Why do the keys in the circle of fifths have the pattern of accidentals that they do?Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale?Is there a name for this phenomenon in the circle of fifths?How are keys in the circle of fifths related?Are the I IV V chords the heart of music and harmony?Are there geometric symmetries in musical harmonics?Learning the Circle of FIfthsIs the circle of fifths misnamed?Is this pattern between Primary and Secondary chord notes important?E# note in the D# Major scale. What does it mean?Why does the circle of fifths only show some notes that are enharmonically equivalent?
Can a US President have someone sent to prison?
I hit a pipe with a mower and now it won't turn
Being paid less than a "junior" colleague
Can I ask to speak to my future colleagues before accepting an offer?
Why are there so many religions and gods?
Was it really unprofessional of me to leave without asking for a raise first?
What does Mildred mean by this line in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri?
Do the 26 richest billionaires own as much wealth as the poorest 3.8 billion people?
Do space suits measure "methane" levels or other biological gases?
The Confused Alien
One folder two different locations on ubuntu 18.04
Most importants new papers in computational complexity
Should I report a leak of confidential HR information?
Details of video memory access arbitration in Space Invaders
How exactly is a normal force exerted, at the molecular level?
Can a police officer film me on their personal device in my own home?
How do I tell the reader that my character is autistic in Fantasy?
Understanding Lasso Regression's sparsity geometrically
Is there a nice way to assign std::minmax(a, b) to std::tie(a, b)?
Automatically convert a number to use the correct SI unit prefix
Can a single server be associated with multiple domains?
What is the highest number of sneak attacks that a Pure/High Level Rogue (Level 17+) can make in one round?
Can I travel from Germany to England alone as an unaccompanied minor?
Is there a way for presidents to legally extend their terms beyond the maximum of four years?
Why do the keys in the circle of fifths have the pattern of accidentals that they do?
Why is music theory built so tightly around the C Major scale?Is there a name for this phenomenon in the circle of fifths?How are keys in the circle of fifths related?Are the I IV V chords the heart of music and harmony?Are there geometric symmetries in musical harmonics?Learning the Circle of FIfthsIs the circle of fifths misnamed?Is this pattern between Primary and Secondary chord notes important?E# note in the D# Major scale. What does it mean?Why does the circle of fifths only show some notes that are enharmonically equivalent?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I'm attempting to fully understand the circle of fifths, and I noticed that in the clockwise direction, the sharps are added in their own circle of fifths starting at F. I'm wondering why this pattern appears; I've tried looking at a piano and seeing if there is any special change in the pattern of black keys that happens when you go up a fifth, but I haven't found anything. To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale, but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
theory intervals accidentals
New contributor
add a comment |
I'm attempting to fully understand the circle of fifths, and I noticed that in the clockwise direction, the sharps are added in their own circle of fifths starting at F. I'm wondering why this pattern appears; I've tried looking at a piano and seeing if there is any special change in the pattern of black keys that happens when you go up a fifth, but I haven't found anything. To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale, but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
theory intervals accidentals
New contributor
add a comment |
I'm attempting to fully understand the circle of fifths, and I noticed that in the clockwise direction, the sharps are added in their own circle of fifths starting at F. I'm wondering why this pattern appears; I've tried looking at a piano and seeing if there is any special change in the pattern of black keys that happens when you go up a fifth, but I haven't found anything. To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale, but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
theory intervals accidentals
New contributor
I'm attempting to fully understand the circle of fifths, and I noticed that in the clockwise direction, the sharps are added in their own circle of fifths starting at F. I'm wondering why this pattern appears; I've tried looking at a piano and seeing if there is any special change in the pattern of black keys that happens when you go up a fifth, but I haven't found anything. To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale, but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
theory intervals accidentals
theory intervals accidentals
New contributor
New contributor
New contributor
asked 9 hours ago
VityouVityou
162 bronze badges
162 bronze badges
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale,
That is exactly the reason. When the diatonic scale is transposed to start on tonics other than C
(or A
for relative minor) you must make adjustments with sharps/flats to maintain the diatonic pattern.
...but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
I think you may be misunderstanding the key signature circle of fifths. The tonics are arranged in fifths to show the alteration of sharps/flats one by one. It's a circle of key signatures arranged in fifths.
You may be mistaking the key signature circle of fifths for a chord progression.
