Re: Re: F_minor...

[jerry and judy <jerbidoc@zianet.com>]

>Personally, I favor D major, largely for the brightness it projects and also
>the unique sound it gets when the voices of a chord are played close together.
>Unfortunately, it is an unpopular key with horn players, who have to read in
>four sharps what sounds as two sharps.
>
>Skip Heller

Interesting.  I assume that you seriously believe that Dmaj is 'brighter'
than Emaj or Gmaj, (which after all, both begin on higher pitches, all
things being equal).  Can you actually hear disparate 'effects'
(non-musical I assume) in pieces transposed into several keys?  I don't
know how this would be explained.

My concern about the key of a piece involves how it fits under the fingers,
maybe to some psychological degree the 'symmetrical' appearance of the
score, but mainly how high or how low the pitches are (a rather minor
concern).  And these considerations aren't all addressed by ONE key for all
melody and accompaniment registers etc.  Try playing the Goldberg's in Dmaj!

This brings to mind an interesting picture.  Imagine JSB working at the
keyboard on his WTC (I don't know if he composed at the keyboard).  He
needs to create a prelude in F#maj (for the 13th P+F in Book I).  He idlely
runs the F#maj triad in his right hand and echoes the same chord in his
left hand.  And then in next 2 measures, over a descending scale, he finds
his figuration that will develop by imitation into all of the other figures
of the prelude.  Now this prelude doesn't appear in Rutland Broughton's
list of the 'great' preludes and fugues of Book I (which are listed as
1,4,8,12,14,15,16,17,18,20,22 and 24).  I wonder if the key has anything to
do with either the transparency of the 'effort' or the 'lack' of ultimate
greatness.  :)   BTW, the fugue is sublime! he was a quick study!!

Jerry