Ray, the notes, and harmonies used, and their relationships to each other and a central tone determines the key. What makes those relationships "hierarchical" to each other has to do with how things are used - typical patterns, various emphases, etc.
A Key Sig as Tom pointed out is merely a notational device. It may correspond to the key, and very often does, but it doesn't necessarily have to. For example, virtually all classical music pieces will modulate to a different key. If a piece in C modulates to G, the key signature will remain C, and the F# will be written in. So the music will sound "in the key of G" even though the signature reads C. It's the addition of the F# and its replacing of the F natural in this case that changes the hierarchical relationship of the tones and harmonies (and of course the composer will create musical patterns that help to emphasize the key of G, such as ending melodies on a G note, and with a G harmony, etc.).
One common mistake theory students make is they look at a key - say 1 sharp, and assume it's in G. It MIGHT be in E minor - the only way to tell is to look and see if E minor and B Major chords are emphasized, with the inclusion of D#, as opposed to G and D chords.
So key signatures, ending notes/harmonies, and beginning notes/harmonies are good ways to narrow down what the key might be, but ultimately, it's the music itself that tells us the key.
Thanks. I should have made myself clearer. The "key" of a piece of music seems mostly to be the key of its opening bars. But not always. For example, the Tchaikovsky piano concerto in B flat minor. What are the rules? ray@iinet.com.au www.iinet.com.au/~ray
It would be nice if there were a simple set of rules, but there isn't.
First of all you have to understand what a key is, and that's actually a fairly complex idea. Then you have to realize that "key" means slightly different things to various groups of musicians within today's musical community. I.e. Someone concerned only with music from the Common Practice Period of classical music will have different notions of what "key" means compared to a modern jazz player. Yes, their notions of key are very closely related, but they also have significant differences.
A key is a particular type of tonal center. A musician can create the feeling of a tonal center in his listener's ear by manipulating his music such that a single tone emerges which is felt to be a place of rest, compared to the other tones used in the composition. Medieval musicians made music with tonal centers but they were not "keys". They were "modes". Keys and modes are related, but they are not the same things. Keys and modes both involve tonal centers, but they are both particular types of tonal centers, and both have certain conventions of common practice that need to be in play in order for the music to be defined as either "modal" or "Tonal". [Note: "Tonal" with a capital "T" means the maj/min key system.]
Essentially, as far as modern notions of key are concerned, if musical materials are manipulated such that a central tone emerges (which feels like a place of rest) as well as a major chord (maj triad, maj7, maj6, dom7, etc.) associated with that central tone, then the music is in a major key. If the musical materials are manipulated such that a central tone emerges (which feels like a place of rest) as well as a minor chord (min triad, min7, min6, min(maj7), etc.) associated with that central tone, then the music is in a minor key.
Note: In CPP classical music there would never be a Imaj7 or I6 (used as final chords) or I7 (ever) in major keys. I.e. The only acceptable version of I, as far as a final chord is concerned is a Imaj triad and a dom7 chord built on I would have been against all their "rules". In min keys the only acceptable final chord is a Im triad, and they would never have used Im7, or Im6 or Im(maj7) as chords in their own right, and especially not as final chords.
The ways that a musician might manipulate his musical materials in order to bring about this feeling of key are many. But the two most important ones are rhythmical emphasis (which may involve the notion of departure and return) of the notes in the tonic chord and familiar cadential formulas (which are also governed largely by rhythm) like V7-I and V7-Im cadences.
So, the key signature of a piece of music may tell you exactly what key the music itself is in, or it may not. It may tell you what key the 1st 16 bars of music in, but may not tell you what the new key is at bar 17. Etc.
If the music you're looking at is indeed Tonal music (but lots of modern music that is not specifically atonal is not really Tonal btw), then the surest way (usually) to thresh out any operative key(s) is to look for any dom7 chords in the piece. Very often (but not always) the dom7 chord will be functioning as V7 in the primary key, in a secondary key, or in the key-of-the-moment. If the dom7 chords are also part of V7-I and/or V7-Im progressions then that usually cinches the deal.
If the music you are looking at is just a monophonic melody (i.e. no chords) then you need to look for melody lines that appear to be outlining V7-I or V7-Im cadences.
But the final arbiter is always how the music feels. If the key signature is no sharps or no flats but Dm feels like home then it's not really the "key of C". It's not necessarily really "in D dorian" either, if you're the type of guy who has studied Medieval modal music, although it may well be. It might be (probably is) one of these modern jazz-type modal pieces that most jazz musicians would say is "in D dorian". But I prefer to say "it's in D minor with a dorian coloring" to avoid the arguments with the medieval modal guys.
Hope that helps rather than confuses, but that's the way it is. I.e. Being able to tell the key is not really all that simple in a lot of cases. But then again, quite often it is as simple as just observing the dom7 chords and if and how they resolve.
If I understand you correctly, the key of a work is often (but not always) the key of the opening bars. It is almost always the primary key of the first and last movements, and virtually always the key the piece ends in.
