Shape-notes

[groveland]

In another thread, someone spoke of shape-note singing. #I was not familiar with the concept, but I think it might have important value for stringed instrument players, particulary in view of the recent discussions of tab vs. notation.

Shape-notes appear on the staff as regular round-head notes do, but each shape (triangle, square, circle) denotes a degree of the scale. #The differentiation between keys is simply where the "I" lives on the staff.

In my mind, this opens the door to key-signatureless notation, which in my opinion might be very, very useful for stringed instrumentalists.

Fretboard positions are relative to each other. Knowing where the I is by the shape on the staff, I could conceivably just read shape notes from then on for the II, III, IV, etc. #Assuming I know intervals on the fretboard, the shapes will guide the fingers relative to the I, unencumbered by accidentals on the key signature.

This actually makes more sense to me than our current filled-in round note-heads with accidentals in the signature. #There is really only one key signature - no sharps or flats. The tonic simply changes, and you find the interval relative to that tonic based on the shape.

This could be the notation of the future, freeing us from the historical baggage of black and white keys. I could envision eliminating the staff entirely with no loss of functionality, and a big gain in simplicity and clarity, at least for single note lines.

Perhaps not as a total replacement for our current system, but how about as shorthand?

Any thoughts? #Or am I out of my mind?

[JimD]

Sorry to repeat my comment from the other thread but...

Shape notes are great for purely diatonic music (all in one key) but lose their usefulness when there are any chromatics or modulations. It simply doesn't work for anything complex.

They've been around for over 200 years and haven't replaced standard notation even for the type of hymns that they were invented for...

[arbarnhart]

Standard notation has some drawbacks, the most notable (to me) being that some notes have a sharp or flat between them and some physcically don't (but can still logically be flatted or sharped - the key of C# has an E# in it) so the notation does not clearly indicate intervals. I wish it did, because it would make transposition on the fly a whole lot easier. But notation has a long history and a huge library - it is probably here to stay.

You probably know the story of QWERTY and DVORAK keyboards - QWERTY layout was invented to purposefully slow people down and disperse commonly used keys so that the mechanics didn't get jammed as easily. Decades later, the DVORAK layout was invented to allow the fastest entry. I remember the pundits who prophesied that within a few years QWERTY would be an outdated option available for an extra charge and all keyboards would be DVORAK.

QWERTY only had decades to establish a standard that can't be ousted by a more sensible approach.

I was going to translate this post into Esperanza, but strangely enough AltaVista Babelfish doesn't offer that as an option...

[JimD]

Standard notation has some drawbacks, the most notable (to me) being that some notes have a sharp or flat between them and some physcically don't (but can still logically be flatted or sharped - the key of C# has an E# in it) so the notation does not clearly indicate intervals. I wish it did, because it would make transposition on the fly a whole lot easier. But notation has a long history and a huge library - it is probably here to stay.

Quite true, standard notation does have its drawbacks --but a truly precise notation would be too unwieldy. Standard notation evolved over centuries. It does have its logic, though you do have to understand some theory and acoustics to get it.

[arbarnhart]

Standard notation has some drawbacks, the most notable (to me) being that some notes have a sharp or flat between them and some physcically don't (but can still logically be flatted or sharped - the key of C# has an E# in it) so the notation does not clearly indicate intervals. I wish it did, because it would make transposition on the fly a whole lot easier. But notation has a long history and a huge library - it is probably here to stay.

Quite true, standard notation does have its drawbacks --but a truly precise notation would be too unwieldy. Standard notation evolved over centuries. It does have its logic, though you do have to understand some theory and acoustics to get it.

OK, I'll bite - what does acoustics have to do with it?

I take some issue with theory. If you like C major and A minor, then it certainly makes things simpler. I would even go so far as to say that it would probably be easier in the long run if everything was written in those keys with notes at the top about keys it is more commonly played in. I think standard notation forces far more rote memorization into learning and understanding theory than is necessary.

[Tim]

I'm far from an expert on this but I sort of thought of shaped-notes as tab for singers. #It allowed people who couldn't really read music to sing the proper intervals given a reference note.

