APPLIED TO CERTAIN TERMS IN MU¬ 
 SICAL THEORY THAT SEEM TO THE 
 WRITER TO BE INCORRECTLY USED 
 OR DEFINED. 
 
 BY 
 
 GEO. F. ROOT. 
 
 : : : PUBLISHED BY THE JOHN 
 CHURCH COMPANY, CINCINNATI, 
 NEW YORK, CHICAGO. : : ; : 
 
 r 
 
Return this book on or before the 
 Latest Date stamped below. 
 
 University of Illinois Library 
 
 
 L161—H41 
 
DON’T 
 
 A FRIENDLY ATTEMPT TO CORRECT, SOME 
 PREVALENT ERRORS IN MUSICAL 
 TERMINOLOGY. 
 
 GEO. F. ROOT. 
 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 THE JOHN CHURCH COMPANY. 
 
 Cincinnati. New York. Chicago. 
 
 Copyright, 1895 , by The John Church Co, 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2018 with funding from 
 
 University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates 
 
 
 https://archive.org/details/dontfriendlyatte00root_0 
 
c< 
 
 
 DO 
 
 
 T he humorous protest which is the title of this book has been applied 
 with a good deal of effect to some common rhetorical and grammatical 
 errors, and 1 am wondering if 1 shall be thought presuming if 1 apply it to 
 some common musical ones. 
 
 If it is thought that 1 am taking too much upon myself in assuming the 
 right to utter this significant word to my neighbors, 1 can only say that 1 take 
 great interest in the subject, and that there is great need that something be 
 done. Furthermore, I promise to welcome every don’t ” which may be ap¬ 
 plied to my work, and will give each a candid and careful consideration, for 1 
 am in entire accord with what a great man means who says: “With consist¬ 
 ency an honest man has simply nothing to do; what he says to-day he may 
 see to be wrong and unsay to-morrow. To shut his eyes to the truth or con¬ 
 tinue in the wrong for tlie sake of being consistent is the height of folly.” 
 
 What I am most anxious for is an agreement among musicians as to exactly 
 what our well-known musical terms shall mean and our musical signs indi¬ 
 cate, so that they shall not be mixed and confused in their meanings, one 
 with another, in people’s minds. 
 
 It is plain that no term in our science should be applied to two or more 
 things in a conflicting or confusing way, since each thing has its own name 
 which describes it clearly without conflict or confusion, and it is equally plain 
 that no musical sign should be said to do what k does not do, or represent 
 what it does not represent; and yet such is the loose and random way in whicli 
 statements are made and terms applied that these things are done all the time. 
 
 There are a good many couples in our science that are in this danger, and . 
 the question is, is anything gained by giving to one the meaning that belongs 
 to the other?. That much is lost in clearness and logical accuracy by doing 
 so is certain. 
 
 Here are some of the couples: “ Measure and Bar,” “Tone and Note,” 
 
 “ Key and Scale,” “ Time and Measure,” “ Degree and Tone,” “ Degree and 
 
 3 
 
4 
 
 EXPLANATORY. 
 
 Note/’ “ Interval and Tone”; yes, in an important work which I have on 
 my list the term “ interval” is applied to single tones. Then there are sev¬ 
 eral single terms often used with wrong meaning, and some, like “ letters ” and 
 “ numbers,” are used that have no place in the science at all. (While we do 
 not use letters nor numbers, we do use some of their names.) 
 
 Corresponding with a prominent musician in the East on his misuse of ele¬ 
 mentary terms in an important work that he is publishing, he says: ‘‘ 1 must 
 use terms and langua|^e that will be understood.” I reply: Would not ‘ the 
 third note in the tliird measure ’ be just as well understood as ‘ the third note 
 in the tliird bar,’ and ‘ the first tone of the scale ’ be just as well understood as 
 ‘the first degree of the scale,’ and would there be any trouble with ‘tonic 
 and dominant of the key, instead of ‘ tonic and dominant of the 5c<7/c,’and, 
 ‘ what was the pitch of that tone ? ’ instead of ‘ what was the pitch of that 
 noie?^ and ‘ double measure ’ instead of ‘ double iiine,^ and ‘ sing the first 
 tone,’ instead of ‘ sing the first letter or niimher^?^'’ 
 
 1 then added: “ The trouble in using the right terms would not be with 
 your students, but with yourself. You have been so long accustomed to this 
 picturesque way of applying terms that to be exact in their use would prob¬ 
 ably give you more trouble than you would care to take; but if prominent 
 musicians would take hold and look into the matter we should have more 
 hope of ultimate success.” 
 
 I shall criticise his work in what follows. 
 
 That 1 wish my readers to think my criticisms reasonable and just goes 
 without saying, but to give myself the best chance for such a result 1 must 
 make sure, to begin with, that we stand on common ground in some im¬ 
 portant things. First, about the nature and limitations of technical terms. 
 
 \ - Let me state briefly the law in regard to them. 
 
 hi every science, art, and occupation are words taken from their common 
 meanings, so to speak, and special or technical meanings given to them. 
 Sometimes technical meanings are similar to common meanings, but often 
 quite different; indeed, some of our technical terms have not a particle of 
 their common meanings in their true musical use. “ Accidental ” and “ Nat¬ 
 ural ” are two of the most conspicuous terms of this kind. It is self-evident 
 that if such terms are thought ot in music with their common meanings, con¬ 
 fusion and trouble will follow. 
 
 It would be interesting, if there were room here, to go through our musical 
 terms and see which of them are used with their common meanings, which 
 vary more or less from their common meanings, and which have nothing of 
 their common meanings in the minds of those who use them correctly. 
 
 Second, why should the simple terms of our science get into this disorder 
 and stay so^ year after year, and generation after generation, when it is not 
 
EXPLANATORY. 
 
 5 
 
 so with any other science ? First, because, unlike any other science, art in 
 music is not only entirely separate from its theory, but is not in the least de¬ 
 pendent upon it. A man may conduct like a Thomas, or play like a Pade¬ 
 rewski, or sing like an angel, while saying “a sharp raises a note a half a tone,” 
 “ with five lines there are but four spaces,” or any other common absurdity, 
 llis musical terms, correct or incorrect, have little or nothing to do with his 
 performance. 
 
 Still, those who have the wrong meanings of any of our musical terms in 
 mind are in more or less perplexity and trouble when tliey have occasion to 
 use them in teaching or explanation, for they can not make the meanings, as 
 they understand them, accord with the facts of the science. Therefore a 
 second reason for errors comes in some cases from an honest effort, though 
 from mistaken premises, to improve om nomenclature, and the mistaken prem¬ 
 ises come from supposing that the wrong meanings of certain musical terms 
 are intended. For example: 
 
 A man thinks that “natural” in music is intended to mean that one char¬ 
 acter or one key has more naturalness than another; that tones not repre¬ 
 sented by the aid of flats or sharps are more natural, and that lines and 
 spaces without flats or sharps are in a similar condition. He knows that 
 meaning is wrong, but instead of getting fully hold of the technical meaning 
 of the word himself, and then laboring to have others understand it, he pro¬ 
 poses another term. This has been done in the case of this word three times 
 in my remembrance of more than fifty years. That no word has been found 
 which answers the purpose so welt as “ natural ” I think 1 can show. 
 
 A third reason for new errors, and the perpetuation of some already started, 
 is the desire for novelty, the wish to say or do something new to attract at¬ 
 tention and create interest. 1 have nothing to say against that desire if it. 
 does not proceed from vanity or conceit. I believe in a good novelty; but 
 may an old man say a plain word to those who are coming on to teach, and 
 perhaps to make books? Is there not danger of beginning too soon to “ im¬ 
 prove ” our system ? Look back. Do we not all recall some things that we 
 have said or taught or written musically that we now see are wrong and wish 
 we had omitted ? Judge the present by the past. Keep the mind unpreju¬ 
 diced and open and you may find that some things that you are saying and 
 doing now are wrong. If so, remember that the progressive man changes 
 his mind as occasion requires, and that no one loses in the estimation of his 
 fellowmen by acknowledging his errors. 
 
 In regard to the advent of new terms into our system and new statements 
 of its truths, time only will show whether they have come to stay. Some 
 that all admit are good find it hard to get a foothold on account of the sec¬ 
 ondary nature of the subject and the small importance which is attached to it 
 
6 
 
 explanatory. 
 
 by musicians. Others that are not improvements have perhaps a temporary 
 success and then pass away. It is light and knowledge only that will sift the 
 wheat from the chaff and get us at last on to a basis where our science can 
 hold up its head with other sciences now more logical and accurate. 
 
 With these preliminary explanations will my readers please imagine a 
 “Don’t” prefixed to each of the quotations that here follow? All will be 
 from books or other printed utterances of those who assume to guide people 
 in musical matters. No authors’ names will be given, as that might rouse 
 antagonisms, and cause some to feel that having said a thing they must de¬ 
 fend it, right or wrong. 1 hope all will see that my desire is to help and not 
 antagonize, for that is certainly my feeling. 
 
 The “ Don’ts” may be imagined of various grades: some in “ large caps,” 
 some in “small caps,” soiue in “ italics/’some in “ lower case,” and some 
 in smaller type, each indicating the amount of emphasis with which the 
 word is uttered. 
 
 G. F. R. 
 
i c 
 
 DON’T. 
 
 ? 9 
 
 (from the writer’s standpoint.) 
 
 (The objectionable statements are- in the smaller type, the 
 criticisms in the larger.) 
 
 No. I. THE STAFF. 
 
 The staff consists of five lines and the spaces between them. Each line and 
 space is called a degree, making nine degrees, numbered from lowest to 
 highest. 
 
 When more than nine degrees are wanted, short lines above and below the 
 staff are used, called added lines. 
 
 H OW the wrong idea of the staff leads into contradictions! 
 
 According to the above, the next degree above the fifth 
 line is the first added line. The space between those two lines 
 is ignored. Does the staff ever begin and end with a line ? 
 that is, is a line the first place on which a note can be 
 written ? 
 
 How much simpler and truer is the idea that with five 
 lines there are six available spaces, and if more are wanted 
 the staff is enlarged. 
 
 The staff usually consists of five lines and four spaces. Sliort added lines 
 are used to represent tones which are too high or too low to be represented 
 on the start. 
 
 7 
 
8 
 
 don’t.” 
 
 A very common saying, and certainly a true one, is, that 
 in music, by our system of notation, a note means nothing 
 unless it is on a line or space of the staff. How then can it 
 be above or below the staff? 
 
 The teacher draws a horizontal line two or three feet in length upon the 
 blackboard, and asks: “ When 1 point to that line what do you sing? ” The 
 class reply by singing one. He then draws another line above the first, and 
 asks: “What do you see between tlie two lines?” spaced And so 
 
 he goes on, until he gets five lines, and then asks: “ How many lines and 
 spaces are there in the staff? ” “ Five lines and four spaces ” 
 
 Later he asks how a tone shall be represented above the fifth line, and the 
 answer he gives is: “ the space above the staffs 
 
 G is on the open space above the staff. 
 
 D is the first letter below the staff. 
 
 Is it possible that anyone can think that there are spaces 
 or lines on which notes can be written that are not a part of 
 the staff? 
 
 Is it possible that anyone can think that a staff of any size 
 begins and ends with a line ? 
 
 Would so important a thing as one of the sharps of a sig¬ 
 nature be placed on a degree that is not a part of the staff? 
 
 "I 
 
 and in the following musical phrases are there two notes 
 that are not on the staff? 
 
 
 
 —T“ 
 
 
 
 
 
 ”■ "I 
 
 ■I 
 
 1 J # 
 
 cy ^ r " 
 
 t 1 
 
 > 11 
 
 fm- *} 1 ^ 
 
 
 # 
 
 S • r 
 
 H ‘ 
 
 II 
 
 ^ j 3 
 
 
 I-L 
 
 1 ■ - 
 
 JJ 
 
 The first thing to notice here is the technical or special 
 meaning of certain words when used in music. If we say 
 '‘staff” to a musician he does not think of an old man’s 
 walking-stick, but of the technical or special meaning of 
 that word as used in music. If we say "space” to him he 
 
THE STAFF. 
 
 9 
 
 does not think of across the street or up to the sky, but of 
 the technical or special meaning of that word in its musical 
 use. 
 
 Now, it is self-evident that the definitions of music should 
 not only agree with the usages of musicians, but should be 
 founded upon them, for actions speak louder than words— 
 or definitions. If musicians use but four spaces with five 
 lines, then the statement that the staff has but four spaces is 
 true; but if musicians use six spaces before the staff is en¬ 
 larged, that statement is not true. 
 
 The trouble in this matter seems to come from consider¬ 
 ing that a space can not be a musical space unless it is in¬ 
 closed by two lines; but how thatwiew can be held in the 
 face of universal usage is unaccountable. Why, the very 
 man who says the staff has but four spaces not only uses 
 six, but he names the outer spaces—one, the space above 
 the fifth line, and the other the space below the first. How 
 they can be ignored after that, is inconceivable. But perhaps 
 he is in the way of thinking that somehow '' space above” 
 means above the staff, in the sense of being out of it—not 
 belonging to it. That is still more inconceivable, for a ‘Mine ” 
 or '‘space’’ is only such by virtue of being a part of a staff, 
 the staff being a combination of lines and spaces, which 
 combination includes all that are being used. A line or space 
 does not "go off and flock alone,” as Lord Dundreary used 
 to say. Let me illustrate : 
 
 If a note were put upon the old man’s walking-stick it 
 would be on a staff, but it would not be on the musical staff. 
 If a note were put above the staff, thus : 
 
 “1 
 
 A _ Bt _ ^ ^ _ 
 
 m m 1 
 
 
 
 — -i- 
 
 
 
 X _ L 
 
 L 
 
 
 1 
 
 V 
 
 
 
 it would be on space, but not on musical space. It would 
 not be on the staff at all. It would really be above the staff. 
 
10 
 
 ‘‘don’t.’* 
 
 But here the note is on one of its most familiar and con¬ 
 stantly used spaces. 
 
 — 
 
 
 r-7. - m: 
 
 w - 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 . a. 
 
 ^ 
 
 
 
 L 
 
 
 
 
 u-rn: - 
 
 
 
 
 But how large is this outer space.^ Just as large as the 
 inner spaces, and no larger—just large enough to write a 
 note upon. All beyond that is not musical space, but com¬ 
 mon space. Some of that common space, however, be¬ 
 comes musical space as the staff is enlarged. Every short 
 line adds one of those outer spaces. There is a space above 
 every line which is inseparable from it; there is a space be¬ 
 low every line which is inseparable from it; therefore a staff 
 of any size begins and ends with a space, and not with a line. 
 
 It seems- to me if the friends would only see that these 
 outer spaces, whether made by the long lines or the short 
 ones, are just as real, just as simple, just as good, and just as 
 
 available as the inner ones thev would allow them to be 
 
 •/ 
 
 counted in, and our difficulties would vanish. 
 
 Now about naming the lines and spaces (degrees) of the 
 staff: The staff is a variable character as to size. It always 
 has five lines and six spaces, but it often has six lines and 
 seven spaces, seven lines and eight spaces, eight lines and 
 nine spaces, and so on. But there should be no variable¬ 
 ness in naming. That should be fixed, and not in the least 
 dependent upon the varying size of the staff. “First line” 
 should always be as it now is, the first line of the permanent 
 staff, or the first long line. “First line above” always the 
 first short line upward (omitting the word “added” as super¬ 
 fluous, and using the word “above” simply to show the di¬ 
 rection in which the staff is being enlarged), “first line below” 
 the first short line downward, etc.; and now if ‘ ‘ first space ” 
 could be the name of the first space of the permanent staff, 
 or the first long space, and “ first space above” could be the 
 
tHE STAFE. 
 
 ri 
 
 name of the first short space upward, one of the objects of 
 this agitation would be accomplished. 
 
 There are two errors, or contradictions between facts 
 and definitions, which are the reasons and the excuses (if any 
 are needed) for this agitation. One is saying {our spaces and 
 using s\x\ the other is, calling the second space of the per¬ 
 manent staff the first, and the first added space the second. 
 Both these eYrors would be remedied by squaring definitions 
 and statements with the facts. What if it makes some trouble 
 and confusion to do that (no reform was ever wrought with¬ 
 out inconvenience to somebody), isn’t it worth while to take 
 some trouble to make our science,more logical and true? 
 
 In conversation with one of our most intelligent musicians 
 on this subject lately, he said: '‘The common concept of 
 musical people is that the line must be the boundary of the 
 staff; that the space is too vague to be a boundary.” He 
 smiled as he gave voice to this common error, for he saw 
 how the facts were against him. 1 replied that if that strip 
 of space just above the fifth line was definite enough to 
 write a note upon, and to put the sharp of a signature upon, 
 it was definite enough for a boundary; at all events, that it 
 was more definite than the boundary of many a prairie 
 tract of land before the fence was put up. The owner finds 
 his boundary, perhaps with some trouble, and then puts his 
 fence on it. The fence does not make the boundary; it 
 was there before. Just so with that strip of space just above 
 the fifth line. It has its boundary perfectly well defined 
 (which boundary is the boundary of the five-line staff), and 
 when we wish to enlarge the staff we put a fence on that 
 boundary, which fence incloses that space and brings in 
 another strip of space which then becomes the boundary of 
 the enlarged staff, for the law of this musical field is that 
 there shall be a strip of space outside of every fence which 
 shall belong to it, and so be a part of the field. 
 
12 
 
 “don’t.’’ 
 
 As well might one say there can be no field, or that 
 nothing can be produced by it unless it is inclosed, as to say 
 there is no musical space, or it can not represent anything 
 unless it is inclosed. The constant and universal usage of 
 musicians disproves that. The outer spaces of the staff are 
 used just as the inner ones are, and, although uninclosed, 
 they are never undefined—their “ boundary ” is as clear as if 
 a fence (line) were there. 
 
 Let this subject be approached by a mind not already 
 preoccupied by the common definition, and the new view 
 will seem not only simple and in accordance with the facts, 
 but any other will seem out of the question. Surely no one 
 would insist upon the old definition because it has been 
 held many years, or even because of its general acceptance. 
 That would bar all progress. 1 remember well when it 
 was universal to say “A sharp raises a note a half a tone.” 
 We are pretty well over that now, but progress in these 
 matters is slow because they are not vital to singing or 
 playing. If they were, they would be righted in short 
 order. 
 
 In regard to the added degrees not belonging to the 
 staff, this may help: There are extant very old music- 
 books in which the staff has but three lines. 1 have seen 
 one. After a while it was found that three lines were not 
 enough, so they added another. The science did not, how¬ 
 ever, say “this new line does not belong to the staff—we 
 will use it when we want it, but it is not a part of the staff.” 
 No; it took a far simpler way. It said we will have a staff 
 of four lines, and there were books with four-line staffs. It 
 was soon found, however, that another line was wanted, 
 and again science did the obvious and simple thing. It did 
 not say “ we must have this line, but our staff has had but 
 four lines, and we will not consider this line as a part of 
 the staff.” No; it said the staff now has five lines. And 
 
THE STAFF. 
 
 Still the pi'ocess went on. It was found that five lines were 
 not enough; but, on experimenting, a new condition came 
 up. It was found that more than five long lines would confuse 
 the eye, so the enlarging was done by short lines, and it 
 was soon found that while the five long lines must always 
 be printed, even though some of them were not used, there 
 was no need of printing the short lines unless they were 
 wanted. Now, what do science and analogy say.^ “We 
 need to enlarge the staff, but we add something to it that 
 does not belong to it ” ; or do they say we need a larger staff, 
 and we enlarge it.^ Which is contradictory and illogical, 
 and which is straightforward and simple.^ 
 
 When the staff had three lines, that extra line could 
 have been a short one, printed or written only when 
 needed; or, when the staff had four lines, the fifth could 
 have been an occasional one; but it was not necessary then 
 to use short lines; the eye could locate a note at a glance 
 anywhere on a four- or five-line staff, but beyond that there 
 would be trouble; otherwise I am confident our staff would 
 contain more than five long lines instead of our being 
 obliged to enlarge, as we do now, by short ones. 
 
 But to return. Say to one whose opinions are not fixed 
 on this subject, “There is nothing in the nature of the 
 case that compels the staff to have a certain number of 
 lines. It may have three, four, five, six, seven, eight, or 
 any number; but in order to have as few lines as possible, 
 musicians use the spaces between the lines and the space 
 just above the upper line and the one just below the 
 lower. With five lin^s there are therefore six spaces, which 
 are made by the lines, are closely connected with them, and 
 belong to them. The fact that the outer spaces have lines 
 only on one side of them makes no difference in their use. 
 In fact, they are easier to recognize than the inner spaces, 
 because no calculation is required to locate them. These 
 
M 
 
 ‘‘don’t.” 
 
 lines and spaces are always grouped together, and form the 
 five-line, or permanent, staff. Begin at the middle line and 
 write notes upward, and when you have gone as far as 
 you can, that is, when you have placed a note on the 
 highest place on which a note can be properly written, you 
 have reached the limit of the staff in that direction. Begin 
 at the middle line and write downward as far as you can, 
 and your last note will show you the limit of the staff in 
 that direction. If you wish to write more notes in either 
 direction you have to enlarge the staff.” 
 
