Tonality.

[Peter]

Who decided what letter would be allocated to each note?

I've often wondered why the note we call C isn't called A instead. It would seem sensible to start with the sharp-less and flat-less key, than with the one with three sharps!

I think a lot of European countries use the Tonic sol-fa system but in the UK we use the letters. If we tried to be logical and start with A as C as you suggest, then B (D) would have 2 sharps, C (E) would have 4, D (F) one flat - so this wouldn't work either since the increase in sharps or flats is always a 5th apart not a 2nd. The origins of our key naming are in singing and the modal scales - F major corresponding to the Lydian mode.

[Joy]

Isn't A used for tuning in the orchestra? (B-Flat, as I recall, was what we used to tune instruments in a concert band.) I wonder, then, if that is where the key A got its designation, if its the underlying foundational tone for tuning.

As far as I know A (above middle C) is used for tuning in orchestras however concert pitch may vary from ensemble to ensemble, and I think has varied widely over musical history.

[Sorrano]

I think a lot of European countries use the Tonic sol-fa system but in the UK we use the letters. If we tried to be logical and start with A as C as you suggest, then B (D) would have 2 sharps, C (E) would have 4, D (F) one flat - so this wouldn't work either since the increase in sharps or flats is always a 5th apart not a 2nd. The origins of our key naming are in singing and the modal scales - F major corresponding to the Lydian mode.

It seems to me that the scores I've looked at (German, French, and Italian) have used the letters in designating tonal centers, (A Major, B Minor, etc.). However, I think that the circle of 5ths (C, G, D, A, ....A-flat, E-flat, B-flat, F, C) and the entire chordal structure of traditional music is dependent on things being where they are as far as sharps and flats. I can't even imagine trying to scramble the system! It seems natural to me to use letters of the alphabet or numbers to designate the tonal key centers, based on the 440 that we consider A, as the first in the order of the scale. The key scales would probably have developed later as established orders of tonality with all the chordal relationships. Probably I am wrong, but it's an educated guess.

P.S. 440 hz was not always the standard, I see in the wikipedia that the standard has varied as widely from 430 to 466, but to our day it translates, basically, to the A above the Middle C on the keyboard.

[Sorrano]

As far as I know A (above middle C) is used for tuning in orchestras however concert pitch may vary from ensemble to ensemble, and I think has varied widely over musical history.

Yes, 440 hz is the current standard for tuning the orchestras, the A above middle C. In bands, because so many of the instruments are tuned to B-Flat, we used the B-flat above middle C to tune.

[Peter]

It seems to me that the scores I've looked at (German, French, and Italian) have used the letters in designating tonal centers, (A Major, B Minor, etc.). However, I think that the circle of 5ths (C, G, D, A, ....A-flat, E-flat, B-flat, F, C) and the entire chordal structure of traditional music is dependent on things being where they are as far as sharps and flats. I can't even imagine trying to scramble the system! It seems natural to me to use letters of the alphabet or numbers to designate the tonal key centers, based on the 440 that we consider A, as the first in the order of the scale. The key scales would probably have developed later as established orders of tonality with all the chordal relationships. Probably I am wrong, but it's an educated guess.

P.S. 440 hz was not always the standard, I see in the wikipedia that the standard has varied as widely from 430 to 466, but to our day it translates, basically, to the A above the Middle C on the keyboard.

I think this link is very helpful - the diatonic scale and perfect 5ths go back to Pythagoras. http://www.ramstrum.com/momilani/html/TUNING.HTM

[Joy]

My goodness, I had no idea how thorough and detailed this all was. Thanks for that, Peter, it was all very interesting.