[Mark Robertson-Tessi]

I take some issue with theory. If you like C major and A minor, then it certainly makes things simpler. I would even go so far as to say that it would probably be easier in the long run if everything was written in those keys with notes at the top about keys it is more commonly played in. I think standard notation forces far more rote memorization into learning and understanding theory than is necessary.

As Jim said, if everything was written in C and Am, you couldn't write anything that switched keys, or was even moderately chromatic without running into the same problems you find with standard notation. #it would almost be like shape note, except now the c-position on the staff always stands for the 1, even if it is to be played in Aflat, or whatever.

Certainly there is a learning curve with std not. #I think your main point was the lack of consistency between steps on the staff being equal. #Yet, such is the major scale, an assymmetric run of half and whole steps. #The two other options would be each of the 12 notes gets a line or space on a staff, or each whole step gets a line or a space. #The latter would lead to (obviously) messy notation, since almost no piece is written in whole tones solely. #The former would I think be annoying to read (though it's an interesting thought), since there would be no easy distinction between notes in the key and notes that are not in the key like accidentals in std notation. #

If we talk about atonal music, std notation is perhaps at a disadvantage, as intervals need one more thought in translation since they are out of context of a key (how many half steps between e-flat and b-sharp?, etc.). #But for music that is in a certain key (even chromatic), the molding of the staff around the major scale makes for faster reading than any other system i think. #Not too long after learning std notation, new students can recognize the intervals of the major scale, and things like thirds and fifths jump out at them.

Cheers,
MRT

[arbarnhart]

I read standard notation and have for about 40 years, though I admit I am not too deeply schooled in theory. The point about rote memorization is that you don't just learn one way to read it, you learn a dozen! As you are reading notes, if you keep looking back to see if it is sharped or flatted, you won't keep up. What happens is that you start memorizing which are sharp or flat and using a different mapping from the staff to the notes for each major key signature. Are the ascending treble staff lines EGBDAF? Usually not; there is a shim at the beginning of the measure that adjusts what the lines mean. I strongly disagree that 5ths start jumping out in every key. If the tonic is a note that is on a staff line (as opposed to between lines) is the 5th on a line or between lines?

[JimD]

If you know what your key signature is then, yes, fifths should start to jump out at you.

If the tonic is on a line, the fifth is on a line. If the tonic is on a space, so is the fifth.

Actually, with a bit of experience, any interval that you pay attention to should "jump out " as well.

[arbarnhart]

Actually, it's a trick question. On the treble staff, are the notes E and F on a line or space? I know that you use the top ones for indicating key, but either F is the 5th of B and both are on the treble staff. There are an even number of chromatic notes and we use a notation system that divides things up line/space/line/space/... yet an octave occupies an odd number of spaces.

I'll use notation because it is what we have. The language is set and I if I want to be understood I better speak it.

[Mark Robertson-Tessi]

What happens is that you start memorizing which are sharp or flat and using a different mapping from the staff to the notes for each major key signature. Are the ascending treble staff lines EGBDAF? Usually not; there is a shim at the beginning of the measure that adjusts what the lines mean. I strongly disagree that 5ths start jumping out in every key. If the tonic is a note that is on a staff line (as opposed to between lines) is the 5th on a line or between lines?

Arbarnhart, interesting questions. #In some way it is true that you memorize the key signatures, at first, for each key. #However, i think it goes beyond that. #Eventually sharps and flats are simply labels for the actual notes rather than modifications from the natural tone. #

Some people may see a dot on the top staff line and think f. #Then they consider the key they are in, key of G, so f is sharped. #Then they play an F-sharp. #That is probably along the lines of what you mean by mapping the staff to the key.

However, another way:
You know you are in G. #You see a dot on the top line. #You think 7th scale tone (of G), which is f-sharp. #Then you play the f#. #This is along the lines of the intervals jumping out at you that I meant, but more subtle maybe.

