Why do E♯ and F♮ not sound the same (according to Wikipedia)?
I was just reading the Wikipedia page on the note F (as I do every evening) and was confused by this part where it says that even though F♮ and E♯ are enharmonic they “do not sound the same”:
E♯ is a common enharmonic equivalent of F, but is not regarded as the same note. E♯ is commonly found before F♯ in the same measure in pieces where F♯ is in the key signature, in order to represent a diatonic, rather than a chromatic semitone; writing an F♮ with a following F♯ is regarded as a chromatic alteration of one scale degree (E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way).
What does the author of this sentence mean? Do they not by definition sound the same?
notation alternative-tunings intonation enharmonics
New contributor
add a comment |
I was just reading the Wikipedia page on the note F (as I do every evening) and was confused by this part where it says that even though F♮ and E♯ are enharmonic they “do not sound the same”:
E♯ is a common enharmonic equivalent of F, but is not regarded as the same note. E♯ is commonly found before F♯ in the same measure in pieces where F♯ is in the key signature, in order to represent a diatonic, rather than a chromatic semitone; writing an F♮ with a following F♯ is regarded as a chromatic alteration of one scale degree (E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way).
What does the author of this sentence mean? Do they not by definition sound the same?
notation alternative-tunings intonation enharmonics
New contributor
add a comment |
I was just reading the Wikipedia page on the note F (as I do every evening) and was confused by this part where it says that even though F♮ and E♯ are enharmonic they “do not sound the same”:
E♯ is a common enharmonic equivalent of F, but is not regarded as the same note. E♯ is commonly found before F♯ in the same measure in pieces where F♯ is in the key signature, in order to represent a diatonic, rather than a chromatic semitone; writing an F♮ with a following F♯ is regarded as a chromatic alteration of one scale degree (E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way).
What does the author of this sentence mean? Do they not by definition sound the same?
notation alternative-tunings intonation enharmonics
New contributor
I was just reading the Wikipedia page on the note F (as I do every evening) and was confused by this part where it says that even though F♮ and E♯ are enharmonic they “do not sound the same”:
E♯ is a common enharmonic equivalent of F, but is not regarded as the same note. E♯ is commonly found before F♯ in the same measure in pieces where F♯ is in the key signature, in order to represent a diatonic, rather than a chromatic semitone; writing an F♮ with a following F♯ is regarded as a chromatic alteration of one scale degree (E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way).
What does the author of this sentence mean? Do they not by definition sound the same?
notation alternative-tunings intonation enharmonics
notation alternative-tunings intonation enharmonics
New contributor
New contributor
edited 18 mins ago
Lightness Races in Orbit
20917
20917
New contributor
asked yesterday
Aran G
8616
8616
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
The thing is that the "some tunings that define the notes in that way" in the Wikipedia quote include the most common tuning today, 12-tone equal temperament (12-TET). So, E# and F natural do usually sound the same.
...But not always. Change the tuning system and you can easily have an E# and an F natural that sound slightly different. Just intonation will likely do it, since its perfect fifths are slightly larger than 12-TET's. (Just intonation is a mess the more of the chromatic scale you want to tune with it.)
1
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
1
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
6
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
2
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
I think this particular phrasing is rather confusing, as it is trying to talk about two concepts at the same time: enharmonic equivalence, and intonation.
The concept of intonation (and temperament, which relates to systems of intonation) deals with the fact that even given a certain reference pitch (such as A4=440), there is no one absolutely correct frequency for the other notes to be sounded at. The exact frequencies of notes might be selected to make a certain key sound harmonious, or to be a good compromise that allows a range of keys to sound good (such as 12-tone equal temperament).
On instruments that allow the intonation to be varied by the player (such as fretless stringed instruments), the very same note - even with the same name - might be sounded at a slightly different pitch to make it sound better in a certain chord or melodic phrase. So even two notes notated as E4 might not be at the same pitch; following the logic in the quote from Wikipedia, one could go so far as to say "E and E do not sound the same".
