TromboneChat

Just curious, I believe you only play a Bbb, which is an A, if I am correct. Why is there a single Bb in the beginning of the key signature of First Studies number 9 after the first double bar and then a Bbb at the end of the key signature? Is it conventional or is there another reason or purpose?

It's just required for that key. Cb has 6 flats, so Fb (which is never used) must have 7 flats.

Hello all.

I think that Cb major must have 7 flats ( all the notes in the scale have flats ) .
So , being that F major have already a flat (the Bb) , the key of Fb must have a double flat and 6 flats ; the key signature is : Bbb /Eb /Ab/Db/Gb /Cb/ Fb .
Is a kind of "hypothetical" key , however .

Regards
Giancarlo

I have no earthly idea how to play such a key, and if it's hypothetical, then why does it even exist? Or is there an instrument that can play in that odd key?

I'm asking because I really don't know the answer and it sounds like an interesting topic.

Hello again .

The key of Fb is basically the key of E , written with flats .
Every instrument can play it : Fb , Gb , Ab , Bbb, Cb , Db , Eb . Or : E , F# , G# , A , B , C#, D# ( the Key of E ; you can see this on a piano or keyboards ) .

However , accordind to same picky experts' thought , on a perfect instrument as trombone it is , the Fb should sound a little bit "lower" than a E , as a A# should be a little "higher" than a Bb ....Maybe just a kind of darkness or brigthness in the tones' colour ?

Regards again
Giancarlo

It’s just E Major respelled in flats. Simply play the previous 8 measures (the part that is in 3 flats or E-flat major) in 4 sharps and it is exactly the pitches that are written there.

This is all the result of bad editing. When transcribing the original trumpet key (for the section in question, it was in treble clef G-flat major = 6 flats), the editor just added two flats. However, that was not the wisest thing to do. It would have been best to opt for 4 sharps instead of 8 flats (the B double flat is the eighth flat).

As a conductor, I see this occasionally with orchestral pieces that are transcribed for wind ensemble or band. I remember seeing a piece that went into concert C# major for about 30-40 measures. The arranger/transcriber kept everyone in sharps up and down the score. That in itself was the huge mistake……writing it in D-flat major instead of C# would have eliminated ALL of the problems. For this particular section, the B-flat trumpets were in 9 sharps (F and C were double sharps) when they should have been in 3 flats. The poor E-flat saxophones were in 10 sharps (F, C and G were double sharps) when they should have been in 2 flats. I think I just rewrote that section for certain instruments in more user-friendly keys (flat keys) and we got through it fine.

Again, flipping extreme sharp key signatures to flats and extreme flat key signatures to sharps is something that the editors should look for. Fortunately, most modern music-writing software does this automatically now. Thus, it should be rare on more recent publications.

GGJazz wrote: ↑Tue Aug 15, 2023 7:06 pm Hello all.

I think that Cb major must have 7 flats ( all the notes in the scale have flats ) .
So , being that F major have already a flat (the Bb) , the key of Fb must have a double flat and 6 flats ; the key signature is : Bbb /Eb /Ab/Db/Gb /Cb/ Fb .
Is a kind of "hypothetical" key , however .

Regards
Giancarlo

Oops, left out a flat. Yes.

The question posed is why a Bb at first, then a Bbb at the end,?it seems redundant and confusing.

There are millions of mistakes in arbans. Which edition do you have?

The Randall revised from the Mantia.

I have the Mantia, it has mistakes all over. Even my Alessi/Bowman reprints many of them.

Double flats in a key signature is all kinds of wrong. Be best.

Arban's for trumpet went from 6 sharps to 6 flats. Transcribing it to a C instrument now puts it from 4 sharps to 8 flats. I've always railed at the lack of the 2 missing sharp keys (B and F#) which frequently show up in orchestral music and inclusion of two keys I should never see. I thought the Alessi-Bowman version had fixed this.

brassmedic wrote: ↑Wed Aug 16, 2023 2:31 am Double flats in a key signature is all kinds of wrong. Be best.

Well...............I've seen it legitimately, when playing in a European wind ensemble. Db minor I think.