At first it may seem like the same thing, but I would argue that it isn't. #I have seen people sight read for a long time. #Give them a key signature, and they can read a certain melody in the key no problem. #Add in some accidentals, no problem. #Rewrite the melody with accidentals instead of key signature, no problem. #Then, make a new notation, but start changing things, like enharmonically spell some of the notes different. #Change the key signature. #All the while keep the melody simple, so that instrument technique is not an issue. #Then go to atonal stuff. #Invariably, the speed at which they can read goes down. #Why? #I think it is because they move from using method 2 to method 1. #At first, they are in a mindset of a particular key, and they only have 7 notes to deal with, until clearly shown otherwise by accidentals. #Once you throw in the other stuff though, they have to move to the first method more (ok, an f note. #Is f sharped? etc.)

Everyone probably thinks of it differently. #I find it interesting to see how musicians translate music.

Cheers,
MRT

[Mark Robertson-Tessi]

Actually, it's a trick question. On the treble staff, are the notes E and F on a line or space? I know that you use the top ones for indicating key, but either F is the 5th of B and both are on the treble staff. There are an even number of chromatic notes and we use a notation system that divides things up line/space/line/space/... yet an octave occupies an odd number of spaces.

Well, actually the fifth of the B (middle line) is the f(sharp, though it doesn't matter here) on the top line. #The f# below, in the first space, is a fourth below the B, and the interval is then a fourth, which is always two notes on two opposite loctaions (space/line). #If you look at the low f#, which is a space, the fifth below is the B in the space below the first ledger line, and the fifth above is the c# in the third space (all are spaces). #

There are two terms called fifth:

The interval fifth, which is always two notes separated by 7 half steps, like E on the bottom line of the staff, and B in the middle line; and the fifth of a particular key, which is any B in the key of E (including the one that's an interval fifth)

Cheers,
MRT

[groveland]

it would almost be like shape note, except now the c-position on the staff always stands for the 1, even if it is to be played in Aflat, or whatever.

Sure - That's what I'm getting at... We can do chromaticism too. #Perhaps my original post was not clear.

By designating shapes for degrees of the scale, you can decouple from the notion of a particular tone - You are referring to an interval away from an arbitrary base tone - Which is the tonic. #In this model, all scales would be notated the same, because all scales work with the same intervals, hence the same shapes. #There are no key signatures, just sets of intervals.

Precede any alteration with the typical # or b accidental. #All that needs to be known is, what is the tonal center? #The result is an optimized musical notation system with basically 9 symbols that models all scales and 'keys'.

I would like to remove the staff, too, but we need a way to indicate the octave from the tonal center. #Our theoretical 'shape' model handles one octave. #The staff lines and spaces themselves could also be decoupled from actual tones, and could represent degrees of ANY scale instead. #Perhaps middle C could take on a more general meaning, like "the tonic of the scale of the moment", and the staff can designate generic intervals from the tonic.

Our current notation system works fine - But there's a lot of historical baggage. I am always looking for a simpler way of modeling music.

I don't think we run into the same problems as we do with standard notation if you play a stringed instrument. On strings, everything is relative, so the new models would work well. Pianists would suffer.

[JimD]

Our current notation system works fine - But there's a lot of historical baggage. I am always looking for a simpler way of modeling music.

But maybe it's the historical baggage that makes it work...

[groveland]

Pianists would suffer

What I mean is, pianists benefit from standard notation in that there is one key per position on the staff. The model I proposed is optimized for strings, where transposition is accomplished by changing positions on a neck while retaining the relationships. The modified shape-note model is just like that.

So I think we can close this one out. I got a lot of food for thought, and I don't think I should try and change the world just now. Thanks folks. You're the best.

[Mark Robertson-Tessi]

Groveland,

interesting thoughts. Your removal of the staff is actually something I have seen used to good effect in beginner harp books, where the notes are written out on a ghost staff, so they have the same height positioning, but there are no lines and spaces on the page. The actual note names are written inside the note heads (so you know what to play). But it's a way to introduce note reading. I think it works quite well for early note teaching.

I think your modified shape note system would work quite well for tonal music. In fact it works quite well for regular shape note singing. The shapes tell you everything you need to know about the pitch (except the register), and if you are given a key center, and then you just go from there, ignoring line and spaces. If you know your symbols, you could write it all on one line even, though you would lose the visual sense of the melody line which I think is important for quick reading.