 The above, I am confident, would appeal to such a person 
 as I have described as less conflicting and more sensible 
 than this: “Write upward from the middle line, and when 
 you get to the fifth line, that is as far as you can go on the 
 staff, you can put a note on the space next above the fifth 
 line, but that is outside; it does not belong with the others. 
 You can not write the scale of G on the staff. The only 
 scales that can go on the staff are E and F (using the treble 
 clef). In all other scales some notes have to be written on 
 something that is not the staff.” 
 
 How the clear mind of a child, or of a thoughtful student, 
 must be troubled by such statements, if he thinks at all. He 
 sees that certain long lines and spaces are always there, and 
 that others—short ones—are added only when they are 
 wanted; but he can not see why two of the long spaces that 
 are always with the long lines should be classed and num¬ 
 bered with the short added ones. But he supposes that it 
 must be right if the book and teacher say so, and as he 
 finds he can sing just as well, whether he says one thing or 
 the other, he does not trouble himself, but allows illogical 
 and confused thought about the matter to stay in his mind. 
 
 I am often reminded, when thinking on this subject, of a 
 conversation I once had with a dear old friend who has 
 made some of the best and most popular music-books ever 
 
THE STAFF. 
 
 *5 
 
 published in this country. I began: “ \n our system of 
 notation is a note ever written on anything but a line or a 
 space.^” He promptly answeredNo.” '‘Then, whereverin 
 a piece of music we see a note, there is a line or space 
 “Certainly.” “Are the lines and spaces on which notes are 
 written all alike “No; some are long and some are short.” 
 “Have you any objection to this statement—'Some are long 
 and permanent, and some are short and occasional ” “ No, 
 Tve no objection to that, it is true.” “If a note is written on 
 the space just above the fifth line, is it on a long permanent 
 space, or is it on a short occasional one?” “Why, a long 
 permanent one, of course.” “Well, then, why not count it 
 in with the other permanent spaces ?” His answer was a 
 very common one in these discussions. It was to the effect 
 that he would not change his views, “for,” he added, “I 
 can’t recede from the stand 1 have taken for years on this sub¬ 
 ject in my books and teachings.” I did not quote Emerson’s 
 famous saying about consistency (see Preface), but it would 
 have been appropriate. (Read No, ^6 in this connection.) 
 
 Let me say, at the outset of these articles, that “a little 
 theory and a great deal of practice” should, of course, be the 
 teacher’s motto while at his work. Much talk about terms or 
 definitions, or theories, then, is most objectionable. I only 
 contend that the right terms are as brief, as easily spoken, and 
 more readily understood than the wrong ones, and that they 
 should be used where it is possible without explanation or 
 comment. It is only where teachers are conferring together, 
 as in this work, that discussions and explanations are prof¬ 
 itable. 
 
i6 
 
 ''don’t.” 
 
 No. 2 . THE STAFF AND PITCH NAMES. 
 
 The first seven letters of the alphabet are used in naming the degrees of the 
 staff. By these letters the absolute pitch of the tone is determined. 
 
 The arrangement of letters upon the staff is determined by characters called 
 clefs, of which three are used in this book. 
 
 The sharps and Hats in the signatures mean that the letters upon which they 
 are placed must be played or sung sharp or flat. When there are two sharps 
 in the signature every F and C must be played or sung sharp, because the 
 sharps in the signature are upon the lines and spaces whose alphabetical names 
 are F and C. 
 
 W HEN I first began to take special notice of our musical 
 terms and definitions I thought, where errors in them 
 were very plain, that 1 could make everybody join me in "a 
 more excellent way;” if we could find one; but 1 soon found 
 that when a teacher was deeply interested in making his class 
 play or sing well he didn’t care much about the phraseology 
 in which he gave his directions. If his pupils understood 
 what was wanted, and did the right thing with fingers or 
 voice, he was satisfied, and so were they and their friends— 
 most of them. 
 
 Now and then some critic would say: "What an illogical 
 set these musical people are, as to their theory, using wrong, 
 sometimes absurd, terms, when the right ones are just as 
 well known and just as easily spoken.” To which the teacher 
 might have responded: "Do not my pupils read readily 
 and play (or sing) well.^” and the answer being "yes,” he 
 might have added: "Well, what more do you want.^ Are 
 not good music and a ready reading of it the main things?” 
 To this there can be but one answer: They are the main 
 things; and to the main objects of our art, popular attention 
 will always be turned. 
 
 Then why trouble about the wrong use of terms if they 
 do not interfere with good singing, or playing, or composing, 
 or conducting, and "nobody cares”? Well, an error is an 
 
THE STAFF AND PITCH NAMES. 
 
 17 
 
 error, although it may be in a subordinate department of the 
 subject, and there are people who do care. Is it nothing to 
 have our terms' ‘ loose ” and ‘ ‘ illogical, ” and to be so regarded 
 by scientists in other departments of education.^ 
 
 “Well, give a specimen of the errors to which are applied 
 such disagreeble terms.” Willingly. . Unfortunately they 
 are only too plenty. Perhaps a good way will be to quote 
 from a recent lesson by a member of one of our Teachers' 
 Clubs. 
 
 The young man who was acting as teacher, standing be¬ 
 fore the blackboard, pointed to the first line of the Treble 
 Staff and asked, “ What letter is this.^” to which there came 
 a prompt answer: “It isn’t a letter at all; it is a line.” 
 
 “Well, what letter does it stand for.^” 
 
 “It doesn’t stand for any letter; it stands for the pitch of 
 a tone.” 
 
 “Well, what letter is the tone.^” 
 
 “It isn’t any letter; a letter and a tone are two different 
 things. To be sure, the tone that the first line represents has 
 the same name that a certain letter has.” 
 
 “Well, isn’t that the same thing.^” 
 
 In answer, I hold up a small door-key that I happen to 
 have in my pocket, and ask, “What is this.^” “A key,” is the 
 answer. 
 
 “Do we use this article in music?” 
 
 “No.” 
 
 “What about it do we use?” 
 
 “Its name.” 
 
 “Does the name ‘key,’when used in music, have any 
 reference to this little brass instrument?” 
 
 “None at all.” 
 
 “What does it'mean in music?” 
 
 “A family of tones.” 
 
 “You observe, then, first,that this key which 1 hold up 
 
i8 
 
 don’t/’ 
 
 before you, and its name diXt two entirely different things; 
 second, that the name maybe taken away, so to speak, from 
 this article, and applied to something widely different from 
 it. So it is with letters. A letter and its name are two as 
 different things as a key and its name are. We no more use 
 letters in pitch representations than we do brass keys. We 
 use the names of certain letters to name things as different 
 from letters as a 'family of tones’ is different from the little 
 instrument with which you unlock your door when you 
 come in late at night, and do not wish to disturb the family.” 
 
 When the smile had subsided, the young man turned to 
 the board again and said: "What should I have asked 
 
 "That depends upon what you wanted to know. If, when 
 you pointed to the first line, you merely wanted its name, 
 that would be one thing; if you wanted to know what it 
 stands for or represents, that would be quite another.” 
 
 "Well, the first line is named E, any way.” 
 
 Here a smile goes round the class, and I say: "No; if it 
 is named E, put the Base Clef on the staff and it must be 
 named G. Sharp, Hat, double sharp, or double flat it, and 
 it must have other names. No, that line has but one name, 
 and that it has under all possible circumstances, with or 
 without clef, sharp, flat, natural, or accidental of any kind.” 
 
 " Well, what has that line to do with the letter E.^” 
 
 "Nothing.” 
 
 "Well, with the name E, then } It seems to me you arc 
 splitting hairs.” 
 
 "You call it a hair.^ Why, it’s a good-sized log—one 
 that will roll into your path and impede your progress in 
 a good many ways. Let us split it, then it won't roll, and 
 you can use its two sides in an orderly way. Class, what 
 does this name that we are talking about, name in the al¬ 
 phabet ?” 
 
 ‘‘A letter/’ 
 
THE STAFF AND PITCH NAMES. 
 
 19 
 
 ''Something to see, or something to hear?” 
 
 “Something to see.” 
 
 “What does this name name in music?” 
 
 “The pitch of a tone.” 
 
 “Something to see, or something to hear ?” 
 
 “Something to hear.” 
 
 “What connection, then, has the first line of the treble 
 staff with the name that has given us so much trouble?” 
 
 “The thing named ‘first line ’ (something to see) stands 
 for the thing named E (something to hear).” 
 
 “That is it; isn't that simple enough?” 
 
 Then the young man says: “ 1 se^; 1 ought to have asked 
 the name of the line, and then what it stands for or repre¬ 
 sents; but I am sure 1 have seen in a Musical Catechism 
 something like this: ' How many letters of the alphabet are 
 used to represent musical tones? Seven, What are their 
 names? A, By C, D, E, F, and G.'” 
 
 “Well, what remark would you make on that statement 
 now?” 
 
 “Why, 1 see that lines and spaces, and not letters, repre¬ 
 sent the pitches.” 
 
 “Perhaps the author meant to ask how many and what 
 letters of the alphabet are used to name musical tones ?” 
 
 “Even then he would not be right; for the letters them¬ 
 selves are not used, at all; and is it right to say'musical 
 tones'?” 
 
 “ Well, the word ' musical ’ is unnecessary there. A tone 
 is a musical sound, and in a dictionary or catechism every 
 statement should be exactly right.” 
 
 There is one thing that we have to do all the time in this 
 “ letter "business which prevents people from seeing readily 
 the fact that the letter and its name are two different things. 
 It is this: When we have occasion to write or print the name 
 of a pitch represented by the first line, treble staffs we use a 
 
20 
 
 ‘‘don’t.” 
 
 letter. For instance, I write or print this statement: “The 
 pitch represented by the first line of the treble staff isF.” 
 There, doesn’t that look as though we used letters in music * 
 The first thought is “yes”; but look a little deeper; that “E,” 
 so used above, is not the name of a letter —it has nothing to 
 do with the alphabet or with language—it is the name of a 
 tone. 
 
 When we write or print the name given to “a family of 
 tones” we do not have to use the brass instrument—we 
 have the worif “key.” But in the other case we have no 
 word, but have to take the letter itself to name something 
 which is not a letter. 
 
 Give the letter (fixed) names of the degrees of the Bass Clef Staff. 
 
 Give the names of the pitches that the degrees of the Base 
 Staff represent, is the right phraseology. The writer of the 
 above does not seem to see the distinction between the 
 name of a thing and its office. The names of lines and 
 spaces are never anything but “first, second, third,” etc; 
 what they represent is a different matter. I can not object 
 to the word “Bass” for “Base,” because it is so extensively 
 used, but the latter name, as indicating the foundation or 
 support of the harmony seems to me preferable. 
 
 In an answer which soon follows the above, occurs this 
 phrase: “//* the letter has been previously flatted.'' 
 
 Since letters are not used, they can not, of course, be flat¬ 
 ted. Lines and spaces are the only characters affected by 
 sharps and flats. (See No. 14 .) 
 
 What fixed names do we apply do the degrees of the staff? The names of 
 the first seven letters of the alphabet. 
 
 The letter names here referred to do not apply to anything 
 to see in music, but only to tone pitches, something to hear. 
 In my blind class, many years ago, in New York city, there 
 were several who, when 1 touched any key upon the piano 
 
THE STAFF AND PITCH NAMES. 
 
 21 
 
 and called for the name of its pitch, would respond promptly, 
 ‘"E,” “D,’’ ‘"F-sharp,” ‘‘B-flat,” or whatever the tone might 
 be. Their answers were right, but they saw nothing. If 1 
 asked: “ What is the name of the sign to seeing persons of 
 this pitch E.^” they would answer promptly: “ First line of 
 Treble Staff'.” If 1 had asked them if the name of that line 
 was F, I am quite sure they would have answered “No,’’for 
 they perfectly understood that if it was ever named E, it 
 would sometimes have to be named E-sharp, sometimes 
 E-flat, and sometimes E double-flat, and changing the clef, 
 G, or G-sharp, or G-ilat, etc. 
 
 Observe the difference between fhe name of a thing and 
 its office. The office of the thing named “first line” (some¬ 
 thing to see) is to stand for or represent to the eye the thing 
 called E (something to hear). 
 
 Under the head of “Absolute Names” this writer goes on: 
 
 As we Iiave just been reailing the scale, what is tlie syllable name of the 
 first line of the staff? SoL'^ 
 
 No line of the staff has a syllable name or a letter name. 
 The only name that line has is given in the question, “first 
 line.” It, the first line, may be made to represent the tone 
 “E,”sung to the syllable “Sol,” but the name of the line is 
 neither E nor Sol. 
 
 Every time we change the position of tlie scale we change the names of the 
 degrees. 
 
 Wrong. The names of lines and spaces never change, and 
 they are the only “degrees” in our system of notation. 
 
 What degrees of the staff represent the pitch ^^A”? 
 
 Here “ degrees ” means a line and space, and is used cor¬ 
 rectly. 
 
 In another place he speaks of degrees as having relative 
 names. 
 
22 
 
 ‘‘don’t.” 
 
 There are no such things as relative lines and spaces, 
 although they are constantly made to represent both absolute 
 and relative tone pitches. 
 
 Second, it is as plainly demonstrated that our musical alphabet of seven letters 
 is incomplete. There being more tones than letters within the limits of one 
 octave, it is only reasonable that there should be as many letters as there are 
 tones within such limits. 
 
 There is no “alphabet” in music. “Alphabet” is the name 
 of something of great importance in another science. It is 
 not composed of tones, but of letters. That which may be 
 said to correspond in our science tothe alphabet in language 
 has its own name. There is no need of borrowing. 
 
 No. 3 . DEGRHES. 
 
 How many degrees ot^pitch did we sing? T^a'o cJec^rees. 
 
 T 1 IE word “ degrees ” has no place here. As well might 
 one say: “How many degrees of length did we 
 sing.^” d'here are dillerent lengths in music, and different 
 pitches. A “quarter” is one length, a “half” is another. 
 C, or one, is one pitch. D, or two, is another. “Sing a 
 quarter, sing a half.” “Sing one, sing two.” The latter 
 phraseology is simple, sensible, and scientific; tlie other is 
 not. 
 
 t'arther on this error becomes more apparent. 
 
 What degree of pitch seems to make the best ending ? 
 
 “What pitch, or what tone, makes the best ending.?^” is 
 the right question. 
 
 Using the absolute names, what degrees did we sing? 
 
 We do not sing degrees; we sing tones. The word “de¬ 
 gree” has but one meaning as a technical term in music, 
 
DEGREES. 
 
 23 
 
 viz.: A line or space of the staff. Notes are not degrees; 
 tones are not degrees; lengths are not degrees; pitches are 
 not degrees; powers are not degrees; qualities are not 
 degrees; intervals are not degrees. All those things have 
 their own names, and it is worse than unnecessary to call 
 them degrees. 
 
 What degree of pitch do we sing when G is the home tone that we do 
 not sing—when C is the home tone ? F-sharp. 
 
 Why it should be “degree of pitch” here, and “tone” 
 (the right word) in another question near by, is not evident, 
 for both mean the same pitch, F-sharp; but F-sharp may be, 
 and often is, sung as a chromatic‘tone, when C is key tone. 
 But why should degree ” come in there, when “what 
 pitch do we sing,” or “what tone do we sing,” is so unmi.s- 
 takably clear and direct } 
 
 Intermediate tones take their names from the names of the degrees by 
 which they are represented. 
 
 No. The degrees by which they are represented 'have 
 no other names than “first space,” “first line;” “second 
 space,” “second line;” etc. These degrees, by the aid of 
 accidentals, represent the intermediate pitches, but the 
 pitches do not take the names of the degrees. The pitches 
 are named absolutely by such names as “C-sharp,” ** D-flat,” 
 etc., and relatively by such names as “sharp one,” “flat 
 two,” etc. 
 
 First degree of power, second degree of power, lliird degree of power, etc., 
 meaning pp., p., m., etc. 
 
 To say that “mezzo” is a degree of power is as unneces¬ 
 sary as to say that C is a degree of pitch, or a quarter is a 
 degree of length. Mezzo is a power; C is a pitch. The 
 word “ degree ” is superfluous in both cases. That classifi¬ 
 cation of powers is not only arbitrary, but lacks the clearness 
 and directness of the usual form. To say that “the third 
 
24 
 
 “don’t.” 
 
 degree of power is ‘ mezzo ’ ” is not nearly so simple and 
 clear as “ a medium power is called ‘ mezzo,’ a loud power 
 ‘ forte,’ a soft power ‘ piano,’ ” etc. 
 
 
 No. 4. BEATS AND MEASURES. 
 
 We measure the lengths of tones by a division of time into equal portions. 
 The portions into which time is divided are called measures. Measures are 
 divided into smaller portions, called parts of measures, thus: One, two, one^ 
 two, one, two, etc. 
 
 E do not make measures and put music into them. 
 
 V V We make music, and it induces the mental pulsa> 
 tions, which are the real beats of music, and these beats, as 
 they flow, group themselves into measures. Beats may be 
 manifested by motions of the hand, or by counting. The 
 question of how much time is taken is not thought of 
 
 A measure is a portion of time represented between two bars. A measure 
 is divided into parts: “ Two-part measure,” Three-part measure,” etc. A 
 measure is a combination of strong and weak parts, etc. 
 
 It takes time to do anything, but a measure is no more a 
 portion of time than a scale is. 
 
 Here are the facts with regard to measures: When per¬ 
 sons hear music that they comprehend, in other words, that 
 is tuneful and enjoyable to them, they are conscious of its 
 causing something like regular mental pulsations that keep 
 with the music, and with which they are often inclined to 
 ‘‘keep time,” as the saying is, by making motions of the 
 head, foot, or hand. These mental pulsations are the real 
 beats of music. It is true the extensions of the beats out 
 into the hand are also called beats; but the hand no more 
 “keeps the time ” than the hands of the watch in its sense. 
 We observe while hearing music that the beats are not all 
 alike; some regularly recurring are more prominent than the 
 
BEATS AND MEASURES. 2^ 
 
 Others; these are called accented beats, the others unac¬ 
 cented beats. 
 
 Music makes its beats go in groups by means of the regu¬ 
 larly recurring accented beats. When music is of such a 
 nature that it makes its beats group themselves into twos (an 
 accented and an unaccented beat), it is said to be “double 
 measure”; when in threes (an accented followed by two 
 unaccented beats), in “triple measure”; and so on. 
 
 Measures are, therefore, “groups of beats.” “Portions 
 of time ” would be a very unsatisfactory description of what 
 makes measure; and “equal portions of time” would not 
 be true, for in almost all music the beats may in places be 
 accelerated or retarded, or there may be a pause; but the 
 measure is always “a group of beats. ” 
 
 Accented and unaccented beats, and the measures they 
 make, whether only felt, or whether at the same time man¬ 
 ifested by hand or baton, form the steady, unchanging foun¬ 
 dation for all the rhythmic variation and beauty of music 
 caused by conflicting accents, such as syncopations, etc. 
 
 It is quite true that the measure is represented by the 
 space between two bars, and that the representation of the 
 measure is also called a measure. 
 
 Those who may be inclined to use the names “Two-part 
 measure, three-part measure,” etc., instead of “double, 
 triple,” etc., are asked to consider the following reasons for 
 not doing so: Measures consist of beats, therefore if new 
 names were wanted, two-beat measure, tbree-beat measure, 
 etc., would be truer and better than “two-part” measure, 
 “three-part” measure, etc. The word “part,” when con¬ 
 nected with “measure,” refers to the space in book or on 
 blackboard that stands for a beat. If the whole space from 
 bar to bar stands for a measure of two beats, one half of the 
 space stands for one beat, and the other half for the other. 
 In the representation of Triple measure This space is divided 
 
26 
 
 ''don’t.” 
 
 into three parts, in Quadruple measure into four parts, etc. 
 So ''part of measure” refers to representation, and not to 
 the real measure, which is a "group of beats.” Of course 
 it is understood that the representations of measures are also 
 called measures, but real measures in music exist, whether 
 represented or not. Blind people appreciate measures just 
 as well as do those who see, for they feel the mental beats, 
 which, in their grouping, make the measures. Some have 
 thought that " double measure ” was a wrong term, because 
 as double means two, it means two measures. That is a mis¬ 
 take; the double has reference to the beats; it means two 
 beats. Triple measure means three-beat measure; Quadru¬ 
 ple measure, four-beat measure, etc. 
 
 But that which should show to every thoughtful mind 
 that our present names for measures are best, is this: 
 
 6-8 is not always "six-beat” measure; it often consists 
 o{ two compound beats; that is, two threes, something like 
 triplets, the dotted quarter being beat-note. It would be 
 clumsy to say that such a measure is "a Compound two- 
 part measure”; but "Compound double” is neat and con¬ 
 venient. So 9-8 is "Compound triple,” and 12-8 "Com¬ 
 pound quadruple.” In all cases the compound measures 
 have a dotted quarter for beat note. So, teachers, is it not 
 best to continue our present names—Double, I'riple, Qiiad- 
 ruple, and Sextuple, for the simple measures, and Compound 
 double. Compound triple, and Compound quadruple for the 
 ' others.^ If not, what will you call the latter? 
 
 4 
 
KEY AND SCALE. 
 
 27 
 
 No. 5. key and scale. 
 
 A scale is in the key of the letter which is taken as one. If C is taken as 
 one, or basis of a scale, it is called the scale or key of C, etc. 
 