There is a circle of fifths chord progression but it moves by diatonic fifths through the seven diatonic chords.
They are similar, but not the same thing.
I'm not sure this is what your asking about but...
The diatonic major scale is two tetrachords (series of four tones), those two tetrachords are major consisting of two whole steps followed by a half step. The starting notes for the two tetrachords are a perfect fifth apart. So, when we start on C
...
[C D E F ]
...is a major tetra chord and gives us the first half of the scale, then go up a perfect fifth for the second major tetrachord and the second half of the scale...
[G A B C ]
...the second tetrachord is major, so we do not need to add sharps.
The full scale is [C D E F ][G A B C ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale, and so start on G
...
[G A B C ]
...for the first half of the scale, go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[D E F A ]
...that tetrachord is minor! we need to make it major with F#
. Notice that it is the third we changed.
The full scale is [G A B C ][D E F# G ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale - we will will keep the previous sharps added - and start on D
...
[D E F# G ]
...is our first half major tetrachord and we go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[A B C D ]
...this tetrachord is also minor, so we put a sharp on the third and use C#
...
The full scale is [D E F# G ][A B C# D ]
.
If you keep following this pattern of moving up to the next tetrachord by a perfect fifth, and maintain the sharps added in the previous stages, you only need to add one sharp to the next new tetrachord - to alter the third of the tetrachord - to change it from minor to major.
I hope this helps illustrate why moving up by perfect fifths results in sharps added one by one.
add a comment |
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale.
This is exactly correct, and there's not much more to it. The major scale requires the seventh scale degree to be a half-step below the tonic, as with C major. When you build a major scale on G, you have to raise the seventh scale degree, which is F#. When you go up a fifth to build a major scale on D, you keep that F# as the third, and you have to raise the seventh scale degree from C to C#. When you go up a fifth to A major, you again have to raise the seventh scale degree from G to G#.
but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
It's because it's always the seventh scale degree of the corresponding major scale. Just like the tonic of each scale, the seventh degree is a fifth higher than the seventh degree of the preceding scale in the circle.
add a comment |
As the first answer indicates there is a specific pattern to the major scale. It is built from whole and half step intervals, specifically
(W - W - H) - W - (W - W - H)
The parentheses are placed around a smaller grouping of intervals called a tetrachord (a 4 note sequence). Notice that the same exact tetra chord appears twice in the construction of the major scale. This means that scales that differ by a 5th have a lot of common tones and are sometimes referred to in music theory as being compatible keys.
I disagree with some of the statements made in the previous answer. While it is somewhat true that the structure of the major scale is a coincidence the relation between different keys is not. You can't just stack them in any order are see a simple pattern. Only the stacking in 5ths (or 4ths) will reveal this pattern and it is related to the structure of the scale using tetrachords.
As for changing key, this construction makes it very easy. To move up a 5th from where you are all you have to do is augment the 4th of the key you are in. Example: Modulate from C to G, raise the F. To modulate down a 5th all you need to do is drop the 7th of the key you are in. Example: from C to F, drop the B to Bb. On an instrument like guitar this makes reading key changes very easy without moving position by several frets. Now you may wonder how this helps if a key modulates to the relative minor third above the current key. Perhaps it doesn't, but a lot classical music (and this is classical music theory) makes use of compatible keys in modulation (even a lot of modern music does too). So this is a common type of modulation and it helps to memorize it. In Jazz there are other types of modulations that make use of modern harmony ideas. A few that come to mind are the Coltrane and Parker cycles, that modulate by thirds instead of 5ths and 4ths. Another is Pat Martino's way of seeing multiple keys as connected by the diminished form.
If you abandon the major scale as the building block of melody you will lose the circle of 5ths connection, it may be replaced by another circle.
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
add a comment |
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/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 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
);
);
Vityou is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f86169%2fwhy-do-the-keys-in-the-circle-of-fifths-have-the-pattern-of-accidentals-that-the%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
3 Answers
3
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale,
That is exactly the reason. When the diatonic scale is transposed to start on tonics other than C
(or A
for relative minor) you must make adjustments with sharps/flats to maintain the diatonic pattern.
...but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
I think you may be misunderstanding the key signature circle of fifths. The tonics are arranged in fifths to show the alteration of sharps/flats one by one. It's a circle of key signatures arranged in fifths.