The only "rule" I use for determining this is what I hear over the course of the work.
If I understand you correctly, the key of a work is often (but not always)
the key of the opening bars. It is almost always the primary key of the
first and last movements, and virtually always the key the piece ends in.
The only "rule" I use for determining this is what I hear over the course
of the work.
And a slight addendum: The concept that movements would be related by key is something that evolved over time - in the Baroque, movements in a suite might have totally unrelated keys, so we don't talk about the key as a whole (just for individual movements). In the classical period, composers started more and more to make the keys for each movement related, so that the keys might go C-G-C for the three movements, and we say that the work itself is in C. Further, on to Beethoven, we may say a piece like the Ninth is in "D minor" even though it ends in D Major.
But I should also point out that sometimes the word "in X" are used to simply distinguish two similar works. For example, if Haydn wrote 104 or so symphonies, and only one is in Db Major, we might say "the Db Major Symphony" or "Symphony in Db Major" to differentiate between it and the other symphonies. It may only be the first movement in that case that we use to choose the key we "speak".
The key signature is the determinant, and the only one.
The problem with the question "What key is this tune *really* in?" is that key is two things, not one.
The tonality is the tone center or key note.
The mode is the system by which the other notes are determined on the basis of the tonality.
For example, in the key of C Major, the tonality is C and the mode is Major. The step scheme of major mode is wwhwwwh, starting with C.
Until about a century ago, there were three major and three minor modes. The loss of this convention has led to the increased use of Greek names for the modes, which is basically a bonehead stupid idea, and the even dumber one of adding the late medieval theorist Glarean's bogus "locrian" mode, which is not Greek at all and never was.
Ever since the invention of the sharp and the flat, it has been perfectly possible and most practical to stick with one major and and one minor mode.
So the tonality is determined by reading and listening, but it is usually obvious. The mode is a practical decision of whether major or minor or one of the others requires the least accidentals and is easiest for others to read and understand.
Many pieces begin and end with different tonalities.
In late medieval times, when they began to write harmony, every voice was considered to be in its own mode with its own tonality. So much for what key a piece is *really* in. daveA
On May 4, 9:27?am, Ray Johnstone <r...@iinet.com.au> wrote:
What determines the "key" of a work?
r...@iinet.com.auwww.iinet.com.au/~ray
The key signature, the ending note and chord, the chords throughout
the music being from the family of chords for the key.
Not necessarily. Music is aural but a key signature is a notational
(visual) device...
Indeed. And as a counter-example one should note that French Horn parts were traditionally written with no key signature, but that doesn't mean that all pieces played by French Horns are in the same key
Jack Campin - bogus address 9 May 2008 12:33:23 [ permanent link ]
your opening statement says that this signature of no sharps or flats
determines the key. You have chosen Cmaj as an example and that is
certainly a possibility. But that same key signature could also be
A min as well as D dorian, E phrygian,
Those are not keys. Keys are restricted to major and minor modes only.
"D Dorian" is not ambiguous but neither is it a key. daveA
What positive benefit would result from restricting usage in the way you advocate?
==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === <http://www.campin.me.uk> ==== Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557 CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts
Jack Campin - bogus address 9 May 2008 17:12:55 [ permanent link ]
your opening statement says that this signature of no sharps or
flats determines the key. You have chosen Cmaj as an example and
that is certainly a possibility. But that same key signature could
also be A min as well as D dorian, E phrygian,
Those are not keys. Keys are restricted to major and minor modes only.
"D Dorian" is not ambiguous but neither is it a key. daveA
What positive benefit would result from restricting usage in the way you
advocate?
Fewer of these stupid arguments. The "restriction" has been there ever
since they idea of keys was adopted. Not my idea. daveA
That is, nothing. You don't have any idea why somebody would want to use a designation like "D dorian", so you want to stop them doing it without any attempt to listen to their requirements.
I believe you sell some sort of educational product, but whatever it is, you just persuaded me not to bother finding out anything more about it. You're obviously a crap teacher.
==== j a c k at c a m p i n . m e . u k === <http://www.campin.me.uk> ==== Jack Campin, 11 Third St, Newtongrange EH22 4PU, Scotland == mob 07800 739 557 CD-ROMs and free stuff: Scottish music, food intolerance, and Mac logic fonts
The key signature is the determinant, and the only one.
What if the music was never written down in standard notation? Why can't a piece of music like that, that clearly adheres to the conventions of the maj/min key system, not have its key determined just because no-one ever transcribed the music in standard notation?
The problem with the question "What key is this tune *really*
in?" is that key is two things, not one.
The tonality is the tone center or key note.
The mode is the system by which the other notes are determined
on the basis of the tonality.
If the music is truly key-based music, and not modal music, or some other form of music; and if the chord associated with the "key note" (usually called a "tonic" in key-based music, btw, in my experience) is a major chord, then "mode" of the key is major. If the chord associated with the tonic is a minor chord, the the "mode" of the key is minor.