 From the lowest sound the ear can distinguish to the highest, at every point, 
 there is a sound. That the sounds might be nmele eivailahle, they were ar¬ 
 ranged into Scales. The scales are Major, Minor, and Chromatic. A tune 
 formed from a Major Scale is said to be in a Major Key, and a tune formed 
 from a Minor Scale is said to be in a {Minor Key. 
 
 SCALE can not be in the key of a letter, for no letter is 
 
 /v ever taken for one or for any other pitch in our system 
 of notation, but we do not criticise that point here (see No. 
 
 # 2). It is using “key and scale’- as synonymous terms that 
 we call attention to in this article. 
 
 If the words “key and scale” mean the same thing in 
 music, one might be dropped ; but they do not. The “ key ” 
 is a family of tones, and remains so in any possible order or 
 combination; but there is only one way that the tones of a 
 key become a scale. Let us look a little more deeply ifUo 
 this: 
 
 The word “family ” is an abstract term. Alone it does not 
 specify particular persons or tones, but it gives a clear idea 
 of relationship. When the word “family” is applied to 
 people, even though no particular family is mentioned, its 
 related members, father, mother, brother, sister, etc., come 
 promptly to the mind. So when applied to tones, the mem¬ 
 bers of the tone family come just as promptly—for harmony 
 purposes, tonic, dominant, sub-dominant, etc., and for vocal 
 purposes, one, three, five, do, mi, sol, etc., all conveying to 
 the mind clear ideas of tone relationship before any particu¬ 
 lar key or tone is mentioned. To show a family of people, 
 not as an abstraction, but in the concrete, as the scientists 
 would say, Mr. Jones’ or Mr. Brown’s family must appear; 
 and to show a tone family in the same way some tones must 
 be specified, as C, and the other members of the key of C, 
 
28 
 
 don’t,” 
 
 or G, with its members, or F, etc., and to be manifested they 
 must take some musical form. The most important forms 
 that the tones of a key take for educational purposes are the 
 scale, chords, and their arpeggios. But notice, the tones of 
 a key come to these forms already named. '‘Tonic,” 
 “ dominant,” “one, three, five,” “do, mi, sol,” etc., are ap¬ 
 plied to the tones of the key to begin with, to describe and 
 impress key relationship. Therefore it is only secondarily 
 that they are scale names, chord names, and arpeggio names. 
 
 As all tone relationships must be in a key when tones are 
 used for tuneful purposes, all interval names must also be 
 there primarily, the seconds that make the scale, the thirds, 
 fourths, etc., that make chords and their arpeggios, etc., but 
 for educational purposes it is convenient to say “the intervals 
 of the scale,” when speaking of the seconds that make the 
 scale, or “intervals of the chord,” when dealing with that. 
 But to speak of intervals that are not in the scale as intervals 
 of the scale is altogether incorrect. There are no thirds, 
 fourths, fifths, etc., in the scale; there are nothing but sec¬ 
 onds there, and there are no chords or arpeggios in the scale. 
 The scale being a well-defined melody itself, any succession 
 of tones that varies from it is not in it, but all musical forms, 
 including the scale itself, are in or of the “ key.” 
 
 There is no more propriety in saying that one, three, five 
 are tones of the scale because they occur in it, than to say 
 they are tones of “ Rosseau’s Dream” because they occur 
 in that old melody. 
 
 The two words “key” and “scale” are in the science. 
 Why not give to each what belongs to it, and no more i 
 What is gained by investing “ scale'’ with some of the at¬ 
 tributes of “key”.^ Surely nothing. All agree that the 
 “ key ” is the tone family, and that all possible tone relation¬ 
 ships are predicated of the key—-yes, chromatic relationships 
 included, for chromatic tones are temporary members of the 
 
KEY AND SCALE. 
 
 29 
 
 key, having, while in the key, names that describe their re¬ 
 lationship, as ‘‘sharp four,” “Hat seven,” etc. 
 
 In a diagram in one work there are six musical examples, 
 the first headed: “All the seconds in the scale”; the second 
 headed: “ All the thirds in the scale”; the third, “All the 
 fourths in the scale,” and so on up to “ All the sevenths in 
 the scale.” 
 
 There are “ninths,” “tenths,” “twelfths,” and “fif¬ 
 teenths.” Are they in the scale ? Just as much as all those 
 mentioned above are, excepting the seconds. Sing or play 
 a scale and notice whether you hear any intervals, excepting 
 major and minor seconds, or wrfte it and look. 
 
 The scale is a melody. It is simply one of the forms that 
 the tones of a key may take. You would not say that there 
 are any ^ds, 4ths, etc., in this: 
 
 
 
 T=t 
 
 
 
 —t 
 
 0- 
 
 0 ^-0 
 
 I 
 
 
 and yet there are, if they are in the scale. This is another 
 case where “ scale” is invested with some of the attributes 
 of “key.” How much better to keep clearly and distinctly 
 to what each term means, and not mix the two. 
 
 Scales are not compositions, but only a part of tlie material that] is used in 
 a composition. 
 
 A key is not a composition, but a scale is. A scale is just 
 as much a composition as is any other melody made from 
 the tones of the key in which it is written. 
 
 Material for compositions is taken from the key and not 
 from the scale. We do not take material from one melody 
 or composition to make another, but we go back to the 
 reservoir for all material. 
 
 A Dictionary says: 
 
 Diatonic, a term applied to the regular members of a scale (or key). 
 
 Which scale There is a scale, the regular members oi- 
 
30 ''don’t.’’ 
 
 which are named “one,” “sharp one,” “two,” “sharp 
 two,” etc., and, descending, “eight,” “seven,” “flat seven,” 
 etc. To be sure it might be said: “The diatonic scale is 
 meant,” but why leave a loophole for a misunderstanding.^ 
 
 The word scale should not be used in this definition. 
 
 The key is the great family or reservoir from which tones 
 are taken for intervals, chords, scales, and all possible melo¬ 
 dies and harmonies. 
 
 The terms “ diatonic ” and “ chromatic ” are predicated of 
 the hey —diatonic, the regular members—chromatic, the oc¬ 
 casional members. The diatonic tones of the key in scale 
 order make the diatonic scale, and the diatonic and chro¬ 
 matic tones of a key in a certain scale order make the chro¬ 
 matic scale. Two diatonic tones of a key make a diatonic 
 interval, a diatonic tone and a chromatic tone of a key, or 
 two chromatic tones, make a chromatic interval, and there 
 are diatonic chords and chromatic chords, consequently 
 diatonic harmonies and chromatic harmonies, all from tones 
 of the key where they are primarily diatonic and chromatic. 
 
 “What scale is this tune in.^” Wrong. “With what 
 lone of the scale does the base begin Wrong. “ With 
 what note of the scale does the base begin .^” Worse. 
 “With what letter of the scale does it begin.Still worse. 
 
 No. 6. TONE AND NOTE. 
 
 Tile term scale is applied to that consecutive arrangement of notes by 
 which we proceed gradually from a given note to its octave, etc. 
 
 ( SHOULD think that perhaps he means notes, and that he 
 is speaking of the representation of the scate instead of 
 the scale itself, were it not for his concluding sentence: 
 “by which we proceed gradually,” etc. That seems to 
 refer to giving tones successively by instrument or voice, and 
 
TONE AND NOTE. 
 
 31 
 
 of all musical studies I am pretty sure he would teach har¬ 
 mony through the proper avenue, the ear, and not through 
 the eye. 
 
 It is true, the accomplished musician “hears with his 
 eyes,” and “sees with his ears”; that is, when he sees 
 written or printed music he hears it mentally, and when he 
 hears music, if he cares to, he can mentally see the signs 
 that would represent it. But that is only done when mu¬ 
 sical knowledge has entered the mind through the proper 
 channel. 
 
 The scale in music, that is, the main thing, is a certain se¬ 
 ries of tones, something to hear. ’The “consecutive arrange¬ 
 ment of notes” is but the sign to the eye of the main thing. 
 
 After the printed representation of the scale the teacher 
 says: 
 
 Each one of the successive notes of the scale is called a degree. 
 
 “ Degrees” refer to pitches of tones.* 
 
 Notes are characters of length. It does look as though 
 notes represented pitches in the example given, as they 
 gradually rise, but they do not. Take away the staff and 
 no pitches are represented, although the notes refuain; but 
 take the notes away and all the pitches are there represented 
 just as before. 
 
 The only character in our system of notation that repre¬ 
 sents the pitches of tones is the staff. Clefs, sharps, flats, 
 etc., are staff modifiers, but do not in themselves represent 
 pitches. It is always a line or space, natural or modified, 
 that does that. Here, for example, are represented the 
 pitches of the key of D major: 
 
 I 
 
But notice, while all are represented, as is proven by the 
 fact, that if any line or space is touched, the musician will 
 tell instantly what pitch it stands for, still no particular pitch 
 is indicated or called for. Notes do that while performing 
 their special office, which is to indicate the lengths wanted. 
 When the staff is prepared for a key, before any notes are 
 put upon it, it is in a way like a harp standing silent; all its 
 pitches are latent in its strings, so to speak, but only those 
 are called into action that are touched. So with the staff. 
 Its lines and spaces stand representing all the diatonic pitches 
 of the key, but only those that are wanted are noted for use. 
 
 Notes are not '‘degrees.” There are whole notes, half 
 notes, quarter notes, etc., but not whole degrees, half de¬ 
 grees, quarter degrees, etc. Technically speaking, the lines 
 and spaces of the staff are the only “degrees” in music;* 
 and notice how perfectly the term is there applied. It is 
 consecutive degrees of the staff that represent the pitches of 
 the scale (the notes point them out). It is certain degrees 
 of the staff that represent intervals and chords (the notes 
 point them out), and it is the intermediate degrees of the 
 staff that are counted in reckoning intervals. 
 
 Tones as to pitch are sometimes called “degrees,” but 
 that is still more useless. There is no condition that a tone 
 can be in, that will not be intelligently described, either by 
 one of its relative names, “tonic, dominant,—one, three, 
 five,—do, re, mi, etc.,” or by one of its absolute or inde¬ 
 pendent names, C, D, F-sharp, B-flat, etc. (See No. 3 for 
 “ degrees.”) 
 
 ■^The word “degree’’ may perhaps sometimes be used in teaching, with 
 a different meaning from the above, for the purposes of explanation, but its 
 technical meaning is a line or space. 
 
ONE KEY WITH TWO MODES. 
 
 33 
 
 No. 7. ONE KEY WITH TWO MODES. 
 
 Every key has a bright or Major Mode, and a dark or Minor Mode; thus 
 every key has two modes. Each Tonic-center is the center of two such 
 modes. 
 
 Thus, C major and C minor are not two distinct keys, but the two modes 
 of one key. 
 
 KEY is a family of tones having a certain membership. 
 
 A different membership constitutes a different family, 
 even though both families may have the same absolute pitch 
 for key-tone. The keys of C major and C minor are not 
 only different in membership, but strikingly different in the 
 mental effects of their members, as used in tones, chords, 
 scales, melodies, and harmonies. As well might one say 
 \hat two different faijiilies of Smiths are but two modes of 
 one family, because the fathers of the two families have the 
 same name, as to say the two C families are one, because 
 they have the same absolute pitch for key-tone. 
 
 This may not seem, at the first thought of it, to be a good 
 illustration, because in the musical families the fathers, and 
 some of the other members in both, are the same individuals 
 (absolute pitches), but they are not the same in the all-im¬ 
 portant matter of musical effect. Take the father, for in¬ 
 stance (the key-tone); approach him in one family and he is 
 bright, cheery, and firm; approach him in the other, and he 
 is, musically, a different individual; sad, plaintive, or somber. 
 (See No. 32.) 
 
 The fact that the dominant of both keys is a major chord 
 cuts no more figure than that both keys have the same ab¬ 
 solute pitch for key-tone. From the chord of G major go to 
 the chord of C major, and you are in the one key. From 
 the chord of G major go to the chord of C minor, and you 
 are in the other. 
 
 “Mode’’ is an old-fashioned word, meaning “key” or 
 
34 
 
 ‘‘don’t/' 
 
 “scale” (where people understand “scale” to mean about 
 the same thing as “key”). “The major key with C for 
 key-tone,” means exactly the same as “the major mode 
 with C for key-tone.” There is no place where “mode” 
 can be used musically that a modern and more common 
 word would not be better, because better understood. 
 
 The commonly received view of this subject, that is, that 
 in music there are two kinds of keys of entirely different 
 structure and effect named major and minor, seems to me 
 much clearer and more desirable than the one proposed. 
 
 Those keys which have the most tones in common are in 
 the closest relation to each other. The major keys nearest 
 related to C major are G on one side and F on the other. 
 The minor key nearest to C major is A minor, and there is 
 great propriety in calling it the relative minor of C major, 
 and C major the relative major of A minor. In notation both 
 have the same signature, and in modulation the change 
 from one to the other is closer and smoother than from C 
 major (signature natural) to C minor (signature three flats) 
 or to any other minor key, or to any major key, excepting 
 those above mentioned. 
 
 No. 8. INTERVALS. 
 
 The distance between any note and another in respect to their relative posi¬ 
 tions in the scale is termed an ‘‘ Interval.” 
 
 ^ ^ T NTERVAL ” is the name of two things in Music. First 
 1 and most important it is the name of the musical effect 
 of two tones of different pitch, heard together, or near 
 enough together to be in the mind at the same time. Play 
 
 to a musician and ask him what he hears, 
 
INTERVALS. 
 
 35 
 
 and he will tell you ‘‘a minor third/’ Play this 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 ry' 
 
 
 
 
 
 ^ -g- 
 
 and ask, and he will answer “ major third.” Ask him what 
 the general name for major and minor thirds, and for sec¬ 
 onds, fourths, fifths, etc., is, and he will answer '‘inter¬ 
 vals.” One meaning then of " interval,” by common usage 
 and consent, is a musical effect. Those who have thought 
 of interval only with its other meaning, viz., difference of 
 pitch or distance, so to speak, between two tones, and the 
 distance or space on the staff between the two notes that 
 represent it, may hesitate about precepting the first definition. 
 To such I would say, that our first authority for it is the uni¬ 
 versal usage of musicians. All agree that we can hear sec¬ 
 onds, thirds, fourths, etc., and that they are intervals. The 
 second is the law governing technical terms. 
 
 Any science, art, or occupation mpiy take words from 
 their common meanings, so to speak, and give them special 
 meanings, different from their common meanings. They 
 then become technical terms. Our nomenclature is full of 
 them. The common meaning of "accidental” is "by acci¬ 
 dent.” There is not a particle of that meaning in its musicpil 
 use. The musical word "natural” has no reference what¬ 
 ever to "naturalness,” or "according to npiture,” but refers 
 simply and wholly to pitch, as do " sharp ” and " flat.’’ 
 
 So " Interval,” as something to hear, is no farther removed 
 from its common meaning than are many other technical 
 terms. 
 
 But one of its musical meanings is its common meaning. 
 Briefly stpited, the whole matter is thus: 
 
 The first meaning of interval is the musical effect of two 
 tones—emotional. The second is the difference of pitch or 
 space, or distance between the two tones or their represen¬ 
 tation—matters of calculation—intellectual. The first mean¬ 
 ing is described by the terms seconds, thirds, major, minor, 
 
perfect, augmented, diminished, diatonic, chromatic, etc. 
 The second by the terms “half-step,” “step,” and “step- 
 and-a-half.”* 
 
 We do not hear steps and half-steps, for they describe the 
 space, or distance, or, as Mr. Mathews says, the “hole” 
 between the tones. 1 think there is no place where one 
 could talk about hearing a step that “ major second” would 
 not be more orderly, and more in accordance with the usage 
 of musicians as the name of what is heard, and for “dia¬ 
 tonic half-step,'’ “minor second ” would always be in order. 
 The only question would be about “chromatic half-step.” 
 Surely there must be a name for the musical effect of C and 
 C-sharp, that does not require the use of the word half-step. 
 “ Half-step ” measures the difference of pitch between the 
 two tones, but is not a proper name for the musical effect of 
 the two. If 1 am not mistaken, that interval is called “ aug¬ 
 mented prime” by some harmonists, and “chromatic inter¬ 
 val” by others. Would not “chromatic interval” answer 
 always, since all other chromatic intervals can be described 
 by their other names, as “augmented second,” “diminished 
 fifth,” etc., whenever they occur as chromatic intervals } 
 
 The degrees of the scale do not all include the same measure of space; for 
 example, the interval between E and F, and B and C, is only half the interval 
 between C and D, etc. 
 
 I think that statement would puzzle any learner not already 
 pretty well posted on the subject. The most obvious mean¬ 
 ing of “ the same measure of space*’ would surely be the 
 distance on the staff from one note of the interval to the 
 other. As the example is given, the notes that represent the 
 minor seconds are the same distance apart as the others. 
 
 *The ‘‘ step-and-a-half ”—a compound word, is one interval—the measure 
 of the “ augmented second,” in distinction from step ” and half-step,”— 
 two intervals, which is the measure of the minor third. 
 
INTERVALS. 
 
 31 
 
 '' Is only half the interval ” may not be misunderstood, but 
 that with the whole sentence seems to me an unfortunate 
 way to state what is meant, which I suppose to be this: 
 
 The intervals of the scale are not all alike in size. Those 
 made by E and F and B and C are but half as large as those 
 made by C and D, etc., or, the difference of pitch between 
 E and F is but half as great as that between C and D, al¬ 
 though the distance on the staff between the notes of the 
 smaller intervals is the same as that between the notes of 
 the larger ones. 
 
 But is that the orderly way to begin this subject ? I think 
 
 ♦ 
 
 not. According to Pestalozzi, and all the great educators, 
 the first watchword is, “the thing first, then the sign”; and 
 another is, “tell the pupil nothing that he can find out him¬ 
 self.” According to that the pupil should bear major and 
 minor seconds until he knows the difference between the 
 two, and can tell either the moment he hears it, a thing per¬ 
 fectly simple and sure with everyone who has any ear for 
 music at all, and is far enough along to commence this study. 
 Then the seconds of the scale are examined, and the pupil 
 finds out himself that E and F and B and C are smaller in¬ 
 tervals than the others. Then come names and representa¬ 
 tions. 
 
 The former are called half-step^ and the latter sieps^ termed by some au¬ 
 thors semi-lories and lories or minor' seconds and major' seconds. 
 
 Here “ half-steps” and “minor seconds” are regarded as 
 meaning the same thing, and so “steps” and “major sec¬ 
 onds.” 
 
 Steps and half-steps are no more to be compared with 
 major and minor seconds, and other musical effects, than the 
 tape measure which gives you the dimensions of a beautiful 
 statue is to be considered in comparison with the statue it¬ 
 self; and, besides that, “half-step ” and “ minor second” can 
 
38 
 
 ‘'don’t/' 
 
 not be synonymous terms. It is a half-step from C to 
 C-sharp, but those tones do not make a minor second. 
 
 No. 9. NATURAL AND CANCEL. 
 
 What characters are used to indicate intermediate tones? Sharps, flats and 
 cancels. 
 
 I N a note which follows this question and answer is the 
 following: 
 
 If a name can be given a character that will fully define it and properly con¬ 
 vey its meaning at all times, as “ Hold,” Tie,” etc., do, it seems to us the 
 better way. This character ( ^ ) always means to cancel the work or effect 
 of something. 
 
 A natural cancels the effect of the sharp or flat that has been written on 
 that degree. 
 
 Passing by the imperfectness of the question 1 will con¬ 
 fine myself to the word “cancel.” 1 will try to show that 
 its common meaning, as applied to the action of the char¬ 
 acter in question, is totally wrong, and that it can not be a 
 substitute for the word “natural.” I will also show that 
 “natural” “sharp,” and “tlat” act alike — each simply 
 changing the meaning of a line or space a half-step. 
 
 That my criticisms may be seen to be just, the following 
 statements (which 1 think no musician will dispute) must 
 first be seen to be true. 
 
 Sharps, Hats, and naturals belong to lines and spaces, and 
 not to notes. When the staff is prepared by clef and sig¬ 
 nature to represent a key, its lines and spaces show the 
 pitches of that key before a note is placed upon them. 
 
 The regular members of a key are called diatonic tones. 
 The occasional or temporary members that may come into 
 it are called chromatic tones. Diatonic tones are shown in 
 the signature place — a little section of the staff just at the 
 
NATURAL AND CANCLL. 
 
 39 
 
 right of the clef. Chromatic tones are represented by acci¬ 
 dentals, which are simply sharps, flats, naturals, etc., else- 
 cohere than in the signature place. 
 
 When a staff is prepared for a key its lines and spaces 
 are always in one of live conditions, viz. : natural, sharped, 
 Hatted, double sharped or double Hatted, and here is a 
 point in thorough instruction where the word “cancel’’ 
 can not be a substitute for the word “natural.” One leord 
 must be used. No science would allow a sentence there, 
 like “No sharp or Hat upon it,” or, “nothing but the clef 
 upon it.” The meaning to be, conveyed would be crystal¬ 
 lized into one technical term. I'hat was done generations 
 ago, and it is a perfectly good word if you keep its common 
 meaning out of the way. 
 
 The terms sharp. Hat, natural, etc., refer to pitch and 
 nothing else, and the pitch meaning in the term “natural” 
 is just as real as it is in either of the others. To think of 
 naturalness in connection with “ natural ” in music, is as 
 absurd as it would be to think of something pointed or 
 cutting with “sharp,” or of something stupid or dull with 
 “Hat.” It is having the common meaning of natural in 
 mind that makes all the trouble with the word. 
 
