5 ms·
ehm, I would disagree. The key signature tells you what key the piece is in, period. What the particular notes in that key do (their role, as you put it) is a
by valdiorn 14y ago
ehm, I would disagree. The key signature tells you what key the piece is in, period.
What the particular notes in that key do (their role, as you put it) is a property of that key.
- jofer 14y agoI believe he was referring to the "put my brain in G" comment. It's all about recognizing when to build tension and when to resolve tension. Yes, the roles that the notes play is defined by the key, but if you don't mentally make the switch, you'll often perform things poorly because you don't anticipate where things are going correctly. Or at least that's how it works for me, at any rate. Take anything I say with a grain of salt. I can't sight-read much at all.
- icarus_drowning 14y agoHow is "tell[ing] you what key the piece is in" different that defining tonic/dominant/leading tone relationships? Those relationships are the product of the whole/half step pattern that the key signature communicates. It isn't just important that G has 1 sharp, and it is F. That sharp actually defines the leading tone.
- colomon 14y agoThat's only if the tonic is G. I play tunes all the time with one sharp, but a tonic of D. (ie D mixolydian.)
- icarus_drowning 14y agoSure, but I'd argue that's because the key signature is wrong. The correct way to notate that is with either a modal key signature a la Bartok or notate it as D with a constant natural on the C, showing that the tonal center is D while clearly notating the departure from the traditional major scale.