Why Modulate ?

[m1469]

If there is no discernable difference between "keys" within modern tuning ?

The subject of tuning has come up a few times on the forum, and it has been said that all perceived differences between individual key-areas are simply non-existent anymore with our modern tuning, even for those people with "perfect pitch" (I don't feel like hunting down the thread right now).  That these differences existed only within former tuning methods and that differences perceived within modern tuning are more or less the imagination acting on our behalf.

I can understand the place of modulation within earlier tuning, should a new key area actually produce a new reaction within the audience.  But,  as I have had somewhat of a revelation that chord progressions are not simply for the purpose of going somewhere, but for the purpose of getting somewhere; within modern tuning, where do we actually "get" by arriving in a new key ?


m1469 

[Kassaa]

Well I feel each tonality has a certain character, and when you want to change the character of a piece modulation is still a very good way. Is the character of a tonality really our imagination?

[westley]

Thats a *** good question, m1469!

I would (begin) to answer it this way:

There are several sorts of modulations:

a) Those that keep the same center but change the mode. (C Major to c minor)

b) Those the change the center but not the mode.  (C major to G major)

c) Those that change the center and the mode.  (C major to a minor)


And what you are talking about applies only to the second one.  Still, there are a lot of these sorts of modulations in classical pieces.  And I would say that you would miss them if they were gone because, for instance, when you first encounter G major within a piece in C Major, it gives you a feeling of going somewhere.  Even if your ear adjusts within a few measures so that you have totally "forgotten" the overall center of C and are oriented completely towards G, there was still a moment when you had a feeling of going somewhere new, and, there will be anpother moment like that that when you come back home.

Also, think of this:

  A modulation that became quite common in the romantic era is the modulation in a major key to the flat sixth of that key (Think Chopin etude op. 25 #12, Schubert Bb sonata first movement, or Shcumanns song Widmung)  Even though it is the type you mention, where only the center and not the mode changes, it is an incredibly powerful modulation.  It relies for its effect on the momentary shock you get when your expectation of key is not met.  Try playing any of these pieces without the modulation and see what happens!

But after a few measures, of course, the ear is totally adjusted.

Perhaps this is why later composers such as Debussy spent more time modulating between modes than moving them up and down . . . .  I never thought of that before . . .

Anyway its a good question and I hope I helped a bit!

[BoliverAllmon]

modulation adds color, flavor, and flare to a piece.

[nedgerhart]

If music didn't modulate from key to key as it went along, it might tend to get rather dull! Repeating themes and motives in different keys is a standard trick to keep things interesting both for the musican and the listener, especially handy during extended works. Those old enough to remember the awful 70's hits of Barry Manilow might notice that in every one of his tunes, he goes up a half step before the final chorus. We used to call him Barry Modulation. It's a cheap way to give a lift, for Barry or Beethoven.

Did I totally miss the question? did you really mean, Why isn't all music written in the key of C?

Ned

[m1469]

Okay, let me back up a little here.  I realize that I did not exactly explain where I am coming from with this.

It is my understanding that former tuning strategies left people with keys that produced "different" emotional effects for the listener.  Because of the placement of the wolf (I think that's what it's called) in those tuning formulas, not all keys would sound the same as each other.   With that understanding, I would imagine that composer's chose certain keys to give the audience certain experiences.

So, if a composer wanted to express sorrow, s/he would choose a specific key that supposedly expresses this emotion so clearly, that the listener experiences this emotion as well.  But then, pretty much every piece modulates at some point, and I would assume that the reason for modulation was to give the listener whatever experience that key could offer.

(I am starting to get in over my head here, but I guess I am going to continue anyway... )

And yes, Westley is right in that I am talking primarily about if a piece takes the listener through a new tonal center but not a new mode (I got so absorbed into that quandary that I forgot about the other kinds of modulations... ).

So, if in modern tuning, different keys do not truly give us different experiences, why pick a certain key in the first place ?  And, why modulate to another key in the same mode if the experience will not be new ?  (for example, I to V)

The only reason I could think of would have to do with technical matters, but this in and of itself just does not seem right to me and is more or less unsatisfying.




m1469

[richy321]

Westley has explained very well the difference between modulation and simply writing or playing in a different key.  It is the transition between the two centers that is the modulation, not the mere fact that one section or piece is in a different key.  There is a definite emotional sensation that you experience before you become habituated to the new key, and it varies with the degree of relatedness of the two keys.