Thanks for all the responses. My real question is shouldn’t the “theoretical” key of Fb be written with only a Bbb in the beginning, not at the end on top of the original Bb? I played in the British style brass bands of the Salvation Army, everything but bass bone is transposed treble clef. When I played an EEb tuba and would play in a group that only had bass clef tuba parts, it was easier for me to imagine it was treble clef and either add two sharks or take away two flats. So in the key of B, I would have to imagine the “theoretical” treble clef key of C#, etc.

timothy42b wrote: ↑Wed Aug 16, 2023 5:47 am

brassmedic wrote: ↑Wed Aug 16, 2023 2:31 am Double flats in a key signature is all kinds of wrong. Be best.

Well...............I've seen it legitimately, when playing in a European wind ensemble. Db minor I think.

What's wrong with C# minor?

The Ewald 4th brass quintet, 3rd movement is in F flat. The edition that I've seen has the B double flat at the start of the signature, but I have also seen it the other way (can't remember where).

fsgazda wrote: ↑Wed Aug 16, 2023 11:11 am The Ewald 4th brass quintet, 3rd movement is in F flat. The edition that I've seen has the B double flat at the start of the signature, but I have also seen it the other way (can't remember where).

Thanks

Trhtrbn wrote: ↑Wed Aug 16, 2023 7:25 am Thanks for all the responses. My real question is shouldn’t the “theoretical” key of Fb be written with only a Bbb in the beginning, not at the end on top of the original Bb?

It is a matter of style.

Perhaps when you were in high school and assigned write a proper research paper you were also admonished to follow a "style" guide such as (the book by) "Strunk", or more modernly, to follow "MLA" or "APA" style.

These guides detail the correct way to form a chapter heading or a citation of a newspaper article or an extended quote from a book.

Alas, their correct ways do not all agree with each other. Their differing priorities lead them to differing recommendations for the same task.

And so it is with your double flat.

It is a situation much like "courtesy" accidentals. Strictly speaking... they are unnecessary and I am aware of no international convention that requires their use. However, in practice... courtesy accidentals are usually deployed anyway.

Strictly speaking, the double flat at the start of the key signature should be adequate, but the double flat at the end is more likely to catch the player's attention, alerting them to the absurdity ahead, an absurdity so rare that a standard musical practice for it hasn't acquired a consensus.

I have seen both forms.

It is a matter of style.

Both bb at the beginning of the key signature or b at the beginning and bb added at the end are possible. One good reason for putting it at the end is that when you glance quickly at a key signature the most important information is what the last alteration is and how many there are — either one of these informations tell you immediately what key you're in. If one was to look quickly and see 7 alterations, or see that the last one is Fb, they would think Cb major or Ab minor. The Bbb at the end of the signature forces you to notice it and makes it completely clear that the key is Fb major or Db minor.

GGJazz wrote: ↑Tue Aug 15, 2023 7:34 pm
However , accordind to same picky experts' thought , on a perfect instrument as trombone it is , the Fb should sound a little bit "lower" than a E , as a A# should be a little "higher" than a Bb ....Maybe just a kind of darkness or brigthness in the tones' colour ?

Regards again
Giancarlo

This is getting off-topic and I don't wait to derail the thread, but this is something I've sometimes read here and often heard even high level professional musicians say, and heard mentioned even in university music theory courses, yet is completely incorrect. On a "perfect" instrument and in most non-equal tunings, sharps are typically lower, and flats higher, not the other way around. A# is lower than Bb. Fb is higher than than E.

One simple way to notice that, is sharps are much more likely to be major thirds (which need to be lowered to be pure), and flats much more likely to be minor thirds (which need to be raised). I wouldn't call that "picky", because those are the adjustments every trombonist makes everytime they play with others.

If you go to the extreme of designing a tuning system with as many pure major thirds as possible already built-into the system (i.e. without the musician adjusting for intonation), you end up with sharps that are almost a quarter-tone lower than their respective enharmonic flat.

Hello all .

I apologize for the off-topic .