So when the article says "E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way", the fact that the note might be called both 'E♯' and 'F♮' is a little bit of a red herring; a note's intonation might vary regardless of variations in how it is named. Nevertheless, there might be some contexts in which the note notated 'F♮' tends towards one pitch, and 'E#' tends towards another.
add a comment |
Some tunings are designed so that, whenever possible, two notes which are separated by a perfect fifth will have a precise 3:2 frequency ratio.
If that 3:2 relationship holds between A#->E#, then D#->A#, G#->D#, C#->G#, F#->C#, and B->F#, that would suggest that the frequency ratio between B and the E# above it would be 729:512 (about 1.42).
On the other hand, if that 3:2 relationship holds between F and C, C and G, G and D, D and A, A and E, and E and B, then the frequency relationship between the B and the F above it would be 1024:729 (about 1.40).
It would be possible for all the 3:2 relationships to hold if E# and F were recognized as different notes with slightly different pitches, but if E# and F are the same pitch then at least one of the perfect-fifths relationships much involve something other than a perfect 3:2 frequency ratio.
add a comment |
Totally disagree. This paragraph is not about whether the two notes sound the same melodically, but whether they sound the same harmonically. Depending on key and counterpoint there are times when it is clearer to label a note Fnatural instead of Esharp. This also leads to double flats, double sharps, etc. The end result is purely academic, but makes compositional intent clearer to people who are well versed on the academics. The big hint here are the terms diatonic, chromatic, and key signature which have little or no meaning in atonal music.
New contributor
1
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 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
});
}
});
Aran G 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%2f77929%2fwhy-do-e%25e2%2599%25af-and-f-not-sound-the-same-according-to-wikipedia%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
The thing is that the "some tunings that define the notes in that way" in the Wikipedia quote include the most common tuning today, 12-tone equal temperament (12-TET). So, E# and F natural do usually sound the same.
...But not always. Change the tuning system and you can easily have an E# and an F natural that sound slightly different. Just intonation will likely do it, since its perfect fifths are slightly larger than 12-TET's. (Just intonation is a mess the more of the chromatic scale you want to tune with it.)
1
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
1
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
6
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
2
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
The thing is that the "some tunings that define the notes in that way" in the Wikipedia quote include the most common tuning today, 12-tone equal temperament (12-TET). So, E# and F natural do usually sound the same.
...But not always. Change the tuning system and you can easily have an E# and an F natural that sound slightly different. Just intonation will likely do it, since its perfect fifths are slightly larger than 12-TET's. (Just intonation is a mess the more of the chromatic scale you want to tune with it.)
1
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
1
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
6
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
2
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
The thing is that the "some tunings that define the notes in that way" in the Wikipedia quote include the most common tuning today, 12-tone equal temperament (12-TET). So, E# and F natural do usually sound the same.
...But not always. Change the tuning system and you can easily have an E# and an F natural that sound slightly different. Just intonation will likely do it, since its perfect fifths are slightly larger than 12-TET's. (Just intonation is a mess the more of the chromatic scale you want to tune with it.)
The thing is that the "some tunings that define the notes in that way" in the Wikipedia quote include the most common tuning today, 12-tone equal temperament (12-TET). So, E# and F natural do usually sound the same.
...But not always. Change the tuning system and you can easily have an E# and an F natural that sound slightly different. Just intonation will likely do it, since its perfect fifths are slightly larger than 12-TET's. (Just intonation is a mess the more of the chromatic scale you want to tune with it.)
answered yesterday
Dekkadeci
4,36621118
4,36621118
1
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
1
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
6
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
2
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
1
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
1
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
6
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
2
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
1
1
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
So do you mean that it’s referring to microtonal music when it says some tunings?
– Aran G
yesterday
1
1
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
@AranG It's referring to microtonal music, and also the different tunings if they don't count as microtonal.