 Notes call into action the lines and spaces that are wanted. 
 Some lines and spaces perhaps are not wanted at all during 
 the performance of a piece, but, as indicated by the signature, 
 they stand there representing their pitches all through, just 
 the same. 
 
 But an accidental is never used unless a line or space is to 
 be called into action by a note, so a note is always with the 
 accidental, and it appears to a superllcial observer as if the 
 ]iote were sharped or Hatted, but that is a false appearance. 
 It is the line or space whose meaning is changed, and not the 
 note. It makes no difference what kind of a note is used. 
 
 If the above seems true to my readers we are ready to 
 
40 
 
 ''don’t.” 
 
 begin the investigation. Here is precisely the same musical 
 phrase in two keys: 
 
 V H——H 
 
 1 - 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 i 
 
 — ffWf /i ~ ^ M 
 
 M 
 
 ^ U L. 
 
 
 
 • — 
 
 
 M , -i..-1- 1 
 
 Fi ve five five j;|five six five three five^four four three three two one. 
 Sol sol sol si la sol mi sol fi fa mi mi re do. 
 
 —t— 
 
 -1 
 
 
 
 
 -e - 0 -^ 
 
 ^ .-g= 
 
 
 
 Five five five ^five six five three five 
 Sol sol sol si la sol mi sol fi fa mi mi re do. 
 
 Look at the first measure of the first example. You 
 would not say that the sharp cancels anything there. No; 
 you would say there is no character on that line to cancel. 
 Well, look at the second example. You would not say the 
 cancel cancels the flat, for what does “cancel” mean — 
 “Annul,” “ efface,” “ destroy,” etc., and the flat is not 
 effaced—it is there.. No; you say it is the ejfect of the flat 
 that is canceled. Well, what is the effect of the flat 
 What does it do } It makes that line stand for B-flat, 
 does it not } If so, it must be the musical effect called 
 B-flat that you think is canceled. Is not G in the first 
 example a musical effect as much as B-flat in the second } 
 Is it not exactly the same thing in the key of C that B-flat 
 is in the key of E-flat, and is either effect canceled ? Does 
 not each continue just as long as it is wanted } Certainly 
 if B-flat or five is canceled in the second example when a 
 new pitch is introduced, G or five in the first is canceled 
 when the G-sharp appears. Perhaps the principle will be 
 more clearly seen if you look in the third measure. If the 
 natural in the first key cancels the effect of the sharp which 
 precedes it, the fiat in the second cancels the effect of the 
 natural, for they are absolutely the same in musical effect, 
 and, of course, in their syllables and relative names. Here 
 
 |||four four three three two one. 
 
NATURAL AND CANCEL. 41 
 
 the natural in the first key acts like a fiat, and the proof is 
 that a flat in the second does exactly the same thing. 
 
 How much more complicated the idea of canceling here 
 is than the simple truth, which is, that the natural acts like 
 a sharp in the first measure and like a flat in the third; but 
 let me come to that in a more careful way. 
 
 In the first example the musical effect G starts in the 
 signature place and runs along the line, so to speak, until it 
 comes to the sharp. There the G or five effect stops and a 
 new effect commences named sharp five. This effect has 
 but a short distance to run; it stops at the bar, after which 
 the five is resumed. 1 might say, in passing, that if stop¬ 
 ping one musical effect and introducing another \s> canceling, 
 the bar is as good a cancel as the sharp or natural, for in 
 those two respects it does just what the accidentals do. 
 
 In the second staff the B-flat effect, which is five in this 
 key, starts in the signature place and runs along in the same 
 way until it comes to the natural. Here the five effect 
 stops and the new effect .named sharp five commences. 
 This in turn is stopped by the next bar. In both cases the 
 same process of mind and of voice is gone through with, 
 and the same five, five, five, sharp five,” the same syllables 
 and the same musical effect to the ear. The natural here is 
 practically a sharp. ‘'Why not use a sharp then?” does 
 someone ask ? Because a wise musical law says, that to 
 avoid confusion and misunderstanding a flatted degree of 
 the staff must be sharped by a natural, and that a sharped 
 degree must be flatted by the same sign. 
 
 The simple and true view of this character is that it is a 
 device to sharp where a sharp will not do, and to flat where 
 a flat is not allowed. Whatever other function this character 
 has, is shared by the other accidentals, for there is nothing 
 that the natural can do in one key that the sharp or 
 flat can not .do, producing exactly the same . result, in 
 another key, and vice versa. 
 
42 
 
 ''don’t/' 
 
 Now look at the first key again. The musical effect 
 named F or four in this key starts in the signature place 
 and runs into the third measure before it is stopped. To be 
 sure, that space has not been called into action, but it has 
 been representing F or four all the time. Now the four 
 effect ceases and the sharp four effect comes in, but its sway 
 is short. At the next beat it comes to a character which is 
 appointed Xo flat that degree back to where it was. 
 
 Now look at the second example. The musical effect 
 named A-llat (four in this key) starts in the signature place 
 and runs in the same way into the third measure before it 
 is stopped. There the proper character sharps that degree 
 and introduces sharp four for one beat, then the proper 
 character fats that degree back to where it was before, 
 just what the sharp does in the first key the natural does in 
 the second, and just what the natural does in the first key 
 the flat does in the second. As before, we go through the 
 same process of mind and voice for both, and have the 
 same syllables, the same relative names, and the same 
 musical effect to the ear. 
 
 Now about the common meaning of "cancel.” All know 
 what it is. Let us see if it can be applied in music. Are 
 any tones, or notes, or flats, or sharps, or their effects an¬ 
 nulled or effaced when the new pitch comes in } No; all 
 that has gone before, stays. Every character and every ef¬ 
 fect is just as much wanted as the new pitch is. By no 
 stretch of the imagination can "cancel” mean keeping an 
 effect as long as it is wanted, and then introducing a new 
 one. If so, that operation takes place whenever an acci¬ 
 dental occurs, and at every bar where the effect of an ac¬ 
 cidental is stopped and a line or space resumes its diatonic 
 condition. Will not this illustration be of use here } 
 
 You are writing a letter; you look back and see a line that 
 you do not want; you draw your pen through it; you have 
 
NATURAL AND CANCEL. 
 
 43 
 
 canceled it; it is annulled, or effaced. But instead of that, 
 if the line or sentence is just what you do want, and at its 
 close you proceed to write something else, you have not 
 canceled anything. That is just our musical case. 
 
 Another objection to ''cancel ” is that it looks backward. 
 Notice that every accidental indicates a coming pitch, and 
 that when a musician comes to one he looks forward to see 
 what it calls for. He gives his whole attention to that. He 
 has no occasion to look backward; the key, and the pre¬ 
 vious conditions just passed over, are in his mind, half un¬ 
 consciously perhaps, but he does not have to give them any 
 attention. If a person is not' far enough along in music to 
 know where he is and what has just gone before, his men¬ 
 tal condition would have no value as authority on this sub¬ 
 ject; or, if he has such a belief in "cancel,” that whenever 
 the natural occurs he feels that he must look back and see 
 what is to be annulled or effaced, he also would be no au¬ 
 thority as to what musicians usually do. Is it not seen that 
 to regard the natural as different in its action from the other 
 accidentals, that with it there is a looking back and undoing- 
 something that the others do not do, is not only not true, 
 but far more complicated and confusing than the simple 
 truth that all accidentals act on the same general principle, 
 that each one simply sharps or flats the line or space that it 
 is on, and so indicates a coming pitch? One more import¬ 
 ant point: The teacher who wishes his pupils to be intelli¬ 
 gent on the subject of diatonic and chromatic tones must 
 sometimes question them about the condition of the lines 
 and spaces of the staff, for the lines and spaces of the staff, 
 either natural or sharped, or flatted, are the only representa¬ 
 tives of pitches in our system. When the staff is prepared 
 for a key, as has been said, the diatonic tones or regular 
 members of the key are shown in the signature place, and 
 whatever condition a line or space there is in, may be called 
 
44 
 
 ‘^don’t.” 
 
 its diatonic condition. It is a rule that any line or space may 
 be sharped or flatted from its diatonic condition, to indicate 
 a chromatic tone. If the diatonic condition of th^ line or 
 space is natural, a sharp sharps it or a flat flats it. If in 
 the signature place it is sharped, making that its diatonic 
 condition, a double sharp sharps it, ora natural flats it. If it is 
 Hatted in the signature, a natural sharps it, or a double-flat 
 flats it. 
 
 This important instruction can not go on without a tech¬ 
 nical term for every diatonic condition that a line or space may 
 be in. You point, for instance, to the second line of the 
 treble staff when it is prepared for the key of F-sharp ma¬ 
 jor, and ask, '‘What is the diatonic condition of this line in 
 this key?” The answer will be, " It is sharped.” "How 
 would you sharp it again?” "By a double sharp.” " How 
 would you flat it?” "By a natural.” Then you point to 
 the third line of the treble staff, when it is prepared for the 
 key of A-flat major, and ask, "What is the diatonic condi¬ 
 tion of this line in this key?” The answer would be, " It 
 is flatted.” "How would you sharp it?” " How would 
 you flat it?” etc. Then you point to a natural line or space 
 and ask, "What is the diatonic condition of this degree?” 
 And you immediately perceive, as was shown in the first 
 part of this article, that "cancel” can not be given as an 
 answer. 
 
 Make people understand the technical meaning of "nat¬ 
 ural,” and it will be found far more full and complete than 
 "cancel ” or "restoral,” or any other substitute that has been 
 proposed. 
 
 1 have a little pamphlet, entitled "Cancel Natural,” 
 
 which treats this subject somewhat humorously, but in some 
 respects more fully than this article does, which I shall be 
 happy to send free to anyone who will apply for it. 
 
 (Read No.37 in this connection.) 
 
SIGNATURE, 
 
 45 
 
 No. 10. SIGNATURE. 
 
 What is a signature? The sharps or flats at the beginning of a com^ 
 position to show the key or scale. 
 
 IN regard to this use of the word “Scale,” see No. 5. 
 
 Has the key of C a signature ? It has not. What is the signature to 
 the key of G. One sharp. 
 
 The musician looks at a little section of the staff, just at 
 the right of the clef, to see what key the staff is prepared 
 for. What he finds there is, to him, the signature of the 
 key, for '‘signature’’ simply il^eans sign or signs of key. 
 
 What must he see in the signature place to make sure 
 about the key ? Take the last question and answer first. Is 
 the “one sharp” alone sufficient—simply “a flag held up,’^ 
 as some one poetically says, “ to show the key.^” Let us 
 see. Here is a staff, we will suppose, with all of the signa¬ 
 ture-place concealed excepting the upper line with its ‘ ‘ flag. ” 
 Are you sure the staff' is prepared for the key of G You 
 say: “No, we must see the rest of the staff.” Certainly, 
 and that shows you, does it not, that the little “flag” is not 
 the whole of the “signature ” to the key of G ? It is just as 
 important that you should see that the other degrees in the 
 signature-place are natural, as that those affected by the 
 sharp are sharped. You must see that all the diatonic tones 
 of the key are there represented. That is so quickly done 
 that one does not perhaps realize that he sees anything but 
 the one sharp, until the rest of the staff is concealed. Then 
 . he realizes that he takes in the whole staff there at a glance. 
 Therefore, the whole description of the signature of the key 
 of G (that which must bt seen) is, one degree sharped, and 
 all the rest not affected by that sharp, natural. But science 
 abbreviates or crystallizes into the shortest terms possibhv 
 all descriptions of its facts, therefore “one sharp” is the 
 
46 
 
 ''don’t/' 
 
 usual and proper name of the signature of the key of G 
 major. All, however, using that term should know what 
 the whole signature is. 
 
 When the staff is ready for the key of C major the musi¬ 
 cian looks, as before, into the signature-place to see what 
 key the staff is prepared for, and what does he find? In¬ 
 stead of a part of the degrees natural and a part of them, 
 sharped or flatted, he finds them all natural. . Is it difficult 
 to understand that natural degrees are just as good ‘'signs 
 of key ” as sharped or flatted ones ? 
 
 Surely not to every open and candid mind. What then 
 would the abbreviation of that description be ? There is but 
 one word, and that has been used for generations. With a 
 proper understanding of its technical meaning, “natural” 
 answers every purpose as a name for what must be seen in 
 the signature-place when the staff is prepared for the key of 
 C major, or, in other words, as the name of its signature. 
 
 1 don’t know whether to say that it would give a bad 
 prominence to the key of C to consider that while all other 
 keys have signatures it has none, but 1 know it would tend 
 to make it different from other keys in the minds of learners, 
 a thing which every good teacher strives to avoid. He 
 wants his pupils to regard all major keys as exactly alike in 
 their structure, and all equally simple, equally natural, 
 equally melodious, and equally useful. 
 
 It is, of course, plain that all this trouble comes from try¬ 
 ing to substitute “ cancel ” for “natural,” and necessarily 
 trying to avoid the use of the latter word where “cancel” 
 can not be a substitute. 
 
 For instance, a writer in this dilemma says: 
 
 “ What will be the key sign with one on the added line below and he 
 answers: The absence of sharps and flats 
 
 He is partly on the right ground. He sees that “the ab¬ 
 sence of sharps or flats ” is a signature, for that is exactly 
 
SIGNATURE. 
 
 47 
 
 whiit ‘‘key sign” means, but he does not like to put the 
 meaning of that sentence into one word, for, if he does, that 
 word must be “ natural,” as “ cancel ” does not at all answer 
 there. But science comes to the. relief of the situation and 
 says one word must be used. It does not matter that here 
 and there a person holds out against this law. It will always 
 prevail, for it is sensible and right. 
 
 A prominent author and class-teacher says “ the signature to the key of C 
 major is not the absence of anything but the presence of something. It is not 
 a negative but a positive thing,” etc., and concludes with the statement that 
 
 the staff and clef constitute the signature to that key. 
 
 * 
 
 It is true you cand have a signature without a clef, but it 
 does not follow that therefore the clef is a part of the signa¬ 
 ture. You can’t have a staff without paper or blackboard, 
 or something to put it on, but staff and paper are two 
 different things. A clef is of no use without a staff, but 
 they are two. You can’t have “pitch” in a tone without 
 “length”; they are inseparable, but they are different things. 
 
 What is a signature—how does it come about ? This 
 way: 
 
 A composer is going to write a tune. The first thing he 
 does is to put the staff into such a condition that it will rep¬ 
 resent the diatonic tones (regular members) of the key he is 
 going to write in. This is done in a little section of the 
 staff just at the right of his clef. 
 
 If he is going to write in C major the condition is ready 
 to his hand. In some other keys he has to sharp some of 
 the degrees, leaving the others natural; and in some others, 
 flat some of the degrees, leaving the others natural, and 
 very rarely he has to sharp all the degrees or flat all the 
 degrees. 
 
 Observe that the object of his putting the staff into one 
 of these conditions is to make it represent the key he wants. 
 It is only incidentally and secondarily that that condition 
 
48 
 
 
 becomes the ''sign of key’’ or "signature,” but it is the con¬ 
 dition of the staff in the signature ptace that is the signature. 
 
 Now, our science condenses the descriptions of these va¬ 
 rious conditions into the shortest possible terms, so we have 
 "natural” where all the degrees are natural, "one sharp” 
 where one degree is sharped, and all the others not affected 
 by that sharp are natural, "two sharps” where two degrees 
 are sharped and all the others, not affected by those sharps, 
 natural, and so on. Since the signature must show all the 
 diatonic tones of the key, the natural, degrees (if there are 
 any) can not be left out, and never are, in the glance which 
 takes note of the signature, although nothing is said about 
 them. 
 
 There is nothing " negative” about these conditions. In 
 fact, there is nothing more positive than all the degrees 
 natural, or one degree sharped and the others natural, etc. To 
 go back to the clef to find something "positive” seems to 
 me not only unscientific but far-fetched and unnecessary. 
 When you are looking for a signature you take staff and 
 clef for granted. You know those two things must be there 
 before the question of a signature or a sharp or a flat or a 
 natural can come up. Staff and clef being there, these other 
 things come along in their proper order. 
 
 A great dictionary defines Signature as follows: 
 
 The designation of the key (when not C major or its relative minor) by 
 means of one or more sharps or flats at the beginning of the staff, immediately 
 after the clef, affecting all notes of the same letters throughout the piece or 
 movement. 
 
 Surely, everyone must see that lines and spaces are not 
 letters, and that notes are not letters, also that sharps and 
 flats affect lines and spaces, and not notes nor letters. They 
 do not affect letters because there are none, and they do not 
 affect notes because all their work is done before a note is 
 used. (See No. 2 in regard to letters.) 
 
SIGNATURE. 
 
 49 
 
 Let it be remembered that a note or notes^ sharped or flatted, as designated 
 by the signature, continue so through the entire piece, unless the effect of 
 these is cancelled by the use of other accidentals (sharps, flats, or naturals). 
 
 If it is a note that is sharped in the signature, what hap¬ 
 pens in the key of G, for instance, if no note touches that 
 upper line ? Does the sharp have no effect ? Notes are not 
 sharped nor flatted, but lines and spaces are, and then notes 
 are put on them if those pitches are wanted, but the lines 
 and spaces stand there sharped or flatted all the same, if 
 notes do not call them into action. 
 
 But what struck me especially in this statement, is the 
 broad and liberal way in which the word ‘"canceled” is 
 used. While it is not true that any musical effect is can¬ 
 celled, it is true that all accidentals are precisely alike in their 
 capacity, or rather incapacity^ in that matter. 
 
 ‘ Speaking of accidentals an author says: 
 
 Sharps affect all the notes upon the degree of the staff upon which they 
 are written, which come after them in the same measure. 
 
 He is partly over to the true idea; that is, he recognizes 
 the fact that a note is not a “ degree,” but is upon a degree, 
 but he is entirely mistaken in supposing that the sharp be¬ 
 longs to the note. The sharp is to change the meaning of 
 the degree (the line or space) for the balance of the measure, 
 no matter what kind of note is put there, or how many or 
 few notes are used. (See No. 8.) 
 
50 
 
 ''don’t,” 
 
 No. II. OF THE SIGNATURE OF MINOR KEYS. 
 
 LL the diatonic pitches of a key (regular members) are 
 
 / \ supposed to be shown in the signature place, but in 
 minor keys one pitch not belonging to the key is shown 
 there, and one pitch that does belong to the key has to be 
 shown by an accidental whenever it is wanted. So what is 
 seen in the signature place is not the complete "sign or signs 
 of a minor key.” In short, we say, however, that "one 
 sharp” is the signature of the key of E minor, but it is with 
 the understanding that we must look elsewhere before we 
 can make sure. 
 
 No. 12. WHAT THE NATURAL DOES. 
 
 When a flat in the signature is taken away by a natural the tone becomes 
 sharp. When a sharp in the signature is taken away by a natural the tone 
 becomes flat. 
 
 ERE is dimly foreshadowed the truth that the natural 
 
 1 i acts sometimes like a sharp, and sometimes like a Hat, 
 but how crude and full of errors is the statement. A flat or 
 sharp in the signature is never taken away, and a tone never 
 becomes sharp or flat in the sense of being raised or low¬ 
 ered. Another tone may be indicated, which is probably 
 what this author means. 
 
 How much simpler is the true statement. The signature 
 shows the regular members of the key. If a line or space is 
 Hatted in the signature, a "natural” upon it will act like a 
 sharp; if sharped in the signature, a natural upon it will act 
 like a Hat; or, still simpler: in one case the natural will sharp 
 it, and in the other case the natural will flat it. But in con¬ 
 nection with this should be seen that the regular members of 
 the key, as shown in the signature, are the diatonic tones of 
 the key, and that chromatic tones are represented by sharping 
 or flatting the diatonic degrees. (See No. 8 .) 
 
SHARP AND FLAT. 
 
 5 ' 
 
 No. 13. SHARP AND FLAT. 
 
 GRFAT dictionary says of the sharp: 
 
 (a) The character used to indicate that the note before which it is placed 
 is to be raised a half step or semitone in pitch, (h) A sharp tone or note. 
 
 And of ‘‘ flat ”: 
 
 Not sharp or shrill; not acute; as a flat sound. 
 
 The words sharp, flat, and natural, as the names of musical 
 characters, and as parts of the names of absolute pitches, as C- 
 sharp, B-flat, D-natural, etc.; have not the slightest reference 
 to the emotional character of tones, but refer simply and 
 wholly to pitch. Tones named with the word ‘'flat'’ may 
 be so related as to be bold and joyful; tones named with 
 the word “sharp” may be gentle and mournful, and the so- 
 called natural tones of music may be either. Tunes, cho¬ 
 ruses, and instrumental pieces by the thousand could be ad¬ 
 duced to prove these facts. 
 
 To say “flat keys,” “sharp keys,” or “natural key,” 
 meaning more sad, more joyful, or more according to nature, 
 is wholly incorrect. Mournful and joyful may in some de¬ 
 gree be predicated of the terms “minor” and “major,” but 
 as many minor keys as majors have sharps in their signa¬ 
 tures, and as many majors as minors have Oats. 
 
 No. 14. PITCH REPRESENTATION. 
 
 A tone can not be raised. A sharp placed before a note does not “ raise 
 the note a half step/’ nor raise the tone a half step,” but it causes the note 
 to represent a new pitch a half step higher. 
 