You may be mistaking the key signature circle of fifths for a chord progression.
There is a circle of fifths chord progression but it moves by diatonic fifths through the seven diatonic chords.
They are similar, but not the same thing.
I'm not sure this is what your asking about but...
The diatonic major scale is two tetrachords (series of four tones), those two tetrachords are major consisting of two whole steps followed by a half step. The starting notes for the two tetrachords are a perfect fifth apart. So, when we start on C
...
[C D E F ]
...is a major tetra chord and gives us the first half of the scale, then go up a perfect fifth for the second major tetrachord and the second half of the scale...
[G A B C ]
...the second tetrachord is major, so we do not need to add sharps.
The full scale is [C D E F ][G A B C ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale, and so start on G
...
[G A B C ]
...for the first half of the scale, go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[D E F A ]
...that tetrachord is minor! we need to make it major with F#
. Notice that it is the third we changed.
The full scale is [G A B C ][D E F# G ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale - we will will keep the previous sharps added - and start on D
...
[D E F# G ]
...is our first half major tetrachord and we go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[A B C D ]
...this tetrachord is also minor, so we put a sharp on the third and use C#
...
The full scale is [D E F# G ][A B C# D ]
.
If you keep following this pattern of moving up to the next tetrachord by a perfect fifth, and maintain the sharps added in the previous stages, you only need to add one sharp to the next new tetrachord - to alter the third of the tetrachord - to change it from minor to major.
I hope this helps illustrate why moving up by perfect fifths results in sharps added one by one.
add a comment |
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale,
That is exactly the reason. When the diatonic scale is transposed to start on tonics other than C
(or A
for relative minor) you must make adjustments with sharps/flats to maintain the diatonic pattern.
...but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
I think you may be misunderstanding the key signature circle of fifths. The tonics are arranged in fifths to show the alteration of sharps/flats one by one. It's a circle of key signatures arranged in fifths.
You may be mistaking the key signature circle of fifths for a chord progression.
There is a circle of fifths chord progression but it moves by diatonic fifths through the seven diatonic chords.
They are similar, but not the same thing.
I'm not sure this is what your asking about but...
The diatonic major scale is two tetrachords (series of four tones), those two tetrachords are major consisting of two whole steps followed by a half step. The starting notes for the two tetrachords are a perfect fifth apart. So, when we start on C
...
[C D E F ]
...is a major tetra chord and gives us the first half of the scale, then go up a perfect fifth for the second major tetrachord and the second half of the scale...
[G A B C ]
...the second tetrachord is major, so we do not need to add sharps.
The full scale is [C D E F ][G A B C ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale, and so start on G
...
[G A B C ]
...for the first half of the scale, go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[D E F A ]
...that tetrachord is minor! we need to make it major with F#
. Notice that it is the third we changed.
The full scale is [G A B C ][D E F# G ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale - we will will keep the previous sharps added - and start on D
...
[D E F# G ]
...is our first half major tetrachord and we go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[A B C D ]
...this tetrachord is also minor, so we put a sharp on the third and use C#
...
The full scale is [D E F# G ][A B C# D ]
.
If you keep following this pattern of moving up to the next tetrachord by a perfect fifth, and maintain the sharps added in the previous stages, you only need to add one sharp to the next new tetrachord - to alter the third of the tetrachord - to change it from minor to major.
I hope this helps illustrate why moving up by perfect fifths results in sharps added one by one.
add a comment |
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale,
That is exactly the reason. When the diatonic scale is transposed to start on tonics other than C
(or A
for relative minor) you must make adjustments with sharps/flats to maintain the diatonic pattern.
...but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
I think you may be misunderstanding the key signature circle of fifths. The tonics are arranged in fifths to show the alteration of sharps/flats one by one. It's a circle of key signatures arranged in fifths.
You may be mistaking the key signature circle of fifths for a chord progression.
There is a circle of fifths chord progression but it moves by diatonic fifths through the seven diatonic chords.
They are similar, but not the same thing.
I'm not sure this is what your asking about but...
The diatonic major scale is two tetrachords (series of four tones), those two tetrachords are major consisting of two whole steps followed by a half step. The starting notes for the two tetrachords are a perfect fifth apart. So, when we start on C
...
[C D E F ]
...is a major tetra chord and gives us the first half of the scale, then go up a perfect fifth for the second major tetrachord and the second half of the scale...
