the metal, just strait diatonic, 12 notes. This is nice but in music (western, tonal) were after something a abstracted from that, the major scale and really circle of fifths. So when you abstract you usually remove unnecessary things. So instead of dealing with things in terms of notes, now we use 12 entire major keys and their notes. But what's better is you still get all twelve diatonic notes, but it's hard on the notation with sharps and flats everywhere. But it's okay because too much chromaticism and you begin to lose a tonal center.



      How tonal centers play a role in music is complicated and matters for separate discussion. Point is most music can be viewed as being in some key, with modulation to different keys for desired effect relating to modes. I like to think of keys as absolute things in relation to other keys, with their own moods and feeling. Thus F major is different then E major even though they share the same pattern. C major is the most familiar key for many reason and so it acts like the foundation. It makes sense to annotate and analyze music relative to C major which is the choice taken by standard music notation.






      share|improve this answer



























        1














        1










        1









        I like to think of it as all being relative to C major and really the the fundamental thing is the major scale. So in some ways its like a mapping to the white keys of the piano and you get pretty routine at associating lines and spaces of treble clef to section of piano, and then you have little notation for sharps and flats pretty nicely, and even little "valves" to hold the note sharp and flat per say.



        What youd like is a bit closer to the metal, just strait diatonic, 12 notes. This is nice but in music (western, tonal) were after something a abstracted from that, the major scale and really circle of fifths. So when you abstract you usually remove unnecessary things. So instead of dealing with things in terms of notes, now we use 12 entire major keys and their notes. But what's better is you still get all twelve diatonic notes, but it's hard on the notation with sharps and flats everywhere. But it's okay because too much chromaticism and you begin to lose a tonal center.



        How tonal centers play a role in music is complicated and matters for separate discussion. Point is most music can be viewed as being in some key, with modulation to different keys for desired effect relating to modes. I like to think of keys as absolute things in relation to other keys, with their own moods and feeling. Thus F major is different then E major even though they share the same pattern. C major is the most familiar key for many reason and so it acts like the foundation. It makes sense to annotate and analyze music relative to C major which is the choice taken by standard music notation.






        share|improve this answer













        I like to think of it as all being relative to C major and really the the fundamental thing is the major scale. So in some ways its like a mapping to the white keys of the piano and you get pretty routine at associating lines and spaces of treble clef to section of piano, and then you have little notation for sharps and flats pretty nicely, and even little "valves" to hold the note sharp and flat per say.



        What youd like is a bit closer to the metal, just strait diatonic, 12 notes. This is nice but in music (western, tonal) were after something a abstracted from that, the major scale and really circle of fifths. So when you abstract you usually remove unnecessary things. So instead of dealing with things in terms of notes, now we use 12 entire major keys and their notes. But what's better is you still get all twelve diatonic notes, but it's hard on the notation with sharps and flats everywhere. But it's okay because too much chromaticism and you begin to lose a tonal center.



        How tonal centers play a role in music is complicated and matters for separate discussion. Point is most music can be viewed as being in some key, with modulation to different keys for desired effect relating to modes. I like to think of keys as absolute things in relation to other keys, with their own moods and feeling. Thus F major is different then E major even though they share the same pattern. C major is the most familiar key for many reason and so it acts like the foundation. It makes sense to annotate and analyze music relative to C major which is the choice taken by standard music notation.







        share|improve this answer












        share|improve this answer



        share|improve this answer










        answered Mar 29 at 6:34









        marshal craftmarshal craft

        1501 silver badge8 bronze badges




        1501 silver badge8 bronze badges
























            0
















            If you look at a "piano roll" display in a sequencer or other MIDI program, I believe looks like the system you're describing, ie, the visual distance is always analagous to a particular interval






            share|improve this answer

























            • While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

              – Polycrystal
              Mar 30 at 14:49
















            0
















            If you look at a "piano roll" display in a sequencer or other MIDI program, I believe looks like the system you're describing, ie, the visual distance is always analagous to a particular interval






            share|improve this answer

























            • While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

              – Polycrystal
              Mar 30 at 14:49














            0














            0










            0









            If you look at a "piano roll" display in a sequencer or other MIDI program, I believe looks like the system you're describing, ie, the visual distance is always analagous to a particular interval






            share|improve this answer













            If you look at a "piano roll" display in a sequencer or other MIDI program, I believe looks like the system you're describing, ie, the visual distance is always analagous to a particular interval







            share|improve this answer












            share|improve this answer



            share|improve this answer










            answered Mar 30 at 10:26









            benjoyabenjoya

            1




            1















            • While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

              – Polycrystal
              Mar 30 at 14:49


















            • While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

              – Polycrystal
              Mar 30 at 14:49

















            While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

            – Polycrystal
            Mar 30 at 14:49






            While you raise a fair point; the question I asked was why the Standard music notation specifically, doesn't use a system analogous to the piano role (Curtis has explained pretty well why this is the case)

            – Polycrystal
            Mar 30 at 14:49



















            draft saved

            draft discarded















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Music: Practice & Theory Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid


            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f82054%2fwhy-does-standard-notation-not-preserve-intervals-visually%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Kamusi Yaliyomo Aina za kamusi | Muundo wa kamusi | Faida za kamusi | Dhima ya picha katika kamusi | Marejeo | Tazama pia | Viungo vya nje | UrambazajiKuhusu kamusiGo-SwahiliWiki-KamusiKamusi ya Kiswahili na Kiingerezakuihariri na kuongeza habari

            Swift 4 - func physicsWorld not invoked on collision? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow to call Objective-C code from Swift#ifdef replacement in the Swift language@selector() in Swift?#pragma mark in Swift?Swift for loop: for index, element in array?dispatch_after - GCD in Swift?Swift Beta performance: sorting arraysSplit a String into an array in Swift?The use of Swift 3 @objc inference in Swift 4 mode is deprecated?How to optimize UITableViewCell, because my UITableView lags

            Access current req object everywhere in Node.js ExpressWhy are global variables considered bad practice? (node.js)Using req & res across functionsHow do I get the path to the current script with Node.js?What is Node.js' Connect, Express and “middleware”?Node.js w/ express error handling in callbackHow to access the GET parameters after “?” in Express?Modify Node.js req object parametersAccess “app” variable inside of ExpressJS/ConnectJS middleware?Node.js Express app - request objectAngular Http Module considered middleware?Session variables in ExpressJSAdd properties to the req object in expressjs with Typescript