 H e narrowly escaped being exactly right in that state¬ 
 ment. It is the last part of it that gives a wrong idea. 
 The note does not represent the pitch, and the sharp does not 
 
52 
 
 “don’t.” 
 
 affect the note. The line or space represents the pitch, and 
 the sharp makes the line or space stand fora pitch a half¬ 
 step higher. Then you can put one kind of note upon it, or 
 another, or no note at all, without affecting in the least what 
 the sharp has done. 
 
 Notes are written higher or lower according as the tones are higher or lower. 
 
 Right, if it is understood that notes do not represent pitch, 
 but only note the lines and spaces that do. (See No. 2.) 
 
 1 ^ 
 
 No. IS. I--SHARP ON F. ■ 
 
 Where did 1 use a new tone ? (F-Sharp is the tone in question.) Oft F. 
 
 INCE a ‘‘ tone ” is something to hear, usi>ig it must mean 
 
 O playing or singing it. How F-sharp can be played or 
 sung on F, which is another tone, must puzzle a class to 
 see. Of course that is not what is meant, but it is exactly 
 what is said. 
 
 Yes, by sharping F we are thrown into a new position, etc. 
 
 There is no such thing as “sharping F,” or rhanging it in 
 any way. A new tone may be introduced named F-sharp, 
 but F can not be changed. The trouble here probably comes 
 from thinking of some line or space of the staff as being F. 
 If so, it is an illustration of the fact that one error is sure to 
 cause others in the course of its ramifications. 
 
 How simple and straightforward is the true phraseology 
 in this matter: 
 
 Having properly introduced the new tone by omitting F 
 and substituting F-sharp, the teacher asks: “Is the new 
 tone higher or lower than F.^ Higher. Is it higher or lower 
 than G.^ Lower. Yes, it is a pitch between F and G, and 
 is named F-sharp.” Then, at the proper time: “What pitch 
 have we omitted that we used when C was keytone?” 
 
INTERMEDIATE TONES. 
 
 53 
 
 What have we substituted ? F-sharp. As the staff stands 
 now, what pitch does it represent that we do not want? F. 
 Yes; so we’ll take those degrees which stand for the F that 
 we do not want, and make them stand for the F-sharp 
 that we do want. That is done by a character called a 
 “sharp,” placed so (on the fifth line), and such is its power 
 when so placed that it makes the octave below it stand for 
 F>sharp too. There are other lesser errors and infelicities 
 that we do not mention. 
 
 No. i6. INTERMEDIATE TONE.S. 
 
 In transposing the scale we must preserve tlie order of intervals as in the 
 key of C. To accomplish this we must reject some of the tones in the key 
 from which the transposition is to be made and use instead certain interme¬ 
 diate tones. 
 
 In transpositions how do we preserve the regular order of intervals? By 
 using certain intermediate toiies as regular tones. 
 
 T his is preparatory to practicing in the key of G after 
 having sung in the key of C. 1 do not see why this 
 should be called “transposing the scale,” nor why there 
 should be any talk about intervals yet; but my main point is 
 the use of the term “intermediate tones.” Intermediate tones 
 are chromatic tones. F-sharp, as it occurs in the key of G, is 
 not a chromatic tone, and should not be thought of as an 
 intermediate tone. It is diatonic. It is in the key of G exactly 
 what B is in the key of C. To give the idea that C, D, E, F, 
 G, A, and B are the principal or most orderly or most 
 beautiful tones of music, and that all others are intermediate 
 or chromatic, and in some way different in character, is to 
 make a serious mistake, and an entirely wrong impression on 
 the mind of the learner. C is “intermediate” in the key of 
 D; F is intermediate in the key of G; B is intermediate in 
 the key of F, and so on. 
 
54 
 
 ‘‘don't.” 
 
 It is far better that all the tones in music named with the 
 words “sharp” or “flat ” (as F-sharp, B-flat, etc.) should be 
 used first as diatonic tones. All the major keys should be so 
 learned and practiced before a chromatic tone is introduced. 
 Then every tone which has been used diatonically may be 
 used chromatically when needed, for every such tone can 
 be in some key either as a diatonic or a chromatic tone. So 
 all the tones of music, whether named with or without the 
 word “sharp” or “flat,” should be regarded as exactly alike 
 in their character, and in their capacity to be diatonic or chro¬ 
 matic. 
 
 There is not room here to show how every tone named 
 with the word “sharp” or “flat” can be successfully 
 brought in first as a diatonic tone. Any who would care to 
 see a way of doing that will find it in my little “Teachers’ 
 Club.” 
 
 No. 17. TONE, INTERVAL, AND NUMBER. 
 
 The teacher gives the different intervals of the major scale of C from one 
 to eight, explaining that one is the tonic or key-tone ; that the scale is 
 based upon this fundamental tone, and that the other intervals naturally 
 revolve around and end upon this tone. 
 
 T his writer seems here to use the word “interval” to 
 mean “tone.” If so, the following criticisms are in order: 
 The smallest family consists of two, whether of people or 
 tones. The largest tone-family is a “key,” the smallest 
 an “interval.” One tone can no more be an interval than 
 one person can be a family. (See No. 7.) 
 
 Would not the following statement be clearer : The 
 teacher gives the different tones of the major scale from one 
 to eight, explaining, etc., that the scale is based upon this 
 fundamental tone, and that the other tones of the key nat¬ 
 urally revolve around and end upon it? (See No. 5.) 
 
TONE, INTERVAL, AND NUMBER. 
 
 55 
 
 This author goes on: 
 
 “ When this is comprehended/’(that which has been explained to this 
 point,) begin upon key-tone one^ give the next degree of the scale,, and ask 
 what was played last.” 
 
 Here ‘‘degree” is used for “tone.” Degrees are not 
 tones; they are lines and spaces. “Degrees of the staff” 
 is correct phraseology, “l^rees of the scale” is not. 
 Surely “tones of the scale”^ right. Why use “degree” 
 when the true word is clearer and more direct. For in¬ 
 stance: “When this is comprehended begin with one, then 
 give the next tone of the scale, and ask what was played 
 last.” (See Nos. 3 and 6 for fuller explanation of “degrees.”) 
 Farther on is an example, with directions as follows: 
 
 After naming the number of each tone as above, the class may call it by 
 “ intervals,” etc. 
 
 We no more use numbers in music than we do letters. 
 We use some of their names to name something entirely 
 different from letters or numbers, viz. : pitches of tones— 
 the letter names as absolute pitch names, and the number 
 names as relative pitch names. For example: The abso¬ 
 lute pitch C in this key is one, the absolute pitch F is four, 
 C here does not name a Ltter nor four a number. (See No. 
 2 for fuller explanation in regard to letters.) Perhaps some 
 who see the difference between a letter and its name may 
 not have thought that there is a similar difference in the case 
 of “number.” “ Four,” for instance, as the name of a num¬ 
 ber, means four things or four units of some kind, but in 
 music it is the name of one thing—a certain relative pitcli 
 in every key. In the sense of Jiumbering the tones, the sec¬ 
 ond tone in the above lesson is four, the third two, etc. 
 
56 
 
 ‘'don’t/' 
 
 Perhaps the way that kind of numbering is done in intervals 
 and chords may throw some light on the subject. In the 
 above lesson one and four do make the first fourth. There 
 the naming and numbering coincide, but the second fourth 
 is made by two and five. In the tonic common chord in any 
 key the fundamental tone and its third and fifth will coincide 
 with the key names one, three, five, but in the dominant 
 common chord its “first” “third” and “fifth” will he five, 
 seven, and nine of the key, and in the subdominant chord, 
 four, six, and eight. Were there any propriety in the use of 
 the word “ number” in the phraseology 1 am criticising, 
 the word is entirely superfluous there, since the names of 
 the pitches are shown by the numerals under the notes. 
 Read the phrase 1 am criticising, and then the following. 
 Which is more clear and concise.^ 
 
 “After naming each tone as above, the class may call the 
 lesson by intervals.” 
 
 Write out every scale in the following manner, numbering them, and com¬ 
 mitting them to memory so as to be able to tell at once what a given number 
 is in any key. 
 
 It is not my province to criticise grammar here, but to this 
 old friend I would hint that “write out all the scales, num¬ 
 bering them,” or “ write out every scale, numbering it,'' 
 would be more in accordance with the generally accepted 
 ideas of grammatical propriety. Still there would remain 
 the error in musical phraseology, on account of which I 
 quote the statement. 
 
 We do not number tones in music; we name them. 
 
 We no more give a tone a number in music than we give 
 it a letter. We use the names of certain numbers and the 
 names of certain letters to name something very different 
 from numbers and letters. (See No. 2.) 
 
KEY AND MODE. 
 
 57 
 
 No. i8. KEY AND MODE. 
 
 Key refers merely to the foundation of any recognized series of diatonic 
 tones. Key is the index to the scale. Mode refers to a characteristic series of 
 sounds, the fundamental of which is the key-tone. Our normal major scale 
 constitutes the major mode ; and when this is transposed above or below we 
 say the key has changed, but t!ie mode remains the same. 
 
 I DO not see how the old word '‘mode” is of any use here, 
 for, as this author virtually says, the “scale” means the 
 same thing—the major scale, the major mode—the minor 
 scale, the minor mode. 
 
 “When the major scale is transposed above or below we 
 say the key has changed, but the mode remains the same,’’ 
 meaning probably that the scale in every major key has the 
 same intervals in exactly the same succession. Transposing 
 the scale is like transposing any other melody, d'he time 
 remains the same, the only difference being that it is higher 
 or lower. 
 
 The “key” is something more than “the foundation of a 
 series of tones”; it is the series itself in any possible order 
 or combination, while the scale is the series in only one par¬ 
 ticular way, ascending or descending. Foundation, meaning 
 one tone, would apply fairly well to the tonic or key-tone of 
 the key, but key and key-tone are by no means the same 
 thing. The key is the great tone family. Its members for 
 harmony purposes are known by such names as tonic, dom¬ 
 inant, etc. In vocal and instrumental music the same mem¬ 
 bers are known by such names as key-tone, one, three, five, 
 do, sol, etc. (See No. 5.) “Key is the index to the scale.” 
 The scale is one of the thousands of forms that the tones of 
 a key may take. If the key is the index to the scale it is the 
 index to any other melody or tune that may be made from 
 its tones. No tone, or succession of tones, differing from 
 the scale, can be in the scale. There are no thirds, fourths, or 
 fifths in the scale ; nothing but seconds there, but all are in 
 the family, or ‘‘key.” 
 
58 
 
 11 
 
 DON T. 
 
 No. 19. METRE AND MEASURE. 
 
 From one bar to another comprises a Measure, and the peculiarity of 
 the measure, as indicated by the metrical signature (numerator and 
 denominator), constitutes i\\Q Metre. If the metrical signature is the piece 
 is in three-quarter metre, because three-quarters, or the value thereof, /ill the 
 measure. The metre is always indicated by the numerator and denominator. 
 Here are examples of Duple, Triple and Quadruple metre, with the proper 
 accents for each. 
 
 ERE are two words that seem to me uncalled for. Although 
 
 1 1 ‘"Metre” has a similar meaning to measure, it belongs 
 to hymnology and not to music, and is not in the least 
 wanted in our science. Even in the above statement it must 
 be seen to be useless, for, wherever it is used, no idea is 
 conveyed by it that “ Measure” would not include. 
 
 “ Duple” is a pretty word, and means the right thing, and 
 if names for measures were now being proposed for the first 
 time, 1 would vote for “duple” instead of “double,” simply 
 because having all the measure names end with “ pie” would 
 make them more uniform. But, as “Double” is in, and 
 answers the purpose perfectly well, it benefits no one to pro¬ 
 pose this. 
 
 A “Measure” is a group of beats. From one bar to an¬ 
 other is but the sign of the measure, although, for short, 
 called measure. 
 
 The metre is always indicated by the numerator and denominator. 
 
 1 don’t know how it may be with “Metre,” but the Mens- 
 ure is indicated only by the numerator. The denominator 
 ’shows the “ beat note” (the kind of note that coincides with 
 the beat). 
 
 “The piece is in three-quarter metre.” It is going a great 
 way from the simplicity of established usage to propose this 
 ph rase, which does not make the subject any clearer, and 
 certainly is not needed. 
 
METRE AND MEASURE. 
 
 59 
 
 ''Metrical signature ” is not the right term. "Signature,” 
 in music, has reference only to "key.” (See No. 9.) 
 
 It should be observed that this writer says nothing about 
 the real beats and measures of music, nor anything of the 
 way that different kinds of music cause different kinds of 
 measures by the different grouping of beats, all of which 
 should come first. Supposing, however, that the main 
 things have been taught, the following statements would be 
 more in accordance with established usage: 
 
 Measures are represented to the eye by the spaces between 
 bars. The different kinds of measures are indicated by dif¬ 
 ferent figures: Double measure by 2, Triple measure by 3, 
 Quadruple by 4, etc. A figure also indicates the note that 
 coincides with the beat of the measure (called the "beat- 
 note”). This is placed below the figure indicating the meas¬ 
 ure, and the two make what is called the " measure sign,” 
 I, for example, indicates Triple measure, with the quarter 
 for beat-note, or three-quarters or their value in each meas¬ 
 ure. Here are examples, etc.: 
 
 No. 20. MEASURE SIGN. 
 
 The figures at the beginning of a composition are called the Fraction, 
 
 N O; they are called the Measure Sign. The measure sign 
 is in the form of a fraction; but "Fraction,” though a 
 good stepping-stone while explaining, is not the technical 
 term in music. There is no need to borrow this mathemat¬ 
 ical term for our musical purposes. We have a good one of 
 our own. 
 
 What do we call sharps, or flats, when placed at the beginning of a com¬ 
 position ? Key Signature. 
 
 Figures placed at the beginning of a composition indicate what ? Kind of 
 measure {called measure signature). 
 
6o 
 
 don’t/’ 
 
 The word ''Signature” stands by itself in music. The 
 prefix "Key” is useless, as "Signature” refers to key, and 
 to nothing else. The prefix "Measure” is wrong, for 
 " Signature ” has nothing to do with measure. The common 
 name for the figures which indicate the kind and variety of 
 measure, "measure sign,” is entirely adequate, convenient, 
 and satisfactory. It seems to the writer much better to leave 
 the word "Signature” to its one important meaning. It is 
 certainly unnecessary to mix it up with measure. 
 
 "What do we call sharps and flats, when placed at the 
 beginning of a composition?” is not a good question. (See 
 No. 9.) 
 
 No. 21. MEASURE AND TIME. 
 
 A WRITER .says | is double time, first variety. 
 
 Double measure, half variety, would be better. The 
 word “time,” in music (tempo), has reference to movement. 
 As-the word “measure” is so well understood, and is in 
 such constant use, there is no need of the word “time” to 
 mean measure. “First variety,” “second variety,” etc., is 
 not so direct and evident as “half variety,” “quarter 
 variety,” “eighth variety,” etc. The only way in which the 
 word “time” refers to measure in music is in the phrase 
 “beating time,” and there its only meaning is keeping with 
 tlie beats of the music, either mentally, or by hand or baton. 
 
“sharped.” “flatted.” 6l 
 
 No. 22. “SHARPED.” “FLATTED.” 
 
 We often hear that a certain note is ‘‘ sharped ”or flatted,”yet both words 
 are grammatically incorrect. When the pitch is raised or lowered by a chro¬ 
 matic alteration it may be said to have been sharpened^' or flattened." 
 
 T here is no such thing as raising or lowering a pitch by 
 '‘chromatic alteration,” or in any other way. You can 
 have another pitch, but every pitch has its—well, its own 
 pitch, and there it stays. 
 
 Notes are neither sharped nor flatted, nor sharpened nor 
 flattened. Those terms are properly applied only to lines 
 and spaces. A line or space is always in one of five condi¬ 
 tions: it is either natural, sharped, flatted, double-sharped, 
 or double-flatted; then one kind of note or another may be 
 put upon it. The presence or absence of the note has noth¬ 
 ing to do with the sharping or flatting. 
 
 Since writing the foregoing, a correspondent of the Visitor 
 has also raised the question of the correctness of the expres¬ 
 sion, "sharped line.” In reply, let me add the following 
 to what is said above: It is certain that we must sometimes 
 put a sharp on a line, and nothing seems to me more simple 
 and direct than to call that process "sharping the line,” and 
 when it is done, to say the line is "sharped,”—meaning 
 simply that a sharp is put upon it. 
 
 The word" sharp, ”as is seen, is used in music both as a noun 
 and as a verb. As a noun, it is the name of a musical char¬ 
 acter and a part of the name of certain independent tone- 
 pitches, as C-sharp, F-sharp, etc. As a verb, it describes 
 the process spoken of above, and is also used to describe a 
 certain kind of performing out of tune; but that is another 
 subject. In what we are talking about we can only "sharp” 
 something by putting a sharp upon it, and the only thing 
 a sharp is ever put upon is a line or space. 
 
 It is true that we can not sharp F. We can have another 
 
62 
 
 ‘'don’t/' 
 
 pitch named F-sharp, but that opens up an entirely different 
 subject from lines and spaces. Let us go into it with some 
 care, and if we get at its true inwardness it will not only 
 help here, but will throw light upon kindred topics. 
 
 Under the head of “ Music,” two entirely different kinds 
 of things are included, viz.: Tones—things to hear, and their 
 Signs—things to see. F, G, C-sharp, B-flat, etc., are tones.. 
 Lines and spaces, sharps and flats, are signs. Now, while 
 you can put one sign on another, as a sharp on a line, because 
 both are things to see, you can not put a sharp on a tone— 
 because one is a thing to see and the other a thing to hear. 
 So while it is sensible enough to talk about sharping a line, 
 it is utterly absurd to talk about sharping F, because F is a 
 tone. Does anyone think that F is the name of a line.^ If 
 so, its name is sometimes F-sharp, sometimes F-double- 
 sharp. Use different clefs and it would have at least twenty 
 other names. (See No. 2.) No, that line has but one name; 
 but the thing named fifth line may be so modified by clefs, 
 and by being sharped or flatted or double-sharped or double- 
 flatted, as to be the sign or representation to the eye of 
 many different tones. 
 
 The things in music named C, 1 ), F-sharp, B-tlat, etc., 
 can not be seen. It is only their signs thiit are seen. 
 
 Is it correct to speak of sharping a line or space ? Is not F-sharp or A-tlat a 
 tone entirely independent of F, or A ? 
 
 That looks as if he thinks F is a line and A a space, and 
 that I supposed I was sharping F when 1 was preparing a 
 line to represent the tone F-sharp, and that 1 was flatting A 
 when I was preparing a space to represent the tone A-flat. 
 
 1 assure him that I had no idea of such a thing as sharping a 
 tone or flatting a tone, but I had a very clear idea of putting 
 a sharp on a line to make it represent the tone F-sharp, and 
 of putting a flat on a space to make it represent the tone A- 
 flat. 
 
"'sharped.” "flatted.” 6) 
 
 No. When we put the shiirp on the line we are not doiitg 
 anything to F. That tone is "way off” in another world— 
 the world of sound—while we, with our signs, are in the 
 world of sight. When we put the sharp on the line, or, to 
 speak more concisely, when we sharp the line, it stands 
 silent, waiting for somebody with voice or instrument to 
 produce the tone it calls for. For short, we say that that 
 line, so modified, is F-sharp, but it isn’t: it is only its sign. 
 Just as we say this—$1.00—is one dollar, but it isn’t; it is 
 only the sign of a dollar. It calls for it, perhaps, if it is on a 
 bill that you ought to pay. 
 
 Is not F-sharpthe name of a particular pitch, without sharping anytliing? 
 
 Certainly. But you can not represent that particular pitch 
 without sharping something. 
 
 Literally, is anything made flat or sharp ? 
 
 1 do not think those would be good words to describe 
 what is done, but the fact remains that flats and sharps are 
 put upon lines and spaces, and, in accordance with scientific 
 usage, there must be some concise way of stating that fact 
 when it occurs. 
 
 It would appear that a line or space can not be flatted or sharped any more 
 than a letter (normal pitch-name), and that such an expression tends to con¬ 
 vey a wrong impression to the pupil. 
 
 1 hope it does not appear to the reader of this article that a 
 line or space can not be sharped or flatted, and sincerely 
 trust that no wrong impression will be made by the forego¬ 
 ing on the mind of any pupil. All I wish to say further, is,, 
 that we do not use letters in our musical notation, unless the 
 clefs be considered letters. (See No. 2.) 
 
64 “don’t.” 
 
 No. 23. ACCIDENTAL. CHROMATIC ALTERATION. 
 
 The Vv'ord “ accidental ” is also employed incorrectly in reference to a for¬ 
 eign tone not contained in the scale in which a composition is written. In 
 such cases it would be preferable to speak of the foreign tone, in a general 
 way, as a chromatic alteration, or, be specific and say, /;-flat, ^-sharp, c-nat- 
 ural, for it is not reasonable to suppose that the composer used the tone acci¬ 
 dentally. 
 
 T he writer of the above seems to think that ‘'accidental” 
 is intended to be used in music with something of its 
 common meaning, and for that reason suggests a way of 
 avoiding its use. 
 
 That is a not uncommon error, and leads to just such un¬ 
 fortunate phrases as “ chromatic alteration,” which is not 
 only unnecessary, but incorrect. The “foreign tone” is just 
 as liable to be a diatonic tone of a neighboring key (in a 
 modulation) as to be a chromatic tone in the key in use, and 
 when it is a diatonic tone, a chromatic alteration to repre¬ 
 sent it would indeed be a strange contradiction in terms. 
 