[G A B C ]
...the second tetrachord is major, so we do not need to add sharps.
The full scale is [C D E F ][G A B C ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale, and so start on G
...
[G A B C ]
...for the first half of the scale, go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[D E F A ]
...that tetrachord is minor! we need to make it major with F#
. Notice that it is the third we changed.
The full scale is [G A B C ][D E F# G ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale - we will will keep the previous sharps added - and start on D
...
[D E F# G ]
...is our first half major tetrachord and we go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[A B C D ]
...this tetrachord is also minor, so we put a sharp on the third and use C#
...
The full scale is [D E F# G ][A B C# D ]
.
If you keep following this pattern of moving up to the next tetrachord by a perfect fifth, and maintain the sharps added in the previous stages, you only need to add one sharp to the next new tetrachord - to alter the third of the tetrachord - to change it from minor to major.
I hope this helps illustrate why moving up by perfect fifths results in sharps added one by one.
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale,
That is exactly the reason. When the diatonic scale is transposed to start on tonics other than C
(or A
for relative minor) you must make adjustments with sharps/flats to maintain the diatonic pattern.
...but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
I think you may be misunderstanding the key signature circle of fifths. The tonics are arranged in fifths to show the alteration of sharps/flats one by one. It's a circle of key signatures arranged in fifths.
You may be mistaking the key signature circle of fifths for a chord progression.
There is a circle of fifths chord progression but it moves by diatonic fifths through the seven diatonic chords.
They are similar, but not the same thing.
I'm not sure this is what your asking about but...
The diatonic major scale is two tetrachords (series of four tones), those two tetrachords are major consisting of two whole steps followed by a half step. The starting notes for the two tetrachords are a perfect fifth apart. So, when we start on C
...
[C D E F ]
...is a major tetra chord and gives us the first half of the scale, then go up a perfect fifth for the second major tetrachord and the second half of the scale...
[G A B C ]
...the second tetrachord is major, so we do not need to add sharps.
The full scale is [C D E F ][G A B C ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale, and so start on G
...
[G A B C ]
...for the first half of the scale, go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[D E F A ]
...that tetrachord is minor! we need to make it major with F#
. Notice that it is the third we changed.
The full scale is [G A B C ][D E F# G ]
.
Now we go up a perfect fifth to start the next scale - we will will keep the previous sharps added - and start on D
...
[D E F# G ]
...is our first half major tetrachord and we go up a perfect fifth for the second half...
[A B C D ]
...this tetrachord is also minor, so we put a sharp on the third and use C#
...
The full scale is [D E F# G ][A B C# D ]
.
If you keep following this pattern of moving up to the next tetrachord by a perfect fifth, and maintain the sharps added in the previous stages, you only need to add one sharp to the next new tetrachord - to alter the third of the tetrachord - to change it from minor to major.
I hope this helps illustrate why moving up by perfect fifths results in sharps added one by one.
edited 6 hours ago
answered 7 hours ago
Michael CurtisMichael Curtis
15.2k10 silver badges51 bronze badges
15.2k10 silver badges51 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale.
This is exactly correct, and there's not much more to it. The major scale requires the seventh scale degree to be a half-step below the tonic, as with C major. When you build a major scale on G, you have to raise the seventh scale degree, which is F#. When you go up a fifth to build a major scale on D, you keep that F# as the third, and you have to raise the seventh scale degree from C to C#. When you go up a fifth to A major, you again have to raise the seventh scale degree from G to G#.
but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
It's because it's always the seventh scale degree of the corresponding major scale. Just like the tonic of each scale, the seventh degree is a fifth higher than the seventh degree of the preceding scale in the circle.
add a comment |
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale.
This is exactly correct, and there's not much more to it. The major scale requires the seventh scale degree to be a half-step below the tonic, as with C major. When you build a major scale on G, you have to raise the seventh scale degree, which is F#. When you go up a fifth to build a major scale on D, you keep that F# as the third, and you have to raise the seventh scale degree from C to C#. When you go up a fifth to A major, you again have to raise the seventh scale degree from G to G#.
but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
It's because it's always the seventh scale degree of the corresponding major scale. Just like the tonic of each scale, the seventh degree is a fifth higher than the seventh degree of the preceding scale in the circle.
add a comment |
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale.