There is a (music theory) singing method in which you sing do re mi for the first three notes of the key, rather than for the specific C D E notes. It is pretty much what you describe. If you modulate, you then change what syllables you sing on the notes based on the new key. You could envision something like that for your system, where if you change key, your shapes change to the new key center. Like anything, after learning it would be second nature.

The numbering system for chords comes out of the desire to separate relationships between actual chord letters and their relationship in the key. Your shape note system would be a melodic version of the chord numbering idea.

Finally, I think once you started investigating modes (which do play a large part in traditional music) and cirlce of fifths progressions, you would end up closer to std notation (and the baggage that goes with it) than it might seem at first glance.

Cool stuff.

Cheers,
MRT

[groveland]

I think once you started investigating modes (which do play a large part in traditional music) and cirlce of fifths progressions

I don't want to flog a dead horse, but it's ironic you should say that - Modes and cycle fives are exactly what put me in this no-key-signature frame of mind! Soloing a circle of fifths on piano, 12 distinct patterns, is a lot more work than on mandolin, one pattern (albeit rotating and shifting). In that sense, mandolin decouples from a key signature, and all keys are the same. Why shouldn't the music representation be the same for all keys? Shape notes sans staff. I like it.

I'm absolutely done now.

[Hog on Ice]

I'll admit to being pretty weak in reading and in theory (which is why I have to puzzle my way through the more esoteric threads in this forum), but it doesn't seem to me that shape notes and standard notation are mutually exclusive. It's still notes on a staff, and you still have the clef signs, key signatures and accidentals - the only difference is the shapes of the notes.

By the way, thanks for bringing up shape note singing - I just spent the last hour reading about it and listening to sound clips. This is incredible music. On an NPR web site they call it "full-bodied, shout-it-out singing." It's sung a-capella (no mandolins...), and is raw and powerful. Take some time to listen - it'll blow your mind.

c~

[jmcgann]

I don't think "all keys are the same" on mandolin at all, especially if you use open strings- you can take closed position (no open strings) fingering patterns and move them for different keys, but each key has it's own musical personality- at least, seeing it that way helps me keep a sense of order...non "mando roots" music, like jazz and classical, modulates (or doesn't have a key signature) often enough that it helps to see the "lay of the land" in a broad sense before putting it on mando.

[Tim]

Hog on Ice -
The movie "Cold Mountain" had a scene with shaped note singers. #They used a group from Alabama (I think) for the movie. #If your local rental place has the bonus DVD, there is a concert of music from the movie that has one complete song. #Not much percentage-wise but a readily available source.

[groveland]

non "mando roots" music, like jazz and classical, modulates (or doesn't have a key signature) often enough that it helps to see the "lay of the land" in a broad sense before putting it on mando.

Yeah, that's how I try to see it... I don't use open strings much; I think they are more conducive to a repertoire than a general solution for improvising on mandolin. The latter is my goal. It's from that point of view I say 'all keys are the same.' And in my opinion, the tuning in fifths makes the mandolin ideally suited for that usage.

[mandocrucian]

Digressing from the sacred harp usage of different shaped note heads.....

Apart from the diamond head used to notate harmonics, is there any semi-common usage of shaped note heads for notating 1/4 tones or microtonally adjusted pitches? (sub-minor 3rds and 7ths, supermajor intervals etc.)

Notationally, what I've seen is the reversed flat [d], reversed natural and the half-sharp [ = with only one vertical line through it], though the amount of deviation from 12TET varies depending on how the notationist employs these.

NH

[Hog on Ice]

Thanks for the info, Tim. I have the Cold Mountain dvd - I guess I should pay a little closer attention to the bonus material!

Check out this site - Voices across America - Sacred Harp - there are streams of dozens of shape note choirs.

(Incidentally they have collections of other styles of gospel music as well. Take a look at http://pilgrimproduction.net.)

Again, not much mando content, except they have a section for Bluegrass Gospel....

c~

[Tim]

I think the shaped-note is the last song of the concert segment. If not it is close to the end.