 An accidental is not a tone; it is simply a sharp, flat, or 
 natural elsewhere than in the signature place—something to 
 see—nothing to hear. The accidental sometimes helps to 
 represent a chromatic tone, and sometimes a diatonic tone 
 (the latter in modulation). Of course the accidental is never 
 used “by accident.” He who thinks that is the meaning 
 intended, will be in constant trouble. It would be as if one 
 thought the intention of “ natural” in music is to mean that 
 one tone, or one scale, or one key has more “naturalness” 
 than another, or that “sharp” means more shrill or high, 
 and “flat” more dull or low. Such thoughts lead the 
 teacher astray in his explanations, to the confusion of his 
 pupils. 
 
 Only the technical meanings of these words should be 
 thought of in their musical use. It is not of the least con¬ 
 sequence what their other meanings are. (See No. 25.) 
 
ACCIDENTAL. CHROMATIC ALTERATION. 65 
 
 The word accidentar’ is, therefore, employed correctly 
 when speaking of the character that aids in representing the 
 ''foreign tone.” It is the duly appointed and only character 
 that changes the meaning of the line or space so that it will 
 represent the pitch wanted. A chromatic or a diatonic alter¬ 
 ation of the meaning of the line or space will be the result, 
 but the "accidental” is the cause. 
 
 For it is not reasonable to suppose that the composer used the tone acci¬ 
 dentally. 
 
 Nor is it reasonable to suppose that he thought of such a 
 thing while using the word "accidental” with its musical 
 meaning. 
 
 In the scale in which a composition is written. 
 
 A composition is written in a "key,” not in a scale. There 
 is nothing in the scale in the way of a melody but the scale. 
 One tune or melody can not be in another. 
 
 The chromatic alteration is merely the means of arriving at the new key 
 or location, etc.; and again: 
 
 Every chromatic alteration does not necessitate a change of key. 
 
 Evidently in this author’s mind "chromatic alteration” 
 means the use of an accidental. Accidentals often indicate 
 diatonic tones. When that is the case, 1 should suppose 
 "diatonic alteration” would be preferred. It is certain that 
 in such cases " chromatic alteration” is not correct. I can 
 not imagine why such an expression should be used when 
 the usual phraseology is so much clearer and better. Here 
 it is: 
 
 "The accidental is merely the means of arriving at the 
 new key.” (Here is where the accidental indicates a dia¬ 
 tonic tone.) "Every accidental does not indicate a change 
 of key.” (Here is where the accidental would indicate a 
 chromatic tone.) 
 
66 
 
 DON T. 
 
 A recent writer in the Visitor suggests “ Incidental” as a 
 substitute for ‘‘Accidental.” Certainly the common meaning 
 of Incidental for musical purposes is not so far out of the 
 way as is that of Accidental. The character referred to is 
 surely one of the incidents in the notation of a piece of music 
 where it occurs, but it is never an accident. Still, it does not 
 fill the bill. Its common meaning is neither distinctive nor 
 descriptive. We should have to give it a technical meaning, 
 and that is all we have to do to Accidental. 
 
 No. 24. RAI5ING A TONE. 
 
 This is produced by raising the root of an essential seventh chord one chro¬ 
 
 matic step. 
 
 OU can not raise a tone; you can have another a half 
 
 1 step higher. “The seventh chord” is the phrase you 
 would use if you were numbering successive chords and had 
 arrived at the seventh one. The usual phraseology, “the 
 chord of the seventh,” is better. The phrase “one chro¬ 
 matic step” applied to a pitch a half step higher is strange 
 
 indeed. 
 
 This author says that the Plagal Cadence embraces the 
 harmonies of the subdominant and tonic, and there he is 
 right; but he follows with “in other words, with the chords 
 of the fourth and first degrees,” and there he is not so clear 
 as if he had said “the chords of four and one,”for “four ” 
 and “one” are the key names of the fundamental tones of 
 those two chords, while degrees are not the names of tones 
 at all, but of lines and spaces. (See Nos. 3 and 6.) 
 
 . r i 
 
 \ 
 
TECHNICAL TERMS—TONALITY. 
 
 67 
 
 No. 25. THCHNICAL TERMS. 
 
 The technical names applied to each note of the scale should also be under¬ 
 stood. The first note of a scale is called Tonic; t. c., keytone; the second, 
 Supertonic, the next degree above the Tonic, etc. 
 
 A mong musical terms, some are '‘technical,” that is, 
 used with a meaning more or less different from their 
 common meanings; some are used ivith their common 
 meanings, and some are “to the manner born,” that is, their 
 musical meaning is their common meaning, and they are 
 only technical when used elsewhere than in music. For 
 example, “tone” is at home in music; it is not technical 
 there; but when used in painting, as the “tone” of a picture, 
 it is technical in that art; and in medical parlance, as the 
 “tone” of the system, it is technical there, thus having dif¬ 
 ferent meanings for its different uses. 
 
 1 do not think the above terms should be called “technical.” 
 They belong primarily to music, with perhaps one exception, 
 “dominant.” But that is not important. 1 would suggest 
 a very small “don’t” for that—it is saying that those are 
 names of the different degrees of the scale that requires cap¬ 
 itals. (See No. 5.) 
 
 No. 26. TONALITY. 
 
 In its general application this (Tonality) refers to our eighty-eight chromatic 
 tones; to the twelve major scales; the several forms of the minor scale; to 
 our system of related and unrelated keys; and the science of Harmony. But 
 Ihe application in this book is to our impression of the key at any particular 
 point, and the relationship between the new and old fundamental. A few 
 examples will set this forth in plainer light. 
 
 T hen comes a musical example of six measures; the 
 first measure in the key of C major, the second in the 
 key of D minor, the third and fourth in G major, and the fifth 
 
68 
 
 ‘‘don’t.” 
 
 and sixth in C major. These simple facts he expresses in 
 the following language: 
 
 The tonality in the first measure is plainly that of C major. At (b) the 
 tonality is recognized as that of D minor even before the resolution on the 
 third beat. The chord at (d) destroys the impression of D minor because 
 ^-natural does not occur in that key. The discord at (e) establishes the to¬ 
 nality as that of G. The concord at (f) does not affect the tonality; but 
 when the F-sharp is canceled at (g) the key of the dominant disappears, and 
 the ear anticipates the return of the original tonality as at (c). 
 
 While the above might be stated in simpler language, this 
 author has one phrase exactly right: “ because Z 7 -natural does 
 not occur in that key.'' But 1 do not see why he did not say 
 “because /^-natural does not occur in that scale," since he 
 generally uses the word “scale” for “key.” (See No. 5.) 
 “ But when the F-sharp is canceled at (g)/’ etc. F-sharp is 
 not canceled—it is there, and its effect is there just as long 
 as it is wanted. Then a new pitch is introduced. Stopping 
 one effect and introducing another is not canceling. If it 
 were, every accidental cancels whenever it appears. So 
 does the bar that follows an accidental. (See No. 8.) 
 
 “The key of the dominant disappears,” etc. That phrase 
 might perhaps answer if the facts were in the mind of him 
 who uses it; but learners should not be subjected to that 
 risk. There is no such thing as “the key of the dominant.” 
 Keys are not founded upon dominants, but upon tonics. 
 That which teas dominant in one key may become tonic in 
 another. Of course that is the meaning here. 
 
 But the first sentence in this quotation calls for special re¬ 
 mark. It is where he speaks of “ our eighty-eight chro¬ 
 matic tones. ” 
 
 Every tone in music, that is, every absolute pitch, is some¬ 
 times diatonic and sometimes chromatic-, excepting those 
 named with the words double sharp and double flat, which 
 are not used as diatonic tones to any extent. (See No. 34.) 
 
TONALITY. 69 
 
 C is just as liable to be chromatic as diatonic, and C-sharp 
 is just as liable to be diatonic as chromatic. 
 
 If this author means that all the tones in music named with 
 the words sharp or Oat, as F-sharp, B-flat, etc., are chro¬ 
 matic, and that C D E F G A and B and their octaves are 
 not chromatic, he makes a grave mistake, for the latter are 
 just as often chromatic as the former. 
 
 Whether he is speaking only of the key of C major, or 
 that there are eighty-eight chromatic tones in each of the 
 great tone-families^ it is an unfortunate expression, for it 
 must'give a wrong impression of the facts to a learner. If 
 he had said “ Tonality refers to all diatonic and chromatic 
 tones; to the twelve,” etc., he would have stated clearly 
 what 1 suppose he means. 
 
 No. 27. AlJGMFNTl^D PRIMH AND MINOR SECOND. 
 
 What name is given to the interval from one to shar[-) one (C to C-sharp, 
 etc.)? Primed 
 
 T WO tones of the same pitch constitute a “prime.” C 
 and C-sharp make what is called a chromatic interval, 
 sometimes called an augmented prime. Then the form of 
 the question is not right. From C to C-sharp is a half step; 
 from six to seven of the harmonic minor key is a step-and- 
 a-half. The musical effect of the first interval is “augment¬ 
 ed prime,” and of the second “augmented second.” 
 
 This questioner is right in some previous questions-, as 
 “ What is the size of the interval from one to two of the har¬ 
 monic minor scale .^” "'A stepA That is right. “Size,” or 
 
 “ difference of pitch,” or “ distance” (so to speak), in fact, all 
 the measurements which we do not hear, but calculate, are 
 well described by the terms “step,” “ half step,” etc. If he 
 had continued, and asked what musical effects do those 
 
70 “'don’t/' 
 
 tones produce heard near together ? the proper answer 
 would be, a major second. 
 
 There is nothing more orderly and beautiful in our science 
 than this plan of describing the two things which are called 
 by the one name of “Interval,”—which things are the differ¬ 
 ence of pitch between two tones (of different pitch), and the 
 musical effect of the two when heard together. (See No. 7.) 
 
 Those who mix these terms, or think they can use the 
 emotional terms for measurements, get into difficulties, one 
 of which may be shown as follows: 
 
 “ What interval is this— 
 
 “ A minor second."' 
 
 “ How far apart must tones be to make a minor second 
 “ A minor second." 
 
 “What interval is this— 
 
 ''A chromatic interval or augmented prime." 
 
 “ How far apart must tones be to produce this interval ?" 
 
 Here he is in trouble. He can not say “ minor second.” 
 No musician would admit that, and if the man is sensible he 
 now sees the necessity for a different term for measuring 
 purposes. 
 
 How clear and logical the true way is. 
 
 “ How far apart are the tones that make a minor second ?” 
 
 “ A half step." 
 
 “ How far apart are the tones that make a chromatic in¬ 
 terval ? " 
 
 “ A half step." 
 
 “ Why then are they not alike ? " 
 
 “ Because in their use, especially in harmony, they produce 
 entirely different musical effects." 
 
AUGMENTED PRIME AND MINOR SECOND. 
 
 I might add that the tones of a minor third and of an aug¬ 
 mented second are the same distance apart, while their 
 effects are totally different. 
 
 The following remarks upon the effect that relationship 
 produces not only upon tones but upon intervals, may he of 
 use in this connection. 
 
 Give a tone alone upon the piano—middle C for example. 
 It has no particular emotional effect. Add the E-flat next 
 above it and it instantly becomes plaintive and mournful. 
 Play C and E together and both become cheerful. So it is 
 seen that single tones are effected in their emotional charac¬ 
 ter by relationship. • Let us see how it is with Intervals. 
 
 Play the minor third again 
 
 Now 
 
 add the major third below—and every particle 
 
 of sadness disappears from the uiinor third. 
 
 Play in the key of C major a moment to get the key of 
 A-flat out of the mind, and then play C and D-flat thus— 
 
 That interval has a somber effect. 
 
 
 Now let it be put into relationship with the other seconds 
 of the scale in A-flat major— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Lx 
 
 
 
 ^ L— 
 
 and all its somberness disappears. All this is to call atten¬ 
 tion to a very important thing in music, viz.: the different 
 effects produced by tone-relationship, as exemplified and 
 illustrated in the tone-families, from the smallest (the Inter¬ 
 val) to the largest (the Key). 
 
72 
 
 “don’t.” 
 
 No. 28. CLEF. 
 
 of the great dictionaries defines the clef thus: 
 
 A character used in musical notation to determine the position and pitch of 
 the scale as represented on the staff. 
 
 Observe, this definition connects the clef with the scale 
 primarily, and secondarily with the staff, while the fact is 
 that the clef determines the pitch representation of the staff, 
 and then the scale or any other succession or combination in 
 the key of C major may be represented upon it by 7 wting the 
 lines or spaces wanted; but the entire work of the clef is 
 done before a note is used; and were any other key than C 
 major to be represented the clef alone would not''determine 
 the pitch,” other staff modifiers (sharps or flats) would have 
 to be added. So neither the word scale nor note has any 
 proper place in the definition of clef. 
 
 But a still greater defect in the definition is that it omits 
 the reasons for clefs. Were the object of the clef only "to 
 determine the position or pitch of the scale,” one clef would 
 be enough, but each clef makes the staff represent the pitches 
 of a certain voice or instrument range or compass as much as 
 possible by its long lines and spaces. The Treble clef, for 
 instance, makes the second line stand for G, and so keeps the 
 pitch representation of the ordinary voices of women nearly 
 within the five lines and their spaces. So the F, or Base, clef 
 makes the staff represent the lower voices of men, and the C, 
 or Tenor, clef makes it represent the higher voices of men 
 with hardly an added degree. 
 
 Clefs, sharps, flats, naturals, double sharps, and double flats 
 are staff modifiers. They have to do only with lines and 
 spaces. Observe the difference between representing a pitch 
 and indicating it. When the staff is prepared for a key by 
 clef and signature, all the pitches of the key are represented, 
 
TENOR CLEF—TRANSPOSITION. 
 
 73 
 
 but none are indicated. Notes indicate the pitches wanted 
 while showing how long to make them. See No. i. 
 
 No. 29. TENOR. CLEF. 
 
 Some have commenced using what they call the Tenor clef, but as the lines 
 and spaces in the Tenor part have the same names as in the Treble and Alto 
 parts, there is not the shadow of a necessity for another clef, and using one 
 puts a wholly unnecessary obstacle in the path of learners. 
 
 HERE are two reasons for the Tenor clef, one very im- 
 
 1 portant and the other appreciable. The first is making 
 the staff represent the exact pitch of Tenor voices instead of 
 an octave higher as the Treble clef does. The second is that 
 the Tenor part may be quickly distinguished from the So¬ 
 prano. Instead of being an obstacle in the way of learners, 
 which it never is, it often removes one. 
 
 No. 30. TRANSPOSITION. 
 
 When any other than C is taken as tonic, what is the change called ? 
 Transposition f or from one key to anotherJ. 
 
 HIS is misleading. “ Transposition” takes place only 
 
 1 when the same tune, phrase, exercise, or scale is given 
 in one key and then in another, or when a piece is given in 
 a different key from the one in which it is written. Giving 
 one piece in one key and then taking another tonic and 
 forming a new key with different exercises is not transposi¬ 
 tion, and simply going from one key to another should not 
 be so called. 
 
74 
 
 don’t/^ 
 
 No. 31. ON REPRESENTING KEYS. KEYTONE. 
 
 I N an excellent work, which is refreshingly true in its use 
 of musical terms, there is one thing to which 1 say 
 “don’t.” It is applying “do” to different degrees of the staff, 
 and having lessons really in different keys, without any sig¬ 
 nature. 
 
 The proper signature does not hinder the practice in the 
 least, and may be used without explanation, just as minor 
 and chromatic scales can be practiced to advantage before 
 their structure is explained. The teacher calls attention to, 
 and names, the signature, and says it will be explained later. 
 
 What is the advantage of this.^ The pupil gets accustomed 
 to the looks of the signature, and quickly associates it with 
 the location of the syllables (so to speak). For instance, 
 with four sharps on the treble staff he connects “do” with 
 the first line, with one sharp “do”on the second line, etc. 
 There is then nothing to unlearn or change, later. He will 
 simply go deeper into the meaning of what he has become 
 accustomed to the appearance of. 
 
 What is the objection to my friend’s plan.^ The oppor¬ 
 tunity is lost for the important matter of associating certain 
 appearances of the staff with certain applications of the syl¬ 
 lables, a new condition comes in when the signature is given, 
 the whole has a new look and there is a sort of setback, and 
 all without the slightest advantage or compensation to the 
 learner. 
 
 My friend objects to keytone, because he says all the tones 
 of a key are keytones. No, all the tones of a key are not 
 “keytones.” All are “members of the key,” or “tones of 
 the key,”but only one is“keytone.” That is Xht right oi 
 a technical term, to have a separate meaning when it is 
 used to apply to one particular thing. The science has a 
 perfect right to apply that word to one tone of the key, and 
 
MENTAL EFFECTS OF TONES. 7S 
 
 there is not the slightest danger that any other member of 
 the key will be called the keytone. 
 
 All the tones and signs of music are natural, or at least 
 one is just as natural as another, but that does not prevent 
 the wordnatural’’from being technically applied to certain 
 things in the science and not to all. 
 
 No. 32. MENTAL EFFECTS OF TONES. 
 
 When a singer reads Hie notes by remembering wliat each line or space 
 means, he is said to be reading by abstract pitch. When a singer reads the 
 notes by computing tlie distance from each note to the next, lie is said to be 
 reading by relative pi fch. 
 
 D oes not a singer read by having the characteristics of a 
 pitch in his mind when he sees its sign, instead of re¬ 
 membering a line or space, or computing a distance? In 
 other words, is it not the mental effect of tones, as the tonic- 
 solfaists call it, by which we are guided ? For instance, when 
 we see the sign of five of a major key, does not the _pecul- 
 iar dominant character of that pitch come to our minds, or 
 if it is the plaintive six, or the restless seven, or the repose¬ 
 ful home-tone—is it not its mental effect in each case that is 
 our guide? Analyze it in your own case and see. Of course 
 this would not apply to beginners. They have first to learn 
 the mental effect of each tone of a key—an interesting and 
 useful work, easily done. 
 
76 
 
 don’t.” 
 
 No. 33. PULSE AND TONE-COLOR. 
 
 Ordinarily, in each pulse-group, especially in the smaller clusters, there is 
 one pulse which stands out more prominently in the mind as the principal 
 pulse of that group. 
 
 W E have long been in the habit of defining beats as 
 mental pulsations, and have long used “pulse’’and 
 “pulsations” as good stepping-stones to the ultimate word. 
 Why Mr. Curwen substitutes the word “pulse” for “beat” I 
 do not know, unless it was to mark a distinction between 
 the real beats of music and the motions of the hand or baton 
 which manifest them. If so, it is an entirely unnecessary 
 proceeding, for there is no more confusion in using the word 
 “beat” for both things, than the word “crescendo” for a cer¬ 
 tain dynamic effect and for the two diverging lines which 
 \ constitute its sign, and there are many other cases in music 
 where one word serves as the name of the thing and its sign 
 without the least confusion. “Pulse” is a good word and 
 means the right thing, but is no better than “beat.” Not¬ 
 withstanding the small “don’t’’attached to this (only because 
 it introduces an unnecessary word into our system) it may 
 prevail—time will show. It is universally used by the sol- 
 faists in England, where it originated, and they are so great 
 a power that whatever they do is sure to have a large fol¬ 
 lowing. 
 
 “Tone-color” is much affected by some teachers and writ¬ 
 ers. It is a picturesque expression, and there is no more harm 
 in applying the word “color”to tone than in applying the 
 word “tone” to color in a picture, if we needed to do so, but 
 we do not. “Quality”is what is meant, and is a far better 
 word for classification and clear distinction. “Clear qual¬ 
 ity,” “somber quality,” “sympathetic quality,” etc., convey 
 much more forcibly the ideas wanted than “clear color,” 
 “somber color,” “sympathetic color,” etc. 
 
DOUBLE SHARP AND DOUBLE FLAT. 
 
 V7 
 
 Possibly in describing the effect of a large orchestra the 
 word “color/’ or “coloring,” might help, but 1 do not see 
 why “quality ” would not always be more definite when we 
 come down to particulars. It is a pretty word, and seekers 
 for novelty will naturally be attracted by it. 
 
 No. 34. DOUBLE SHARP AND DOUBLE ELAT. 
 
 If we wish to make any degree of the staff represent a tone one full step 
 above its natural tone, what character do we use ? 
 double sharp.’’ 
 
 And if the same distance below, what character ? 
 double flat.” 
 
 HE above is totally misleading. Here are the facts: 
 
 1 The double sharp is a device to sharp a degree of the 
 staff already sharped, or that would be sharped if the signa¬ 
 ture were given where it is used. The double flat is a de¬ 
 vice to flat a degree of the staff already flatted, or that 
 would be flatted if the signature were given, etc. 
 
 It is certain that if there had never been any occasion for 
 sharping a line or space already sharped, ther& never would 
 have been a double sharp; and if there had never been a 
 need for flatting a degree already flatted, there never would 
 have been a double flat. The idea that the double sharp 
 and double flat were invented to change the meaning of a 
 natural degree of the staff a whole step at once is utterly 
 subversive of all accepted ideas of tone relationship and rep¬ 
 resentation, as I think 1 can show. 
 