This is exactly correct, and there's not much more to it. The major scale requires the seventh scale degree to be a half-step below the tonic, as with C major. When you build a major scale on G, you have to raise the seventh scale degree, which is F#. When you go up a fifth to build a major scale on D, you keep that F# as the third, and you have to raise the seventh scale degree from C to C#. When you go up a fifth to A major, you again have to raise the seventh scale degree from G to G#.
but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
It's because it's always the seventh scale degree of the corresponding major scale. Just like the tonic of each scale, the seventh degree is a fifth higher than the seventh degree of the preceding scale in the circle.
To me it just seems that each key just happens to have those sharps due to the pattern of the major scale.
This is exactly correct, and there's not much more to it. The major scale requires the seventh scale degree to be a half-step below the tonic, as with C major. When you build a major scale on G, you have to raise the seventh scale degree, which is F#. When you go up a fifth to build a major scale on D, you keep that F# as the third, and you have to raise the seventh scale degree from C to C#. When you go up a fifth to A major, you again have to raise the seventh scale degree from G to G#.
but I'm wondering what the underlying reason is that the sharps are added around the circle of fifths in their own little circle of fifths.
It's because it's always the seventh scale degree of the corresponding major scale. Just like the tonic of each scale, the seventh degree is a fifth higher than the seventh degree of the preceding scale in the circle.
answered 8 hours ago
phoogphoog
1,2476 silver badges9 bronze badges
1,2476 silver badges9 bronze badges
add a comment |
add a comment |
As the first answer indicates there is a specific pattern to the major scale. It is built from whole and half step intervals, specifically
(W - W - H) - W - (W - W - H)
The parentheses are placed around a smaller grouping of intervals called a tetrachord (a 4 note sequence). Notice that the same exact tetra chord appears twice in the construction of the major scale. This means that scales that differ by a 5th have a lot of common tones and are sometimes referred to in music theory as being compatible keys.
I disagree with some of the statements made in the previous answer. While it is somewhat true that the structure of the major scale is a coincidence the relation between different keys is not. You can't just stack them in any order are see a simple pattern. Only the stacking in 5ths (or 4ths) will reveal this pattern and it is related to the structure of the scale using tetrachords.
As for changing key, this construction makes it very easy. To move up a 5th from where you are all you have to do is augment the 4th of the key you are in. Example: Modulate from C to G, raise the F. To modulate down a 5th all you need to do is drop the 7th of the key you are in. Example: from C to F, drop the B to Bb. On an instrument like guitar this makes reading key changes very easy without moving position by several frets. Now you may wonder how this helps if a key modulates to the relative minor third above the current key. Perhaps it doesn't, but a lot classical music (and this is classical music theory) makes use of compatible keys in modulation (even a lot of modern music does too). So this is a common type of modulation and it helps to memorize it. In Jazz there are other types of modulations that make use of modern harmony ideas. A few that come to mind are the Coltrane and Parker cycles, that modulate by thirds instead of 5ths and 4ths. Another is Pat Martino's way of seeing multiple keys as connected by the diminished form.
If you abandon the major scale as the building block of melody you will lose the circle of 5ths connection, it may be replaced by another circle.
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
add a comment |
As the first answer indicates there is a specific pattern to the major scale. It is built from whole and half step intervals, specifically
(W - W - H) - W - (W - W - H)
The parentheses are placed around a smaller grouping of intervals called a tetrachord (a 4 note sequence). Notice that the same exact tetra chord appears twice in the construction of the major scale. This means that scales that differ by a 5th have a lot of common tones and are sometimes referred to in music theory as being compatible keys.
I disagree with some of the statements made in the previous answer. While it is somewhat true that the structure of the major scale is a coincidence the relation between different keys is not. You can't just stack them in any order are see a simple pattern. Only the stacking in 5ths (or 4ths) will reveal this pattern and it is related to the structure of the scale using tetrachords.
As for changing key, this construction makes it very easy. To move up a 5th from where you are all you have to do is augment the 4th of the key you are in. Example: Modulate from C to G, raise the F. To modulate down a 5th all you need to do is drop the 7th of the key you are in. Example: from C to F, drop the B to Bb. On an instrument like guitar this makes reading key changes very easy without moving position by several frets. Now you may wonder how this helps if a key modulates to the relative minor third above the current key. Perhaps it doesn't, but a lot classical music (and this is classical music theory) makes use of compatible keys in modulation (even a lot of modern music does too). So this is a common type of modulation and it helps to memorize it. In Jazz there are other types of modulations that make use of modern harmony ideas. A few that come to mind are the Coltrane and Parker cycles, that modulate by thirds instead of 5ths and 4ths. Another is Pat Martino's way of seeing multiple keys as connected by the diminished form.