– Dekkadeci
yesterday
6
6
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
If you have a system that defines E# and F as different frequencies, then that is not a 12-tone system. In any 12-tone system, E# and F are the same pitch class. What can happen is that you can change your tuning system on the fly if the instrument allows tuning adjustments. But "E# and F do not sound the same" is misleading, if not outright incorrect.
– MattPutnam
yesterday
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
@MattPutnam - in just tuning, for example, there are 12 notes, I think, so isn't that a 12-tone system? 12tet is different, as it's a compromise, and there E#=F every time.
– Tim
20 hours ago
2
2
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
@Dekkadeci - just intonation isn't mictotonal. It merely uses all the notes with slightly different tunings. Microtonal splits notes we are used to into more parts. I guess you may mean 'microtonal' to encompass say, an unfretted instrument that can make E# in one key slightly different from F in another?
– Tim
20 hours ago
|
show 1 more comment
I think this particular phrasing is rather confusing, as it is trying to talk about two concepts at the same time: enharmonic equivalence, and intonation.
The concept of intonation (and temperament, which relates to systems of intonation) deals with the fact that even given a certain reference pitch (such as A4=440), there is no one absolutely correct frequency for the other notes to be sounded at. The exact frequencies of notes might be selected to make a certain key sound harmonious, or to be a good compromise that allows a range of keys to sound good (such as 12-tone equal temperament).
On instruments that allow the intonation to be varied by the player (such as fretless stringed instruments), the very same note - even with the same name - might be sounded at a slightly different pitch to make it sound better in a certain chord or melodic phrase. So even two notes notated as E4 might not be at the same pitch; following the logic in the quote from Wikipedia, one could go so far as to say "E and E do not sound the same".
So when the article says "E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way", the fact that the note might be called both 'E♯' and 'F♮' is a little bit of a red herring; a note's intonation might vary regardless of variations in how it is named. Nevertheless, there might be some contexts in which the note notated 'F♮' tends towards one pitch, and 'E#' tends towards another.
add a comment |
I think this particular phrasing is rather confusing, as it is trying to talk about two concepts at the same time: enharmonic equivalence, and intonation.
The concept of intonation (and temperament, which relates to systems of intonation) deals with the fact that even given a certain reference pitch (such as A4=440), there is no one absolutely correct frequency for the other notes to be sounded at. The exact frequencies of notes might be selected to make a certain key sound harmonious, or to be a good compromise that allows a range of keys to sound good (such as 12-tone equal temperament).
On instruments that allow the intonation to be varied by the player (such as fretless stringed instruments), the very same note - even with the same name - might be sounded at a slightly different pitch to make it sound better in a certain chord or melodic phrase. So even two notes notated as E4 might not be at the same pitch; following the logic in the quote from Wikipedia, one could go so far as to say "E and E do not sound the same".
So when the article says "E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way", the fact that the note might be called both 'E♯' and 'F♮' is a little bit of a red herring; a note's intonation might vary regardless of variations in how it is named. Nevertheless, there might be some contexts in which the note notated 'F♮' tends towards one pitch, and 'E#' tends towards another.
add a comment |
I think this particular phrasing is rather confusing, as it is trying to talk about two concepts at the same time: enharmonic equivalence, and intonation.
The concept of intonation (and temperament, which relates to systems of intonation) deals with the fact that even given a certain reference pitch (such as A4=440), there is no one absolutely correct frequency for the other notes to be sounded at. The exact frequencies of notes might be selected to make a certain key sound harmonious, or to be a good compromise that allows a range of keys to sound good (such as 12-tone equal temperament).
On instruments that allow the intonation to be varied by the player (such as fretless stringed instruments), the very same note - even with the same name - might be sounded at a slightly different pitch to make it sound better in a certain chord or melodic phrase. So even two notes notated as E4 might not be at the same pitch; following the logic in the quote from Wikipedia, one could go so far as to say "E and E do not sound the same".