 Every tone properly used in music stands in key relation¬ 
 ship to its neighbors. It is either a diatonic or regular mem¬ 
 ber of the key that is being used, or it is a chromatic or 
 temporary member. In a major key it is either one or sharp 
 
78 
 
 “ don’t.” 
 
 one, two, or sharp two, or flat two, three, or flat three, and 
 so on up to seven, or flat seven. It must be one of these 
 pitches. There are no such things as double sharp one, 
 double flat three, etc. There is no such a thing as double 
 sharping or double flatting in the sense of changing the 
 meaning of a degree a step, where the pitches of a key are 
 futty represented. 
 
 There are two ways of representing keys on the staff, one 
 by a signature, and the other by accidentals; but observe 
 the important difference between the two ways: When the 
 key is represented by a signature all its regular members are 
 shown, whether they are wanted or not, but when the key 
 is represented by accidentals, only those tones of the key 
 that are wanted are shown, the others have to be “ under¬ 
 stood.” 
 
 Take the following example for illustration, where a mod¬ 
 ulation goes from the key of C to the key of E: 
 
 F-sharp is not shown there because it is not wanted, but it 
 is there potentially, and is in the musician’s mind as two of 
 the key of E, so when he sees the double sharp he knows it 
 is the orderly way to represent the sharp two that the music 
 requires. Ele has nothing to do with the F-natural in that 
 modulation. It is not in existence for him. 
 
 To think of F-natural, which is not diatonic there because 
 it is in the signature at the beginning, or to think of it be¬ 
 cause it is flat two in the key in which the modulation is, 
 
DOUBLE SHARP AND DOUBLE FLAT. 79 
 
 and that the oftice of the double sharp is to “double sharp” 
 it, and so change the meaning of that degree a step at once 
 to get the sharp two, would be a folly that we can hardly 
 conceive of in a person with any musical knowledge at all. 
 
 Custom, as is seen above, permits the staff to make false 
 representations in modulations. Observe right in the midst 
 of the key of E (four sharps) F-natural and C-natural ap¬ 
 pear as diatonic degrees (according to signature). This they 
 are not at that point, so the staff there makes a false repre¬ 
 sentation. 
 
 Just so whenever .the double sharp or double flat appears 
 on a natural degree, a false representation is made. Why.? 
 Because, practically, the double sharp and double flat are al¬ 
 ways used for chromatic tones, and a chromatic tone is never 
 truly represented in any other way than by sharping or flat¬ 
 ting a diatonic degree. Thus a natural line or space can not 
 be where those “ double” characters are used, and it ought 
 not to be so thought of, even if the key in which they oc¬ 
 cur is not “expressed” but has to be “understood.” 
 
 Here the staff makes a true representation of the above 
 musical strain: 
 
 It just occurs to me that the word “double sharp” may 
 mislead some by causing them to think that it means sharp¬ 
 ing twice. It means no such thing. It is simply a name 
 given to a character that sharps once, like any other sharp, 
 but it has a different name from the other sharp and a differ- 
 
8 o 
 
 don’t.” 
 
 ent appearance because of its peculiar office. If it appears 
 to sharp twice, it is like the sun’s rising, an apparent truth, 
 but not a real truth; and it is so because of the nonrepresen¬ 
 tation on the staffs of all the tones of the keys in which the 
 
 double sharp occurs, as I have shown. So, of the appear- 
 
 0 
 
 ance that the double flat flats twice, the same general prin¬ 
 ciple holds true. 
 
 The double sharp can not be used in the keys of C, G, and 
 D. It first finds a place in A major (three sharps) where it 
 can be used only in representing sharp six. In E major it is 
 used for sharp two and sharp six; in B major for sharp two, 
 sharp five, and sharp six, and so on. It is not used to rep¬ 
 resent a diatonic tone in any major key in common use. 
 The first one in which it could be so used is G-sharp (eight 
 sharps), where F double sharp would be seven. 
 
 As a diatonic tone it would, of course, be represented in 
 the signature place. 
 
 I have never seen this key used in music, but building up 
 its signature in the orderly way shows in a clear and pleas¬ 
 ant fashion the true use of the double sharp. First the seven 
 natural degrees are sharped, and then the first degree that 
 was sharped must be sharped again, thus: 
 
 Observe the signature is built up Ty gradually adding 
 sharps, and when it comes to the double sharp, that is add¬ 
 ed precisely as the others are, and with the same effect, for 
 it is not tico sharps, but one. It is made peculiarly, and 
 named peculiarly, because its office is to sharp another sharp 
 (so to speak). 
 
 Going on to nine sharps, ten sharps, eleven sharps, etc., 
 
DOUBLE SHARP AND DOUBLE FLAT. 8l 
 
 would be but sharping again others of the already sharped 
 degrees of the staff. If anyone thinks, after he has placed 
 the seven sharps, that he could take away the first one and 
 substitute a double sharp, and so make that degree of the 
 staff represent a pitch a step higher to begin with, he would 
 make a grave mistake. Such a proceeding would entirely 
 subvert the beautiful order of our signature system. 
 
 The first minor key in which this pitch could appear as a 
 diatonic tone is G-sharp minor (five sharps), where F double 
 sharp is seven; but it will be observed that that degree is 
 already sharped in the signature place. 
 
 In conclusion, in all the major keys in common use, 
 wherever there is a pitch named with the word ''double 
 sharp,'’it is chromatic, and there is a diatonic pitch a half 
 step below it, and wherever there is a pitch named with the 
 word "double flat,’' it is chromatic, and there is a diatonic 
 pitch a half step above it. This is true whatever may be the 
 staff representation. 
 
 A good deal of discussion has recently taken place regard¬ 
 ing the compound characters that always follow the double 
 sharp and double flat (t[^, tjb). It began by the statement 
 that those characters had no names, and has been continued 
 by the effort to find one for each that would be satisfactory. 
 1 will not discuss the merits of the names which have been 
 proposed because I am satisfied that a plan which has been 
 suggested by at least three teachers of prominence will, if 
 adopted, do away with the present awkward form of the 
 characters and render new names unnecessary. 
 
 The plan is to let a sharp alone follow the double sharp, 
 and a flat alone follow the double flat as a means of chang¬ 
 ing back the line or space affected to its diatonic condition. 
 
 At first I thought that plan would not do, it seemed so 
 simple, but reflection convinces me that it would work per¬ 
 fectly well. Let me illustrate: 
 
82 
 
 “don't. 
 
 ) > 
 
 Three, five, jif five, six, five, three, one, two, three. 
 
 Mi, sol, si, la, sol, mi, do, re, mi. 
 
 There can be no doubt as to what that second accidental 
 means. A natural before it would not make it more clear; 
 on the contrary, it would give it a confused look. A natu¬ 
 ral there is as unnecessary as in the changing of a signature. 
 It is far simpler just to let one signature displace another 
 without the intervention of naturals. 
 
 Here the naturals are used: 
 
 
 T 
 
 
 
 \J .1 1 , .1 
 
 -TT- - 
 
 
 
 
 n 
 
 
 
 n ^—r 
 
 
 ^ 
 
 # 
 
 0 # 
 
 .im ^ # 
 
 L ^ 
 
 * 
 
 T 3 T 7 ^ r 
 
 
 
 
 Mi, 
 
 do. 
 
 ti, ■ 
 
 do. 
 
 do, do. 
 
 Mi, 
 
 do, re. 
 
 mi. 
 
 r-fr-rl-i 
 
 fS---^r-n 
 
 0 
 
 
 
 
 ^ 0 ^ 
 
 , 1 • 
 
 .. ^ 0 ^ 
 
 
 
 f W - ■ - w 
 
 s L r. . 
 
 W ' W 
 
 ... 1 ,\ 
 
 S' ^ 1 
 
 r L 
 
 I 
 
 i: 
 
 1 
 
 
 Ke, mi, re. 
 
 do, sol, mi, 
 
 1 
 
 re, mi, re, 
 
 do. 
 
 Here the naturals are dispensed with: 
 
 - 1 — 
 
 “1 - —n 
 
 — q— 
 
 -^- 1 
 
 
 1 1 
 
 r? i 
 
 
 rm ^ 4 1 * 0 
 
 0 9 9 
 
 
 S^ 1 
 
 'L l 4 t • 
 
 mJ 
 
 
 
 ~ 3 
 
 Sad - ly the wTnds in the dark fo-rests sigh. 
 
 44 
 
 Li 
 
 -4 « - 
 
 
 
 ^^^— 
 
 ^ h -* 
 
 —9 -^- 0 — 
 
 
 While o’er the mea-dows the light breez-es fly. 
 
 Whether this arrangement be considered entirely arbitrary, 
 or whether the clef may be considered as ending the effect 
 of the previous signature, by no possibility can the plan 
 cause any misunderstanding or confusion. 
 
KLANG, KEY GROUP, AND A CENTRAL KEY. 
 
 83 
 
 So with the sharp after the double sharp, and the flat after 
 the double flat; but a curious fact is shown in connection 
 with those characters. Every accidental simply changes the 
 meaning of the line or space on which it is placed a half step 
 if the key is represented; that is, it only sharps or flats. 
 We are accustomed to the fact that the natural does some¬ 
 times one and sometimes the other, but here the sharp 
 which follows the double sharp flats, and the flat which fol¬ 
 lows the double flat sharps. 
 
 1 hope these plans will be adopted, that we may get rid of 
 those awkward compound characters ; then if the double 
 flat can be madd into one character as the double sharp is, 
 the whole matter will be in better form. 
 
 No. 35. KLANG, KEY GROUP, AND 
 A CENTRAL KEY. 
 
 MODERN author suggests the German word klang as 
 
 /V a substitute for ''tone,’’ because, as he says, "it ex¬ 
 presses more fully what we hear in the compound of ele¬ 
 mentary or partial tones which collectively constitute a mu¬ 
 sical tone.” 
 
 It is self-evident that whatever constitutes a "tone” is 
 included in the meaning of that word. If, in our musical 
 work, there were need of making more prominent the idea 
 of the partial tones, or overtones, or harmonics of which a 
 tone is composed I can see that the suggestion would have 
 some force; but that is not the case, and I fail to see where, 
 in his after writing, this author uses the word klang that 
 "tone” would not have fully expressed what he wished to 
 say. A sentence or two from a paragraph a little farther on 
 in his work confirms my point 
 
84 
 
 “don’t.” 
 
 In music a klang is always thought and heard in connection with other 
 klangs, and, therefore, always occurs in some positive relation which deter¬ 
 mines its exact pitch, and gives it definite character or meaning. A separate 
 tone is a tone out of relation, and means nothing musically. Music at all 
 moments occurs in some one key, hence the primal relation of a tone is its key 
 relation. Thus a tone has no definite character in the mind until it is rela- 
 tioned as a hey-klaug. 
 
 Rend “tone” for klang, “tones” for klangs, and “tone 
 of a kev” for kcy-klang, and you will get the full meaning of 
 the true and excellent statement which is here made. 
 
 This author uses “key-group” for key. Since a “key” 
 is “a family of related tones” it is of course a kind of 
 “group,” but it is not necessary to say either “ key-kimily ” 
 or “key-group,” for the word “key” alone means all of rela¬ 
 tionship that either word implies. Were it desirable to add 
 a word to “key” to further indicate its meaning, “family” 
 would be far more suggestive of relationship than “group.” 
 
 Where a person thinks that “key” and “key-note” or 
 “key-tone” mean about the same thing, “key-family” or 
 “key-group” would in his mind have some “reason to be,” 
 but this author does not think so, judging from the follow¬ 
 ing questions: 
 
 How many klangs are there in a key? What are the relative positions oi 
 the Tonic and the remaining key klangs? 
 
 Beside the seven principals, a key group contains what I call the Ten Pri¬ 
 mary Intermediates. 
 
 Then follow the names of the diatonic and chromatic 
 pitches that constitute the key of C major. 
 
 The tones thus specified do not complete the full number of tones that occur 
 in a single tone-stratum. There are ten other tones in a stratum, which I call 
 the Ten Secondary Intermediates. 
 
 Then follow their names, thus: g^, hi^, c^, e^, f^, 
 bj?!?, c\}, fj?. (Why d^ and dj?[? are left out does not 
 appear.) - - 
 
KLANG, KEY GROUP, AND A CENTRAL KEY. 
 
 85 
 
 Thus a single tone-stratum contains twenty-seven tones in all, namely, the 
 seven principals, the ten primary intermediates, and tlie ten secondary inter¬ 
 mediates. When I speak of a full tone stratum it will bj understood that 
 these twenty-seven tones are referred to as a unit. 
 
 Middle C is the central tone of the system. 
 
 The natural key of C is the central key of the system. 
 
 Every key centers in and radiates from the central stratum. Thus the 
 twenty-seven tones in the central stratum are twenty-seven Tonic centers of 
 twenty-seven keys. 
 
 Many of these keys are not employed, owing to their complex notation. 
 
 If 1 understand this author, his “primary intermediates’' 
 are simply the chromatic tones of a key. If so, what he calls 
 “secondary intermediates*’are nothing more. All the pitches 
 so named are simply the “primary intermediates” or chro¬ 
 matic tones of certain keys. The following statement will 
 treat the whole subject more fully: 
 
 Every tone in music has a name which describes it as 
 a separate tone—independent of relationship, and a name 
 which describes it in its relation to other tones. The former 
 is called its absolute name and the latter its relative name. 
 The absolute names of tones are the same as the names of 
 certain letters with, in some cases, the addition of the word 
 sharp, flat, double sharp, or double flat. Relative names are 
 tonic, dominant, key-tone, one, three, do, sol, sharp four, flat 
 seven, and names of that kind. 
 
 Following are all the independent or absolute pitch names in 
 use: A, A#, A[7, A^, A^b, B, B#, B[7, C, C#, C^, Ct^, D, D#, 
 D^, Dt^, E, E#, Ei,, £[,[7, F, F#, F^, G, G#,. G^, G[7, 
 G\^\^ —thirty-one in all. (Observe, these spoken names are 
 not letters, and the letters which are their written names 
 are not here used as the names of letters. See No. 2 for a 
 fuller explanation.) All these tones are precisely alike in 
 their capacity for being diatonic or chromatic, or, in other 
 words, principals or intermediates. Those named with the 
 words double sharp and double flat are not used and repre- 
 
86 
 
 don’t/' 
 
 sented as diatonic tones for the reason that the same results 
 can be reached by a simpler notation, but there is nothing 
 in the nature of such tones to prevent such use. The scale 
 or any other melody can be sung with C double sharp for 
 key-tone as easily as with C or D. In many keys in use 
 C-sharp is a chromatic or intermediate tone. In just as 
 many C is chromatic or intermediate, and so with all the 
 other tones excepting those named with the words double 
 sharp or double flat. 
 
 It follows that all the tones in common use are equal in 
 respect to prominence or lack of prominence. No set takes 
 precedence over another set permanently. All take turns in 
 being principals, and all take turns in being intermediates. 
 Those named with the words “sharp” and “flat,” as A- 
 sharp, B-tlat, etc., are just as often principals as those with 
 the shorter names. Look through the keys of G, D, A, E, 
 B, F, B-flat, E-flat, A-llat, D-flat, and G-flat, and notice which 
 are principals, and which intermediates; or, to use the scien¬ 
 tific terms, which are diatonic tones and which chromatic. 
 
 A key can be fully and clearly manifested by its seven 
 regular members, or diatonic tones, but it may have other 
 temporary members (chromatic tones) which, when used, 
 take their place in the family having names given them which 
 describe their relationship. Here are the names of all—per¬ 
 manent and temporary; in other words, diatonic and chro¬ 
 matic of a key: one, sharp one, two, sharp two, three, four, 
 sharp four, five, sharp five, six, sharp six, seven, flat seven, 
 Hat six, flat five, flat three, and flat two. 
 
 From the thirty-one independent tones, whose names are 
 given above, all the keys in common use are made. Take 
 any one of the independent pitches (excepting those named 
 with the words “double sharp” and “double flat) for key- 
 tone and notice what will make “sharp one,” “two,” 
 “sharp two,” etc., “seven,” “flat seven,” etc. You will 
 
klang, key group, and a central key. 87 
 
 notice that no pitch named with the word ‘‘double sharp’- 
 will come into the major keys of C, G, and D, and no pitch 
 named with the word “double flat” will come into the major 
 keys of C, F, and B-flat. These keys will be full and com¬ 
 plete with all their diatonic and chromatic members without 
 the pitches named with the word “ double.” The first major 
 key in which a “double sharp” will occur will be A, and 
 the first in which a double flat will occur will be E-flat. 
 
 If one could find a tone that is midway in the great scale 
 of tones, from the highest to the lowest, appreciable by human 
 ears, that might be called the central tone of the system ; but 
 as ears vary in their power to discover the property of pitch 
 (that which distinguishes a tone from other sounds or noises) 
 in extremely high and low tones, it would be difficult to come 
 to an agreement; and if found, it would have no significance 
 for musical purposes. It would be precisely like its neigh¬ 
 bors in its capacity for use. 
 
 Since every key includes the highest and lowest tones 
 usable, all are alike in extent or compass; and no one can 
 be central in the sense that the others are around it, or 
 emanate or radiate from it. 
 
 In studying keys in connection with our system of nota¬ 
 tion, C is taken first, simply because its notation is the sim¬ 
 plest, and not because it is more central, or simple, or natural; 
 certainly not because it is the primary key, the others eman¬ 
 ating from it as secondary keys. 
 
 Let me repeat: There are thirty-one independent pitches 
 extending by their octaves to the utmost bound of pitch per¬ 
 ception. All major keys made from this material will be 
 found exactly alike in structure and importance. 
 
No. 36. STAFF SPACES. 
 
 No. 36 is an endeavor to make more clear some points which did not re¬ 
 ceive sufficient illustration in No. 1, judging by what has been said on the 
 subject since that article was writ'^en and printed in the Musical Visitor, a 
 year or two ago. 
 
 The dialogue form is chosen, that both sides may be fairly stated. 
 
 Some repetition is unavoidable in bringing up the old points for fresh illus¬ 
 tration. 
 
 HIS is a subject which, like Banquo’s ghost, '‘will not 
 
 1 down.” Teachers continue to discuss it, and write 
 about it in the musical papers with as much ardor, appar¬ 
 ently, as when it was first broached, although, as yet, they 
 do not seem to be in sight of an agreement. Here is a con-- 
 versation, having this subject for its theme, which may be of 
 some use, as it brings up some new points, or rather treats 
 some old points in a new way. 
 
 A begins by saying: “Common space is everywhere— 
 on the surface of a sheet of paper, on a board, on a wall, on 
 the ground, in the air, in short, all around us, but there is no 
 musical space until a horizontal line is made. Take this 
 sheet of blank paper and draw a horizontal line in the center 
 of it thus, and some of the common space that was on the 
 paper is turned into two musical spaces.” 
 
 B: “By what authority do you say that that line has turned 
 common space into musical space?” 
 
 A: “The universal usage of musicians, who say that with 
 one line there are three places on which to write notes: on 
 the line and above and below it, and two of these places are 
 spaces—musical spaces if notes are written upon them.” 
 
 B: “How much common space is turned into these mu¬ 
 sical spaces, as you call them?” 
 
 A: “That depends upon how large the note is to be that 
 is to be used. The strip of musical space which the line 
 makes must be wide enough to hold the note well.” 
 
STAFF SPACES. 
 
 89 
 
 B: ‘ ‘ But there is no boundary on one side of that space to 
 show where the musical space leaves off and the common 
 space begins.” 
 
 A: '‘That is not important—you can tell near enough. 
 You will see exactly how wide the outside spaces are as 
 soon as you have two lines, for the outside spaces will be 
 just the size of the space between the lines. Then, as you 
 go on building up the Istaff, each new line places a visible 
 boundary where the mental boundary was. The lines you 
 use are continually turning strips of common space into mu¬ 
 sical space, and that process goes on just the same when 
 you enlarge the^staff with short lines, ending always with 
 the kind of space with which you began.” 
 
 B: “But what right have you to say that the space just 
 outside of the outer line belongs to the line.^” 
 
 A: “Why, the line creates it. It is never there without 
 the line, it is always there with the line. How two things 
 can belong to each other more than they do 1 can’t imagine.” 
 
 B: “Then you would argue that if the line belongs to the 
 staff, the space it creates belongs to the staff also.” 
 
 A: “Certainly; that is the natural and rational deduction 
 from the facts.” 
 
 B: “Well, let me state the case as a majority of musical 
 people view it: with one line, no space; with two lines, one 
 space; with three lines, two spaces; with four lines, three 
 spaces; and with five lines, four. That constitutes the entire 
 staff, outside of which there are no staff lines and spaces.” 
 
 A: “What are they called then—the outside places that 
 musicians use to write notes upon?” 
 
 B: “Added lines and spaces.” 
 
 A: “Added to what?” 
 
 B: “To the staff.” 
 
 A: “Added to the staff, but do not become a part of it.” 
 
 B: “Why, yes, 1 suppose that is the way it is.” 
 
90 
 
 ‘‘don’t.” 
 
 A: “Is the space next above the fifth line an added 
 space 
 
 B: “Really, no, but theoretically, yes. That is, we agree 
 that the staff shall end with the line, and so we class that 
 space with the short lines and spaces.” 
 
 A: “Then that is the first added space above.” 
 
 B: “Well, we don’t say ‘added space above,’ but simply 
 ‘space above.’” 
 
