Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by seertaak 3047 days ago
Wow -- it's amazing how bad the answers are on stackoverflow.

The first reason why there are both sharps and flats is historical. Equal tempering produces the same pitch for, say, D# and Eb. The same was, however, not true for some of the historical tunings prevalent at the time the very notation became standard.

For more information about this, you can read "How Equal Temperament Destroyed Harmony (and Why you should care)". It explains, for example, that Bach's Wohltemperierte Klavier did not, in fact, refer to the equal tempering, but to a different tempering (whose details I can't exactly recall), but I seem to remember something about slightly less sharp thirds. In fact to summarize that book in a sentence -- he doesn't like overly sharp thirds... and sevenths.

There was a veritable zoo of different tunings, and each involved a different set of compromises. So one produced lovely chords as long as you stayed in root position, whereas another produced slightly less faithful thirds but instead allowed you to play secondary dominants of the relative minor, and so on.

Anyway, the point is that there was a time when playing a third up, and playing a sixth down were not the same thing (modulo an octave), and that's why they used different symbols. But we now use equal temperament, which forces that to be true, to hell with those overly sharp thirds (as compared to natural overtone series).

The second reason has to do with the fact that notes are not really useful on their own. They're useful when considered in relation to other notes. In other words, we're really interested in intervals, rather than individual notes. And when considering intervals, it's customary to begin at a certain note, say, C, and count our way towards some destination note. Once you start doing that, you arrive very naturally at the "sharp" and "flat" formulations.

2 comments

Music teacher with degree here, the Stack Overflow answers are correct as far as modern usage goes, with respect to common-practise tonal harmony at the very least. Your second reason is just an alternative way of phrasing all of the answers that cite F major as an example. Yes, in non-equal temperaments they can be different pitches, but I highly doubt that someone asking the difference between sharps and flats is concerned with niche subsets of early music and contemporary classical.
Thanks for your contribution -- I must admit I'm not a teacher, and my degree is in another subject. I also acknowledge that the second part of my answer is a weasel exit clause which uses the same reasoning as the stackoverflow answers ;)

> but I highly doubt that someone asking the difference between sharps and flats is concerned with niche subsets of early music and contemporary classical

Well, the OP's question has the sentence: "If we can get away with just having sharps (aka black notes on a piano) then why complicate things and add flats as well?"

To my mind, this means the OP understands the idea of enharmonic equivalents, and wants to know why it wasn't simply decreed that, e.g., "sharps it shall be". To give an analogy from mathematics, it doesn't matter whether we add 0.5 to 1 or subtract 0.5 from 2, we still call it 1.5, not "two minus point 5" or "one and point five". (Notwithstanding those crazy French and Germans!)

So I'm curious, given your background, what your response to this latter question would be. Or to phrase it differently: if music notation were invented in 2018, would it look substantially the same?

Why is the top comment on HN a wrong answer?

Music notation existed before keyboards did, or other tempered instruments.