So when the article says "E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way", the fact that the note might be called both 'E♯' and 'F♮' is a little bit of a red herring; a note's intonation might vary regardless of variations in how it is named. Nevertheless, there might be some contexts in which the note notated 'F♮' tends towards one pitch, and 'E#' tends towards another.
I think this particular phrasing is rather confusing, as it is trying to talk about two concepts at the same time: enharmonic equivalence, and intonation.
The concept of intonation (and temperament, which relates to systems of intonation) deals with the fact that even given a certain reference pitch (such as A4=440), there is no one absolutely correct frequency for the other notes to be sounded at. The exact frequencies of notes might be selected to make a certain key sound harmonious, or to be a good compromise that allows a range of keys to sound good (such as 12-tone equal temperament).
On instruments that allow the intonation to be varied by the player (such as fretless stringed instruments), the very same note - even with the same name - might be sounded at a slightly different pitch to make it sound better in a certain chord or melodic phrase. So even two notes notated as E4 might not be at the same pitch; following the logic in the quote from Wikipedia, one could go so far as to say "E and E do not sound the same".
So when the article says "E♯ and F♮ do not sound the same, except in some tunings that define the notes in that way", the fact that the note might be called both 'E♯' and 'F♮' is a little bit of a red herring; a note's intonation might vary regardless of variations in how it is named. Nevertheless, there might be some contexts in which the note notated 'F♮' tends towards one pitch, and 'E#' tends towards another.
edited yesterday
answered yesterday
topo morto
23k24099
23k24099
add a comment |
add a comment |
Some tunings are designed so that, whenever possible, two notes which are separated by a perfect fifth will have a precise 3:2 frequency ratio.
If that 3:2 relationship holds between A#->E#, then D#->A#, G#->D#, C#->G#, F#->C#, and B->F#, that would suggest that the frequency ratio between B and the E# above it would be 729:512 (about 1.42).
On the other hand, if that 3:2 relationship holds between F and C, C and G, G and D, D and A, A and E, and E and B, then the frequency relationship between the B and the F above it would be 1024:729 (about 1.40).
It would be possible for all the 3:2 relationships to hold if E# and F were recognized as different notes with slightly different pitches, but if E# and F are the same pitch then at least one of the perfect-fifths relationships much involve something other than a perfect 3:2 frequency ratio.
add a comment |
Some tunings are designed so that, whenever possible, two notes which are separated by a perfect fifth will have a precise 3:2 frequency ratio.
If that 3:2 relationship holds between A#->E#, then D#->A#, G#->D#, C#->G#, F#->C#, and B->F#, that would suggest that the frequency ratio between B and the E# above it would be 729:512 (about 1.42).
On the other hand, if that 3:2 relationship holds between F and C, C and G, G and D, D and A, A and E, and E and B, then the frequency relationship between the B and the F above it would be 1024:729 (about 1.40).
It would be possible for all the 3:2 relationships to hold if E# and F were recognized as different notes with slightly different pitches, but if E# and F are the same pitch then at least one of the perfect-fifths relationships much involve something other than a perfect 3:2 frequency ratio.
add a comment |
Some tunings are designed so that, whenever possible, two notes which are separated by a perfect fifth will have a precise 3:2 frequency ratio.
If that 3:2 relationship holds between A#->E#, then D#->A#, G#->D#, C#->G#, F#->C#, and B->F#, that would suggest that the frequency ratio between B and the E# above it would be 729:512 (about 1.42).
On the other hand, if that 3:2 relationship holds between F and C, C and G, G and D, D and A, A and E, and E and B, then the frequency relationship between the B and the F above it would be 1024:729 (about 1.40).
It would be possible for all the 3:2 relationships to hold if E# and F were recognized as different notes with slightly different pitches, but if E# and F are the same pitch then at least one of the perfect-fifths relationships much involve something other than a perfect 3:2 frequency ratio.
Some tunings are designed so that, whenever possible, two notes which are separated by a perfect fifth will have a precise 3:2 frequency ratio.
