Avoid chord relabeling changes when changing scales

I had configured a bunch of chords in the section C matrix of Scaler 2.4, and for most of the time it showed the left most column, which was all C based as C maj, Cmin, Caug, C dim etc.

But when I tried to add more chords to the other root notes, suddenly all the former C chords changed to “B#”…

I get it that the chords already dropped into the matrix will change name based on what scale is active. But I thought there wasn’t really a B#? Logically the semitone up from B is a C, so that is correct. But does anybody call it B#"?

Consistently it seems, the former Dmaj gets labeled C## maj

If this is standard music theory/convention, it sure is a convolted way to name things. I wish the chord names would stay consistent after I put them into the custom matrix in section C.


Okay, after looking up some more music theory, that does indeed seem to be a musical convention, carrying over from the weird way of musical notation on these key/clef lines that always kept me from formally understanding music.

So I am turning this thread into a feature request: can we have an option to keep the chord names (only in Section C matrix) the way we originally put them in there, and not have them relabel themselves? Because that stands in the way of me actually understanding what’s going on, and it triggers all my childhood trauma around being forced to learn “music” the 1700s way :wink:

It is simply a matter of theory.
The note B # is C. But it is not usually used as a key, since in the key signature we would have 12 #, when we can play in C without any alteration. They are enharmonies. They have a different name, but they sound the same. I agree that if it can be simplified to simplified chord names and keys. We don’t think of B # D ## F ## to play CEG

That is what I am afraid of, and to me “simply…theory” is an oxymoron :wink:

1 Like

Okay, but it’s not that complicated. And it is not a thing of 1,700. Twelve-tone is from the 20th century. The circle of fifths that we normally use avoids for practical reasons writing tones beyond 7 accidentals, but the truth is that to close the circle well it should continue to 12. What happens is that the major tone with 8 # would be G # major (which is enharmonic of Lab major, with 4b). It would follow D # major, with 9 # (enharmonic of Eb major, with only 3b), and etc, until reaching B # major, with 12 # (enharmonic of C major, without alterations). In the opposite direction, there would also be tones with 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12 flats. Specifically, with 12 flats it would be Dbb major. Would you think Dbb Fb Abb to sound CEG
Knowing that simple theory will save you things like thinking in B # D ## F ## to just sound CEG
And a curiosity:
Dbb (12b) = C (0 #) 12 + 0 = 12
B # (12 #) = C (0b) 12 + 0 = 12
Gb (6b) = F # (6 #) 6 + 6 = 12
Try all the enharmonies. Check that the result is always 12

1 Like

Perhaps, the simple function that we could ask developers would be to enharmonize
That is, for example, if you play more comfortable in C # major (7 #) and Db major (5b) appears, you can choose between the 2 possible ones. And, if there is someone who really likes sudokus, that he can choose to play in B # (12 #) instead of C major. :rofl: :rofl:

You can click in a few places to see sharps or flats, like in the CO5ths or on the scale, it’s a really tough one to consider when the user could be modulating, borrowing, exploring etc etc.

1 Like

@davide Ahhh…ramifications…ramifications. :slight_smile:

Forgive me @jjfagot , but it is the German nature to argue on the details :wink:

Looks like we are both wrong on the timing of the development of the 12 tone scale…

12 equal temperament - Wikipedia

The two figures frequently credited with the achievement of exact calculation of twelve-tone equal temperament are Zhu Zaiyu (also romanized as Chu-Tsaiyu. Chinese: 朱載堉) in 1584 and Simon Stevin in 1585. According to Fritz A. Kuttner, a critic of the theory,[2] it is known that “Chu-Tsaiyu presented a highly precise, simple and ingenious method for arithmetic calculation of equal temperament mono-chords in 1584” and that “Simon Stevin offered a mathematical definition of equal temperament plus a somewhat less precise computation of the corresponding numerical values in 1585 or later.” The developments occurred independently.[3]

Other dates, Bernd, (always depends on where we find the data):
The inventor of the tempered system is up for debate, but the Chinese Zhu Zaiyu is often credited with discovering this mathematical formula in 1580 (when he published his work).
Despite its advantages, many musicians disagreed with this system because it was not considered “natural” or because it destroyed the essence of much music that was made on alternative tuning systems. However, since Johann Sebastian Bach (1685-1750) presented his work The Well-Tempered Harpsichord, where he covered all the notes of the scale and their tonalities with a single instrument, and demonstrated with this wonderful work the advantages of the tempered system, the debate was practically closed. Bach’s work was completed in 1722 and its massive diffusion began in 1801, which is when it was printed.
However, the twelve-tone system as a compositional system that I was referring to is another:

Yes, this was the period and source I had in mind when I referred to the 1700s. I guess growing up in Germany was prone to subject us to the “national greats” such as Bach, the guy who also messed up the “tone ladder” into B-A-C-H instead of Bb-A-C-B in the rest of the world :wink:

1 Like

In my opinion, Bach’s H and B should always be on the scale, not just in German. Bach deserves that and much more

Having had one of the worlds greatest flautist (András Adorján) doing a 20 minute “B_A_C_H” rendition on his flute at my friends wedding (it was his uncle) forever turned me off the H in stead of Bb concept. Ouch.