Aside from modulation itself just the difference in pitch level can create a different feeling, of brightness or somberness. 

Modulation is the hallmark of Western art music from the very earliest times to the end of the Romantic period.  Without it, music would be a much duller art form indeed.  And this is true regardless of the use of equal temperament.

Rich Y

[m1469]

Westley has explained very well the difference between modulation and simply writing or playing in a different key.  It is the transition between the two centers that is the modulation, not the mere fact that one section or piece is in a different key.  There is a definite emotional sensation that you experience before you become habituated to the new key, and it varies with the degree of relatedness of the two keys.

Modulation is the hallmark of Western art music from the very earliest times to the end of the Romantic period.  Without it, music would be a much duller art form indeed.  And this is true regardless of the use of equal temperament.

Rich Y

Yes, I read what Westley explained, and I appreciate it very much.  And, I understand the concept.  But what I am talking about is the fact that in former years, people felt that different keys represented different states of being, and some people still believe that today.  However, it has been refuted that this phenomenon still exists in modern tuning.  Anyway, that is what I am talking about.  And the point is that a person doesn't just modulate for the journey necessarily, though there is some popular thought these days that the journey is all that matters  , but a person modulates to arrive somewhere new.  In one sense, it's about the destination -- and of course there must be a path to get there -- but I just wonder what exactly that destination actually is ? 

So I wonder then, what is the emotional difference between modulating from C to G vs A to E, using the exact same chord progression ?   If it is all about the journey, and one chooses the exact same relationships between the notes and so on... why one key over the other ?

Maybe this answers it :

Aside from modulation itself just the difference in pitch level can create a different feeling, of brightness or somberness. 

But anyway, if that is true, there must be a difference between entire scales.

Also, I do happen to know that "modulation is the hallmark of Western art music" and so on... I just want to know more about it.  I am interested in these things... and I would just think that the reasons people choose specific keys must be different these days than in former years, if there is not some kind of meaning within the key anymore (but there used to be). 


Thanks for your responses,
m1469

[pika rode]

Yet, I feel, while not having perfect pitch, but  playing piano for over 40 years, that e.g. C sharp as a baseline brings me somewhere else than e.g A as a baseline. I believe many people have this sensation and it is unrelated to perfect pitch. Modulating from key to key may bring some extended expectations, not only because of the temporarily perceived different scale. OK, unless the piece you're in is completely atonal.

[pianistimo]

this question seems to have similar ideas to the 'colors' thread, where some people see colors or experience something with certain pitches.  chopin most definately chose both the modulations and modes carefully.  some composers go for the journey and you don't know where they'll end up.  usually back in the key they started.  maybe it's all in the listener/composer relationship.  if you like certain music - there's probably a pattern to it.  (as mentioned - very good observation about barry manilow's patterns)  once you figure out the patterns that you tend to like - you have to stretch yourself farther so you don't end up being repetitive in your compositions.  maybe that's why a lot of REALLy good composers kept a diary of sorts (as debussy) and experimented with sound.  they kept trying to reach farther.  maybe into the 'unknown' areas.  today it seems that we've kind of reached a plateau?  but i'm sure there must be some more new ideas out there.   personally, i don't just look for a piece to modulate or not, but to have a 'flow' and feel like it starts with purpose, goes somewhere, and i like the comfort of coming back where i started (somehow). 

this gives me a question.  would it be reasonable to run a newly composed piece by at least 10-15 people and get honest responses (like on this forum) as to what the reaction of people is to it.  or does it matter to some composers what the response is?  it used to be that shock value was kind of expected.  but, now, isn't the trend kind of competing with pop music.  some kind of music that people will listen to MORE than once, and hopefully request somewhere along the lines because there is some lasting quality to it.  folk music is interesting to look to (as bartok did with rumanian and other folk songs) because you have it all in the melody.  it doesn't completely modulate - but it moves you.  all types of music move me, but i think interestingly choral music moves me more than instrumental alone.  when you hear a modulation or switch of tonal center in choral music, it seems to be controlled much more discretely by the voice and therefore more powerful.