If that 3:2 relationship holds between A#->E#, then D#->A#, G#->D#, C#->G#, F#->C#, and B->F#, that would suggest that the frequency ratio between B and the E# above it would be 729:512 (about 1.42).
On the other hand, if that 3:2 relationship holds between F and C, C and G, G and D, D and A, A and E, and E and B, then the frequency relationship between the B and the F above it would be 1024:729 (about 1.40).
It would be possible for all the 3:2 relationships to hold if E# and F were recognized as different notes with slightly different pitches, but if E# and F are the same pitch then at least one of the perfect-fifths relationships much involve something other than a perfect 3:2 frequency ratio.
edited 8 hours ago
guntbert
1214
1214
answered 9 hours ago
supercat
2,300915
2,300915
add a comment |
add a comment |
Totally disagree. This paragraph is not about whether the two notes sound the same melodically, but whether they sound the same harmonically. Depending on key and counterpoint there are times when it is clearer to label a note Fnatural instead of Esharp. This also leads to double flats, double sharps, etc. The end result is purely academic, but makes compositional intent clearer to people who are well versed on the academics. The big hint here are the terms diatonic, chromatic, and key signature which have little or no meaning in atonal music.
New contributor
1
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Totally disagree. This paragraph is not about whether the two notes sound the same melodically, but whether they sound the same harmonically. Depending on key and counterpoint there are times when it is clearer to label a note Fnatural instead of Esharp. This also leads to double flats, double sharps, etc. The end result is purely academic, but makes compositional intent clearer to people who are well versed on the academics. The big hint here are the terms diatonic, chromatic, and key signature which have little or no meaning in atonal music.
New contributor
1
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Totally disagree. This paragraph is not about whether the two notes sound the same melodically, but whether they sound the same harmonically. Depending on key and counterpoint there are times when it is clearer to label a note Fnatural instead of Esharp. This also leads to double flats, double sharps, etc. The end result is purely academic, but makes compositional intent clearer to people who are well versed on the academics. The big hint here are the terms diatonic, chromatic, and key signature which have little or no meaning in atonal music.
New contributor
Totally disagree. This paragraph is not about whether the two notes sound the same melodically, but whether they sound the same harmonically. Depending on key and counterpoint there are times when it is clearer to label a note Fnatural instead of Esharp. This also leads to double flats, double sharps, etc. The end result is purely academic, but makes compositional intent clearer to people who are well versed on the academics. The big hint here are the terms diatonic, chromatic, and key signature which have little or no meaning in atonal music.
New contributor
New contributor
answered 15 hours ago
Garrett Berneche
1
1
New contributor
New contributor
1
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
add a comment |
1
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
1
1
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
I think you missed the term "chromatic semitone" in the quote, along with the implied "diatonic semitone". According to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semitone at the time of this comment, the two semitone types may be of different sizes.
– Dekkadeci
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
Not at all. In fact it is key to my argument. Every key has a single diatonic note of every letter A-G. You can’t have Fnatural and Fsharp both as diatonic notes in the same key. So it even though we typically think of Esharp as Fnatural (an artifact of basing our musical language around the the key of C) it is not always the correct way to name it. They key of Fsharp has an Esharp as it’s 7th degree, not F.
– Garrett Berneche
14 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
It is correct to say that on an instrument perfectly tuned to the key of Fsharp compared to a instrument that is perfectly tuned to the key of Fnatural the (for the sake of argument we will assume a keyboard instrument) the F key would not produce the same pitch on both instruments, but you would not use the term semitone to describe the difference.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
If the author did indeed mean to speak of microtonal differences then they changed definitions and subjects in the middle of a paragraph. Bad form! I have to assume, based on syntax, they did not mean to do any such thing.
– Garrett Berneche
12 hours ago
add a comment |
Aran G is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Aran G is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Aran G is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Aran G 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.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- 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%2f77929%2fwhy-do-e%25e2%2599%25af-and-f-not-sound-the-same-according-to-wikipedia%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