Coming from a jazz theory background, where we use the word "mode" in somewhat different ways than folks from the classical community, I've never liked the idea of terms like "major mode" to describe a major key and/or "minor mode" to describe a minor key (although I understand what people mean when they use these terms). Any clear meaning of the word "mode" just gets all jumbled up in all the various tributaries of common usage of the word. But that's just me, I suppose.
What jazz players often refer to as "modes" should probably be re-named to something like (but hopefully shorter in length): "alternate tonal centers that are not really keys and are not really classical modes either". Still, most of us throw the word "mode" around with each other, blissfully unaware of any problems with our usage of the word.
• A key is a type of tonal center that adheres to certain notions of key-based music which were propagated during the Common Practice Period of classical music. If the music actually adheres to these conventions, then the key will be either in the "major mode" or the "minor mode". • There is a type of tonal center involved in medieval modal music too, but it is not a "key" and that music actually pre-dates any notions of key-based music. • There is also a type of tonal center that is active in a "modal" jazz tune like So What that is neither a "key" or a "mode" (according to classical notions of modal music). • Jazz musicians have also extended the idea of "alternate tonal centers that are not really keys and are not really classical modes either" to include non-diatonic scales as well. Eg. It's not uncommon in modern jazz to have extended vamps over the 2nd "mode" of the melodic minor scale, aka the dorian b2 scale. D13sus4(b9) / / / |repeat ad infinitum.
At any rate, a "key" comes about by means of the hierarchical relationship that a composer decides to use when he manipulates the tones of the diatonic scale (including the ways in which he uses or does not use chromatic notes). It is possible for a piece of music to be based the Ionian mode without the music actually being in a "major key" if the musical materials do not follow the conventions of Tonality. I.e. In order for the pitch collection known as the diatonic scale to be used to make music that is in a "major key" those notes note have to be treated "stylistically" in very particular ways, adhering to very particular conventions. If those conventions are absent, the music is not in a "major key".
For example, in the key of C Major, the tonality is C and the mode
is Major. The step scheme of major mode is wwhwwwh, starting with
C.
Until about a century ago, there were three major and three minor
modes.
And what do we have now that is different?
The loss of this convention
I don't recall losing this convention. Must have missed something.
has led to the increased use
of Greek names for the modes,
How were they named prior to 100 years ago?
which is basically a bonehead stupid
idea, and the even dumber one of adding the late medieval theorist
Glarean's bogus "locrian" mode, which is not Greek at all and never
was.
Why is the locrian mode "bogus"?
Ever since the invention of the sharp and the flat, it has been
perfectly possible and most practical to stick with one major and
and one minor mode.
It's also been possible to make all sorts of music that is not key-based yet is not explicitly atonal either.
So the tonality is determined by reading and listening,
Right. But you have to know what to listen for. You haven't told us what to listen for.
but it
is usually obvious.
If only that were true. I've been in huge arguments with people about the key of Sweet Home Alabama, a simple blues based vamp. D / C / |G / / / |repeat ad infinitum On the surface, to many many people, it looks like the key of G major. But G, and the Gmaj chord is not the tonal center. The tonal center is D and the chord associated with that tonal center is Dmaj. But it's not "the key of D major". It's an "alternate tonal center" based on D mixolydian and/or a D blues tonality.
Lots of very simple seeming modern popular music is like that. I.e. The key is often not obvious.
The mode is a practical decision of whether
major or minor or one of the others requires the least accidentals
and is easiest for others to read and understand.
What you're referring to in the above sentence as "mode" appears to be a bad choice of words to me. What you're describing are the reasons why a writer would choose one key signature over another. Did you mean to write something like this instead: "The choice of key signature is a practical decision which is based on writing the music with the least number of accidentals so as to make the music easiest for others to read and to understand."
I.e. The mode is not decided when the writer decides what key signature to use. The mode is decided when he composes the music, whether he writes it down in standard notation or not.
In late medieval times, when they began to write harmony, every voice was
considered to be in its own mode with its own tonality.
That doesn't make any sense! You do know that those statement came from
your post. You stated that the tonality is C as it is the keynote and
that the mode is major. Well, with the same key signature, the mode may
be major, minor, dorian, phrygian etc.. Those statements that you made
follow the exact procedure that Groves online outlines for the keynote.
But you then ascribe your own preferences of only referring to the Major
and minor as a key. True, most of the time, the key falls into the major
or minor category, but that doesn't make the statement that key can only
be defined as major or minor modes.
You can take your example and substitute Dorian Mode and whwwwhw and the
statement is equally true and as a bonus, it is useful for accounting
for a large part of the remaining tonal music.
Keys are either major or minor mode. You can get the other modes, which are not keys, with one sharp or one flat. It is not necessary to "account" for anything.
It is more practical to say that something is written in C major but it is dorian mode, meaning that it's d-d'. Otherwise, "C dorian" would be C minor with the 6th degree accidentally sharped.
Sure it is. It ends on the dominant. Not at all uncommon. Look at "Dark as the Dungeon". If clearly in C, ends on G. That's just one way of "accounting" for it. daveA