[folkert]

but then, if it's only the modulation it self what counts.. Why not always start or write the piece in C-major or A-minor? This would make it a lot easier to do the sight-reading

[westley]

I think perhaps what m1469 is suggesting is not necessarily that we don't hear modulations, but that we dont hear them the way they were originally intended.  And that is probably true.

But overall I agree with the person (dont remember who) who said it seemed like what you were really asking was "why aren't all pieces in C?"

And that much harder to answer . . . maybe I will try later . . . but perhaps I should just admit straight away that I don't really know and save some trouble.

[g_s_223]

A related and fundamental issue is the instrumentaton of the work in question, and once we go outside the broad and spacious musical domain of the pianoforte we will find the choice of key very significant.

For instance, the cello is strung C/G/D/A: therefore, works for it written in C-major can benefit directly by use of the open strings and their sympathetic resonances: play the same piece transposed to Db major where none of the open strings are used or useful, and it will sound totally different in timbre.

As a generalisation, string instruments are more favourable towards the keys going sharper up the cycle of fifths, whereas wind and brass tend to favour the flat keys, those instruments themselves often being pitched in F or Bb.

Regarding the original question, the arrival of equal temperament did not in any way undermine the significance of modulation, and in some ways permitted it to be developed to unprecedented and extraordinary levels. It certainly undermined the principle of tonal "affekt", i.e. the association of specific keys and moods, but in exchange provided those gains I mentioned. Tonic, dominant and all the rest remain.

As to "why", one only has to listen to the coda of any great symphony as the long tonal odyssey ends, typically with a return to the home key: QED.

[m1469]

A related and fundamental issue is the instrumentaton of the work in question, and once we go outside the broad and spacious musical domain of the pianoforte we will find the choice of key very significant.

For instance, the cello is strung C/G/D/A: therefore, works for it written in C-major can benefit directly by use of the open strings and their sympathetic resonances: play the same piece transposed to Db major where none of the open strings are used or useful, and it will sound totally different in timbre.

As a generalisation, string instruments are more favourable towards the keys going sharper up the cycle of fifths, whereas wind and brass tend to favour the flat keys, those instruments themselves often being pitched in F or Bb.

Regarding the original question, the arrival of equal temperament did not in any way undermine the significance of modulation, and in some ways permitted it to be developed to unprecedented and extraordinary levels. It certainly undermined the principle of tonal "affekt", i.e. the association of specific keys and moods, but in exchange provided those gains I mentioned. Tonic, dominant and all the rest remain.

As to "why", one only has to listen to the coda of any great symphony as the long tonal odyssey ends, typically with a return to the home key: QED.

ooooooo... this is good


Thanks,
m1469

[folkert]

A related and fundamental issue is the instrumentaton of the work in question, and once we go outside the broad and spacious musical domain of the pianoforte we will find the choice of key very significant.

Allright, but then what about pieces written exclusively for piano. In particulare modern pieces because the composer wouldn't have any reason to write for a non-equal temperamented piano?

[g_s_223]

Allright, but then what about pieces written exclusively for piano. In particulare modern pieces because the composer wouldn't have any reason to write for a non-equal temperamented piano?

I think the main issue here is, to use the most generalised phraseology, "why did the composer pick this set of notes for their piece". Now, if the work is purely "head-music" derived from predefined processes, for example pure serialism or by stochastic means, then we can't really say much beyond that the rules were followed.

However, if the work derives from inspiration, or improvisation, and has some (even tenuous) link with tonality, then I think it is quite likely the composer has settled on one key centre (if not key as such). An idea for a first theme may come to them, for example, loosely associated with E minor. They may then try it out at the piano and noodle about for a bit. I'm inclined to think that most composers would stick with that key centre for the theme, and not arbitrarily shift it up or down say to F minor or Eb minor on the basis that one or other sounds preferable. Similarly, a more traditional transposition , e.g. to B minor, seems similarly dubious. However, I am not a composer, so the views of any composers would be welcome. It's also worth saying that themes and harmonies often come together for many composers, and one to some extent determines the other.

Why a particular sequence of modulations ensues is a well-aired matter of form, and should be independent of the initial tonal centre for a piece.