I wrote the above thing reporting a though that I heard and discuss many times with very good musicians , of course without wanting to establish a certainty ( you may have noticed the question mark) .

Of course , I know about the adjustements we have to do on Major 3rd , minor 3rd , ecc .
I am not sure how this can explain the fact some people said sharps are lower , flats are higher , ecc (I am talking about key roots , not intervals : for example , the key of B , or the key of Cb : who is lower/ higher in pitch ? ) .

Probably Maximilien is right , but as he wrote , some high level musicians state a thing , some others a different one . So I do not think we have already an "absolute truth" about this kind of arguments .

Regards
Giancarlo

GGJazz wrote: ↑Mon Aug 21, 2023 7:25 am Hello all .

I apologize for the off-topic .

I wrote the above thing reporting a though that I heard and discuss many times with very good musicians , of course without wanting to establish a certainty ( you may have noticed the question mark) .

Of course , I know about the adjustements we have to do on Major 3rd , minor 3rd , ecc .
I am not sure how this can explain the fact some people said sharps are lower , flats are higher , ecc .

Probably Maximilien is right , but as he wrote , some high level musicians state a thing , some others a different one . So I do not think we have already an "absolute truth" about this kind of arguments .

Regards
Giancarlo

Well, no, no absolute truths, context matters a great deal. From what I'm able to tell, the idea of high sharps and low flats seems to be have been taught by generations of string players trained to be soloists (and of course most of them wind up not being soloists, but haven't learned other ways to see intonation and keep those same ideas in ensemble playing!). When a violinist plays a concerto with an orchestra, blending with the violin section is not only unimportant, it's probably actually undesirable. You want the soloist to stick out, have a different colour, and prioritize what sounds most expressive melodically, rather than being in tune harmonically. In that particular context, it makes sense to aim for Pythagorean tuning (about the only tuning system where sharps are higher than flats), and, for example, play leading tones high to emphasise the melodic direction instead of tuning them low to be in tune with the fundamental. Problem is, that is an awfully narrow context in which that idea is applicable, and in most contexts that most musicians of the western canon play most of the time, it is actually the opposite of what one should do. Yet that idea got spread way beyond solo playing and gets often repeated as a general truth, stripped of that very narrow context.

As soon as you seek to play harmonically in tune, then sharps will always tend to be lower and flats higher, whether you're playing in just intonation, historical or alternative temperaments, or adaptive just intonation over a roughly equal-tempered bassline or chord roots (which I would wager is roughly what most people do or should do most of the time).

Maybe we should have a separate thread for a conversation on these fascinating questions

Maximillien,

Thanks for the straight-forward explanation of intonation. While it makes sense to stand out from the orchestra, all too often it sounds out of tune, esp. octaves and thirds.

Back to topic.

Double-flats and double-sharps are confusing if we're not used to seeing them. They're even more confusing when there's a mistake in the edition. I've seen the key of Bbb written both ways in a key signature: with a double -flat initially and with a second flat at the end. I prefer the initial double-flat.

Like a lot of musical conventions, it seems like the preferred way of doing something changes with geography, history, schools, teachers, whether Jupiter is ascending... There's probably a doctoral dissertation out there that has these things all mapped out. I won't read it.

BGuttman wrote: I've always railed at the lack of the 2 missing sharp keys (B and F#) which frequently show up in orchestral music and inclusion of two keys I should never see.

I practice and teach 15 major keys, with enharmonics of B/Cb, C#/Db, and F#/Gb. Currently, I don't have the discipline, curiosity, or energy to seek out etudes and such with double-flats and sharps. I imagine I'll get caught flat-footed one of these days...

Kbiggs wrote: ↑Mon Aug 21, 2023 11:27 am I imagine I'll get caught flat-footed one of these days...

Ken,

You won't get caught off guard if you stay sharp!

Posaunus wrote: ↑Mon Aug 21, 2023 12:30 pm

Kbiggs wrote: ↑Mon Aug 21, 2023 11:27 am I imagine I'll get caught flat-footed one of these days...

Ken,

You won't get caught off guard if you stay sharp!

Keep your eyes open: if you don't C# you'll Bb.