If you abandon the major scale as the building block of melody you will lose the circle of 5ths connection, it may be replaced by another circle.
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
add a comment |
As the first answer indicates there is a specific pattern to the major scale. It is built from whole and half step intervals, specifically
(W - W - H) - W - (W - W - H)
The parentheses are placed around a smaller grouping of intervals called a tetrachord (a 4 note sequence). Notice that the same exact tetra chord appears twice in the construction of the major scale. This means that scales that differ by a 5th have a lot of common tones and are sometimes referred to in music theory as being compatible keys.
I disagree with some of the statements made in the previous answer. While it is somewhat true that the structure of the major scale is a coincidence the relation between different keys is not. You can't just stack them in any order are see a simple pattern. Only the stacking in 5ths (or 4ths) will reveal this pattern and it is related to the structure of the scale using tetrachords.
As for changing key, this construction makes it very easy. To move up a 5th from where you are all you have to do is augment the 4th of the key you are in. Example: Modulate from C to G, raise the F. To modulate down a 5th all you need to do is drop the 7th of the key you are in. Example: from C to F, drop the B to Bb. On an instrument like guitar this makes reading key changes very easy without moving position by several frets. Now you may wonder how this helps if a key modulates to the relative minor third above the current key. Perhaps it doesn't, but a lot classical music (and this is classical music theory) makes use of compatible keys in modulation (even a lot of modern music does too). So this is a common type of modulation and it helps to memorize it. In Jazz there are other types of modulations that make use of modern harmony ideas. A few that come to mind are the Coltrane and Parker cycles, that modulate by thirds instead of 5ths and 4ths. Another is Pat Martino's way of seeing multiple keys as connected by the diminished form.
If you abandon the major scale as the building block of melody you will lose the circle of 5ths connection, it may be replaced by another circle.
As the first answer indicates there is a specific pattern to the major scale. It is built from whole and half step intervals, specifically
(W - W - H) - W - (W - W - H)
The parentheses are placed around a smaller grouping of intervals called a tetrachord (a 4 note sequence). Notice that the same exact tetra chord appears twice in the construction of the major scale. This means that scales that differ by a 5th have a lot of common tones and are sometimes referred to in music theory as being compatible keys.
I disagree with some of the statements made in the previous answer. While it is somewhat true that the structure of the major scale is a coincidence the relation between different keys is not. You can't just stack them in any order are see a simple pattern. Only the stacking in 5ths (or 4ths) will reveal this pattern and it is related to the structure of the scale using tetrachords.
As for changing key, this construction makes it very easy. To move up a 5th from where you are all you have to do is augment the 4th of the key you are in. Example: Modulate from C to G, raise the F. To modulate down a 5th all you need to do is drop the 7th of the key you are in. Example: from C to F, drop the B to Bb. On an instrument like guitar this makes reading key changes very easy without moving position by several frets. Now you may wonder how this helps if a key modulates to the relative minor third above the current key. Perhaps it doesn't, but a lot classical music (and this is classical music theory) makes use of compatible keys in modulation (even a lot of modern music does too). So this is a common type of modulation and it helps to memorize it. In Jazz there are other types of modulations that make use of modern harmony ideas. A few that come to mind are the Coltrane and Parker cycles, that modulate by thirds instead of 5ths and 4ths. Another is Pat Martino's way of seeing multiple keys as connected by the diminished form.
If you abandon the major scale as the building block of melody you will lose the circle of 5ths connection, it may be replaced by another circle.
answered 8 hours ago
ggcgggcg
6,1125 silver badges25 bronze badges
6,1125 silver badges25 bronze badges
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
add a comment |
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
My answer does not use the word "coincidence." What statement do you disagree with?
– phoog
5 hours ago
add a comment |
Vityou is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Vityou is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Vityou is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Vityou is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmusic.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f86169%2fwhy-do-the-keys-in-the-circle-of-fifths-have-the-pattern-of-accidentals-that-the%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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