 A: “But you call the first space that is really added the 
 second added space, do you not?” 
 
 B: “Yes.” 
 
 A: “Well, if there is a second added space, there must be 
 a first. Which is it?” 
 
 B: “1 see what you are driving at, but what’s the harm? 
 Can’t people play, or sing, or read music just as well while 
 taking this common view of the subject?” 
 
 A: “Yes; but are you contented, for purposes of teaching 
 and for the credit of our system as a science, that our theory 
 should be complicated where it might be simple, contrary 
 to the usages of musicians where it might be in agreement 
 with them, and false where it might just as easily, yes, much 
 more easily, be true?” 
 
 B: “That is a severe arraignment of the statements 1 have 
 made, if you apply it to them.” 
 
 A: “1 do. Taking the points in the order of their men¬ 
 tion, which is more complicated and puzzling and which 
 more reasonable and clear of the following statements? 
 Here is the first: ‘Write a scale upward, beginning on the 
 middle line of the staff, and you go beyond the staff into 
 something that is not the staff—lines and spaces, to be sure, 
 but they do not belong to the staff—added to the staff, to be 
 sure, but not so added as to become a part of the staff.’ 
 
 “That, to the clear mind of a child or the trained mind of 
 a scientist, would be like saying: A man found he needed 
 
STAFF SPACES. 
 
 91 
 
 more rooms in his house, so he added a story to it; but he 
 said the story he had added did not belong to the house. 
 He could go up into the rooms that had been added, but 
 they were not a part of the house.” 
 
 B, laughing: “He could use the rooms just as well as if 
 he had said they were a part of the house.” 
 
 A: “Yes, but his neighbors would consider him crazy, 
 all the same.” 
 
 “Now the other statement: ‘You write a scale upward, 
 beginning with the third line of the staff. You find the or¬ 
 dinary five-line staff is not large enough, so you add a line 
 
 to it to enlarge it, only you use a short line because more 
 
 % 
 
 long lines would confuse the eye. When you have written 
 it, your scale is entirely on the staff, not a part of it on and 
 a part off. When the man wanted more rooms, he simply 
 enlarged his house.’” 
 
 B: “Then the staff may have six, seven, or eight, or more 
 lines.” 
 
 A: “Certainly.” 
 
 B: “Supposing you enlarge the staff downward by add¬ 
 ing three lines, the lowest line would be the first line of 
 the staff, wouldn’t it.^” 
 
 A: “Yes, but that would not be its name. Its staff-name 
 would be the ‘third line below.’ The names of the lines 
 and spaces would never vary, though the staff' may, or, 1 
 should say, is constantly varying in size. 
 
 “Now to the next point: You make the statement that the 
 staff has no space outside of the five lines. The child and 
 the scientist, standing by, see the musician put the sharp of 
 a signature on one of the outer spaces and then write notes 
 on both of them, just as he does on the inner ones, and the 
 child, who thinks sharps and notes must be written on the 
 staff, says: ‘What is he putting things out there for, if that 
 is not a part of the staff.It is all strange and puzzling to 
 
92 
 
 don’t.” 
 
 him, but the scientist says promptly: ‘ Here, your theory and 
 practice do not agree; you must* either take those outer 
 spaces into the staff or quit using them, if you wish your 
 science to be consistent.’ Then you reply: ‘Can’t we use 
 those spaces when we need to, and still consider that they 
 do not belong to the staff. 
 
 “B: M^erhaps you can. Musicians seem to be able to do 
 extraordinary things in that way, but why you should adopt 
 so far-fetched and unreasonable a theory to get out of your 
 dilemma when the obvious and simple one is at your hand 
 1 can not imagine. What is there in the nature of the case 
 to prevent a space instead of a line from being the outer 
 degree of the staff.^ Surely the universal usage of musicians 
 makes that appear natural and reasonable, and what violence 
 is done to reason and common sense to consider that the 
 staff takes in all the lines and spaces that are being used— 
 long or short 
 
 A: “Now, per contra, you make the other statement: 
 ‘1'he staff includes all the spaces that the five lines make, the 
 two outside as well as the four inside, and if it is not large 
 enough you add more lines and spaces. ’ Then the musician 
 writes where he pleases, the child is not puzzled by any¬ 
 thing contradictory, and the scientist says: ‘Now you are 
 right. That statement agrees with the accepted musical 
 usage, simplifies the whole matter, and is scientific as well 
 as rational.’ 
 
 A: “The third accusation against the common view is 
 ’hat it calls the first space that is really added the ‘second 
 a ided space.’ The child says: ‘Why don’t you call it the 
 first added space, if it is the firstThe scientist says: 
 ‘What kind of a science is this that permits such a falsity on 
 the face of it.^’ And he retires in disgust.” 
 
 B: “Well, how would you remedy it.^” 
 
 A: “The way is most simple and obvious, and has bee 
 
STAFF SPACES. 
 
 93 
 
 mentioned many times: name the long spaces as yon do the 
 long lines, just as they really occur—first, second, third, fourth, 
 fifth, sixth. These pertain to the permanent staff. Then the 
 short lines and spaces—the occasional visitors—exactly as 
 they occur: first added line, first added space, or, better still, 
 omitting the word ‘added,’ first line above, first space 
 above, second line above, second space above (or below), 
 etc.” 
 
 B : “Above what 
 
 A: “Do you expect me to say ‘above the staff I can’t 
 do that, for they are a part of the staff whenever they are 
 used, ‘above’ or ‘below,’ simply indicating the direction 
 in which the staff is being enlarged.” 
 
 B: “Such a change in naming the spaces as you propose 
 would make a great deal of trouble.” 
 
 A: “Only to those who have the false naming in mind. 
 Begmners would not imagine that there could be anv other 
 way, if they are taught correctly about the outer spaces.” 
 
 In passing, it might be mentioned that Webster’s defini¬ 
 tion of “Staff” is, “The five lines and the spaces on which 
 music is written.” This, of course, includes the outer spaces. 
 
 1 hope what has been said will increase the number who 
 will subscribe to the following statements: 
 
 The staff is an aggregation of lines and spaces, long or 
 short. 
 
 There is no such thing as a musical line or space out of, 
 or separate from, a staff. It is only a musical line or space 
 by virtue of being a part of a staff. 
 
 In the representation of a piece of music, a note, or a sharp, 
 or a flat, or a clef has no signification, unless it is on a staff. 
 Therefore, wherever one of these characters is, there is a 
 staff, or a line or a space of it. 
 
94 
 
 “ don’t.” 
 
 No. 37. NATURAL AND CANCEL AGAIN. 
 
 Tliis addition to No. 9 seems to be required, judging by the correspondence 
 on this subject which has taken place since that article was written. It is 
 hoped that this will be a satisfactory explanation of the points in question. 
 
 IN the song '‘1 Come to Thee,” whether in the lower key 
 1 or the higher, the singer, who reads music has precisely 
 the same thoughts when he comes to the sharp four, 
 whether it is represented by the sharp or by the natural. 
 
 He begins by seeing what the signature is, and that being 
 in his mind he does not look back; he looks ahead, and gives 
 sharp four in the one case just as in the other, simply 
 because it is sharp four, represented differently in the differ¬ 
 ent keys in accordance with the orderly laws of the science. 
 Here is the example: 
 
 1 
 
 .Q—---- 
 
 :> n— 
 
 -^ 4 - 
 
 
 1 I 
 
 \ p 
 
 ' 
 
 I 
 
 1 
 
 fm 
 
 J Li J 
 
 ^ • 
 
 '4 
 
 • 
 
 
 
 -- 0 
 
 
 
 34^:4 5 8365 
 
 I come to thee when morn - ing breaks, 
 o 
 
 — 
 
 D 7 0 1 1 1 
 
 0 
 
 
 
 / 
 
 
 • _ 1 _ 
 
 0 
 
 
 ^ 0 J 4 u4 
 
 -T-, ^ 1 
 
 - 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 • 1 
 
 
 3 4 5 8 3 6 5 
 
 I come to thee when morn - ing breaks. 
 
 To teach that the process of mind should be different in 
 the second case from the first would be unscientific and un¬ 
 true, and consequently harmful to the progress of the learner. 
 
 Since it is a fact that the natural in the second case acts 
 like a sharp (and there can be no doubt of that), it is much 
 easier to banish the idea of naturalt\ins; and connect the 
 idea of sharping the word “natural,” than to banish the 
 idea of canceling and connect sharping with the word 
 “cancel,” but that would have to be done if “cancel” were 
 
NATURAL AND CANCEL AGAIN. 
 
 95 
 
 adopted. That there is no canceling done by the natural 
 that is not done by the other accidentals and the bar, has 
 been many times shown. In fact, there is no ‘"canceling” 
 done by any musical character when each character pro¬ 
 duces the effect wanted and continues it as long as it is 
 wanted—stopping only when a new effect is to be intro¬ 
 duced. To think of that character as making the degree on 
 which it is placed represent a pitch a half step higher or a 
 half step lower is simplicity. To chink of it as undoing, an¬ 
 nulling, or effacing something that has been done, is com¬ 
 plexity, as well as falsity. 
 
 P. S. Since writing the above this occurs to me: The 
 sharp in the first example makes the space on which it is 
 placed stand for F-sharp as far as the bar. There the bar 
 acts exactly as a natural would if it were placed there 
 instead of the bar—the measure being longer. The bar 
 makes the space stand for F again—a pitch a half step 
 lower. So in the next example the natural makes the 
 space on which it is placed stand for A as far as the bar. 
 There the bar acts exactly as a flat would if it were placed 
 there. It makes the space stand for A-flat again—a pitch a 
 half step lower. Yet I think no one will say that the bar 
 does any canceling. 
 
 The following example will make this more clear. A 
 composer writes this phrase, for instance. He thinks of it 
 first as being in quadruple measure: 
 
 O 
 
 zjt^ N- 
 
 A — # —— 
 
 —# 
 
 —j— 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 —5— 
 
 
 Then he sees that it is not properly in quadruple measure, 
 but in double, and he writes again: 
 
 4 
 
 
 
 
 I] 
 
 
 
 N ^ l' 
 
 j --l-j 
 
 fj - ij- T J 
 
 “ ^ 1 
 
 
 m -H 
 
 i_ 4 € jind 5 
 
 
 
 
 -0 _ 0 J-l 
 
 
 9 , 
 
 
 m 0 » - . 
 
 
96 
 
 '' don’t.” 
 
 Now the bar stops those two spaces from representing 
 F-sharp and D-sharp and makes them represent F and D 
 (pitches a half step lower), exactly as the naturals do in the 
 first example, but it does no canceling. Each measure is 
 exactly what is wanted. Nothing is effaced or annulled. 
 The bar simply stops the staff from representing F-sharp and 
 D-sharp, and makes it represent F and D. If continuing 
 one pitch as long as it is wanted and then introducing an¬ 
 other is canceling, then the sharp, flat, and bar do it just as 
 often as the natural does. I venture to say that those who 
 use the word “cancel” do so with wrong thoughts about 
 the action of the natural, for, as is said above, it is much 
 harder to connect the true idea and action of that character 
 with the word “cancel” than with the word “natural.” 
 
 Probably one trouble is that many think of a sharp, flat, or 
 natural as belonging to a note. It no more belongs to a note 
 than a bar does. It affects only a line or space—in an ex¬ 
 tended way as aesignature; in a more limited way as an 
 accidental. 
 
 It undoubtedly does appear to the superficial observer as 
 if the accidental belongs to the note before which it is placed, 
 and as if the natural does something in the way of canceling 
 or restoring which the other characters do not—that the 
 boundary of the staff is a line, etc. But in all these cases a 
 little investigation will show that the truth is not in the 
 appearance. 
 
 These remarks are not intended to imply that all who 
 take the apparent for real truths are poor musicians (see 
 Preface), but it is certain that they would be better teachers 
 of the science of music if they would take the trouble to 
 look into these matters and right themselves where they 
 are wrong. 
 
OF THE TONALITY OF CHROMATIC TONES. 
 
 97 
 
 No. 38. OF THE TONALITY OF CHROMATIC TONES. 
 
 For our closing chapter we can not do better than to quote from recent 
 editorials in The Musical Visitor on the above-named subject. 
 
 The discussion began by a correspondent, who, in answer to some state¬ 
 ment that had been made, said: The student was right. The chromatic 
 
 scale has no tonality. Its notation is a matter upon which very few authori¬ 
 ties agree.” The discussion then went on as shown by the larger and smaller 
 type in what follows: 
 
 CCORDING to a standard writer, tonality has reference 
 
 iV to the relationship of tones in a key, and to the recog¬ 
 nition by the ear of the keytone. He says of a series of 
 modulations: “The tonality in the first is that of the key 
 of G major; the tonality in the second is that of E minor,” 
 etc. He might as well have said: “The first modulation is 
 in the key of G major, the second in E minor,” etc.; for that 
 was plainly all that was meant. But that being the meaning 
 of “tonality,” it must include the relationship to each other 
 of all the tones of the phrase or piece having tonality. Now, 
 while a chromatic tone can not be a keytone, it can have a 
 well-defined relationship in a key, for every key consists of 
 regular members called diatonic tones, and occasional or 
 temporary members called chromatic tones. Sharp-four and 
 flat-seven are as well-defined members of a key when they 
 are used in it, as four or seven, and their relationship to other 
 tones as readily recognized, and the diatonic and chromatic 
 tones of a key when given in scale-form—making the chro¬ 
 matic scale—lead from keytone to keytone (one to eight, 
 or vice versa) as surely as do the tones of the diatonic scale. 
 
 Therefore if “tonality” refers to what belongs to a key 
 it must include the occasional chromatic tones used in it, as 
 well as its chromatic scale, for every key has its chromatic 
 as well as its diatonic scale. 
 
98 
 
 
 don’t. 
 
 >) 
 
 This is a matter upon whicli we must “agree to differ.” Whilst it must 
 be admitted that chromatics may be used without quitting the key—as, for 
 example: 
 
 yet the samples you quote, sharp four and flat seven, will almost invariably 
 lead to the keys of the dominant and subdominant, respectively. The pro¬ 
 gression then becomes one of modulation, and we lose, for a time at least, the 
 original tonality. The proof of this lies in the harmonization of the chromatic 
 scale, so called, for it is impossible to keep in the same key for more than two 
 notes in succession. How can there be “ tonality” in such a series of sounds? 
 The diatonic scales, on the contrary, can be harmonized throughout without 
 the introduction of a single accidental (for the raised seventh irt the minor is 
 essential to the scale, although it does not appear in the signature, and the 
 same may be said of the raised sixth and seventh in the melodic minor), and 
 thus the original “tonic ” is never lost sight of. 
 
 The occasional introduction of chromatics in the course of a composition is 
 not the question at issue, for these may or may not imply a change of tonality, 
 as explained above. 
 
 We must take the entire chromatic scale and harmonize it, and as this can 
 not be done without incessant modulation from key to key, 1 think it must be 
 admitted that the scale, as a whole, has no tonality. In a clever but little- 
 known treatise* the position is thus clearly stated: 
 
 “The name (chromatic scale) maybe conveniently retained; but what is 
 so called, etymology notwithstanding, is not a scale, in the technical sense 
 of that word; for a scale implies a given key, but the chromatic progression, 
 founded on the chain-cadence, is composed of a series of changes from one 
 key to another. * “ Of course, by borrowing and interpolating accidentals 
 from other keys, we can obtain as many flats or sharps as we please; but they 
 are not rightfully come by. We borrow after the manner of the Israelites when 
 leaving Egypt. 
 
 * The Genesis of Harmony, by Hugh Carleton. Angener & Co. 
 
OF THE TONALITY OF CHROMATIC TONES. 
 
 99 
 
 The question at issue is not whether the diatonic tones of 
 a key—one, two, three, four, five, six and seven, have tonal¬ 
 ity, but whether chromatic tones, when introduced into a 
 piece of music, have that place and recognized relationship 
 in the key which brings them properly under that head. 
 
 This being the case, when F-sharp and^B-flat are so used 
 in the key of C that they lead, the one to the key of G, and the 
 otherTo the key of F, they are not in the discussion, for then 
 they are not chromatic tones — they are diatonic tones of 
 those neighboring keys. F-sharp is seven in the key of G, 
 and B-flat is four in the key of F. A modulation in each 
 case has taken place, and, we might say in passing, if ''we 
 lose for a time the original tonality ” we find it in the keys 
 to which we go. Tonality is not confined to one key; it 
 changes with every modulation, and exists wherever a key 
 is manifested, however short the manifestation or modula¬ 
 tion. 
 
 It is only when tones not belonging regularly to a key 
 are so used that they do not cause a change of key that they 
 are chromatic tones. 
 
 In the above example F-sharp is sharp four. It and all 
 the other visitors are here chromatic tones, for they cause no 
 change of key or modulation. But notice: each has'not only 
 its name and place in the hey, but its character and relation¬ 
 ship are as well defined to the musician’s mind as are those 
 qualities in its diatonic neighbors. 
 
lOO 
 
 don’t.” 
 
 What musician does not recognize and feel the relation¬ 
 ship and effects of the sharp-four and sharp-two near the be¬ 
 ginning, and, later, those of the sharp-one, sharp-six, and 
 sharp-two, and last, that of the beautiful flat-six, all produc¬ 
 ing a richness and variety in the harmony not obtainable by 
 diatonic tones alone 
 
 Seeing that to be true, and that musicians have given key¬ 
 names to these desirable visitors, who can doubt that they 
 are members of the family while in use, and, as such, have 
 tonality ? 
 
 That tones, both diatonic and chromatic, have tendencies 
 in their progression is plain. Seven naturally leads to eight, 
 four to three, sharp-four to five, (or, in a modulation the 
 same tones might be seven to eight), etc. But while some 
 of the diatonic members of a key have considerable repose 
 (the keytone complete repose), chromatic tones have none. 
 They must move. Their tendency is toward a tone of some 
 repose or through a series to the keytone. But as passing 
 tones, each has its key-name, its key relationship, and its 
 musical effect perfectly recognized by the musician. This 
 is illustrated by the following series—to the musician’s ear 
 unmistakably in the key of C: 
 
OF THE TONALITY OF CHROMATIC TONES. 
 
 lOI 
 
 The foregoing is the chromatic scale ascending, but harmo¬ 
 nize these tones and they are out of the discussion, for the 
 chromatic scale at once disappears. In its place is a series 
 of short modulations, in which there is not a chromatic tone. 
 All are regular members in good standing of the keys they 
 represent. 
 
 The chromatic scale, as such, can not be harmonized, but 
 as every [tone in music may be used diatonically or chromat¬ 
 ically, tones that were chromatic in the chromatic scale 
 may become diatonic by a different treatment. Although 
 this point is out of the discussion, we will say, in passing, that 
 the tonality of the first chord is that of C major, the next 
 two give us D major, the next two E major, the next two F, 
 the next two G, the next two A, the next two B, and the 
 last two C, the starting point. 
 
 . The question is asked: ''How can there be tonality in 
 such a series of sounds?” The answer is: There is tonal¬ 
 ity wherever key relationship is felt and a keytone recog¬ 
 nized, however short the phrase or modulation. The 
 dominant and tonic chords of any key given in that order 
 
102 
 
 ‘‘don’t.”- 
 
 are sufficient to establish that key in the mind, all the more 
 strongly if the first chord is the dominant seventh chord, as 
 in the foregoing modulations. 
 
 *We do not feel called upon to criticise here such expres¬ 
 sions as ‘'keys of the dominant and subdominant,” “raised 
 sixth and seventh,” and “accidentals from other keys,” but 
 they are open to criticism. 
 
 * Comments upon such expressions may be found in other parts of this book. 
 
INDEX. 
 
 ♦ 
 
 Accidental, ..64 
 
 Augmented Prime,.69 
 
 Beats and Measures,.24 
 
 Cancel,.3^, 94 
 
 Central Key,.83 
 
 Chromatic Alteration,.64 
 
 Clef,. i .72 
 
 Degrees, .22 
 
 Double Sharp and Double Flat 
 and their following characters, 77 
 
 F-sharp on F,.52 
 
 Intermediate Tones,.53 
 
 Intervals,.. • *34 
 
 Key and Mode,.57 
 
 Key and Scale,.27 
 
 Key Group,.83 
 
 Keytone, .74 
 
 Klang,.83 
 
 Measure and Time,.60 
 
 Measure Sign,.59 
 
 Mental Effects of Tones,.75 
 
 Metre and Measure,.58 
 
 Minor Second,...09 
 
 Natural and Cancel,.38, 94 
 
 One Key and Two Modes,.33 
 
 On Representing Keys,.74 
 
 Pitch names,.16 
 
 Pitch Representation, .51 
 
 Pulse,.76 
 
 Raising a Tone,.66 
 
 Sharp and Flat,.51 
 
 Sharped and Flatted,.61 
 
 Signature,.45 
 
 Signature in Minor Keys,.50 
 
 Staff and Pitch Names,.16 
 
 Technical Terms,.67 
 
 The Staff,.7, 88 
 
 Tenor Clef,.73 
 
 Tonality, .67, 97 
 
 Tone and Note,.30 
 
 Tone, Interval, and Number, .. .54 
 
 Transposition,.73 
 
 What the Natural Does,.50 
 
 (« 03 ) 
 
UNIVERSrTY OF ILLINOIS-URBAN A 
 
 3 0112 062285827 
 
 ■ ■ -T 
 
 sr'f.