[Derek]

Because it sounds good. Need we really go beyond that? Just simply changing harmonies up in an unexpected way sounds good. I have no idea why, it just does. Its just like we know how gravity behaves but we don't know why it is here or what it really is. The last two questions don't really matter.

[ted]

I could interpret your question in two ways, m1469. Strictly speaking, does the term "modulation" make any sense outside of tonal music of the sort the masters used to write in the olden days ? I think not. So I shall leave it to others to provide the strict version of the answer because I do not create in ways which ascribe any unique meaning to the term and I don't know any theory anyway.

On the other hand, I think Derek has raised a very deep and general point, in that change and contrast are fundamental to all music. Just listening to one chord or scale played one way doesn't do much for me, and I suspect it doesn't do much for you either. I think it was Stravinsky (correct me if I'm wrong) who said that in music we can proceed by either similarity or contrast. To a large extent it is the juxtaposition of these two directions which gives music character. We may veer toward similarity or contrast depending on what we wish to express.

From our modern point of view, much of the music of the masters seems to use similarity more than contrast. So perhaps in those days, modulation was simply one of the few permitted modes of contrast.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

"Why Modulate?" If there is no discernable difference between "keys" within modern tuning ?

- just to make sure... so you're implying the question why CONTEMPORARY COMPOSERS of tonal music still use modulations when there is no difference between keys?

- firstly, i tend to think more that it was just a practice which was carried on, up until our tonal music composers nowadays. but of course, there's more to that.

The subject of tuning has come up a few times on the forum, and it has been said that all perceived differences between individual key-areas are simply non-existent anymore with our modern tuning, even for those people with "perfect pitch" (I don't feel like hunting down the thread right now).  That these differences existed only within former tuning methods and that differences perceived within modern tuning are more or less the imagination acting on our behalf.

- i still believe that there is a difference in character among the different keys of modern tuning. the difference's effect is a matter of which time/period of music are we a product of... i mean, i just can't deny that there is a difference in color. when a pitch goes higher, that's a color change already. when barry manilow goes higher, it's a signal of feeling that it's about to end or to conclude in a big manner (the performer can show off a little). when mozart goes to the dominant (V) for the 2nd theme, it was to help with signaling for a different character, mood and melody... like someone mentioned, CONTRAST. ---- so, i think that's a perceived difference right there.

they too had imaginations at play. Machaut would probably be interested to hear the equal temperament. we may never know, he might find it colorful, and he might say, "wow, it's so expressive, more than ours."

just to add:
- actually, my own issue with this is, how do i bring out a mood in a bach piece, knowing that he used a different tuning, and we use the equal temp?!? his preludes and fugues don't sound that awful to the ear when we use a modern piano tuning... it's an entirely different sound with his tuning, the dissonances are pretty awfully strong. the point is, he composed these pieces THINKING of those "keys"/moods... thus the doctrine of ethos applies pretty well (for now, i say this).

- but again, we should not forget that as products of our own time, Bach's musical effect on us DOESN'T have to be as how it affected them before. so, using modern tuning with his music is OK. if you were a die-hard musician of authenticity, you will have a big problem... and what is authenticity with something we haven't heard at all? i simply don't believe in it. everything is a matter of approximation. anyway, so the doctrine of ethos still applies, only it is applied in a different manner, with different effects.

I can understand the place of modulation within earlier tuning, should a new key area actually produce a new reaction within the audience.  But,  as I have had somewhat of a revelation that chord progressions are not simply for the purpose of going somewhere, but for the purpose of getting somewhere; within modern tuning, where do we actually "get" by arriving in a new key ?

a "destination" doesn't have to exist on its own in the middle of a piece. simply think that the beauty of a piece's progression of harmony will bring you somewhere... and that somewhere is the END.. the resolution of the music. or the progression in itself had so much meaning. think of the whole than focusing on a mere modulation. the mixtures of these modulations are combinations that create wonderful colors. that's why we remember these compositions, because they are beautiful.

and just to add:
hmmm, i think it was when the equal temperament came to full maturity that composers began to modulate even more, and very daring modulations at that, basically starting with beethoven. modulations of early and pre-baroque music were pretty much vague. but the choice of what "key" or mode for the piece was very important to choose from the start of writing a piece. so in this case, it wasn't really important for those composers to have a "destination".


- crazy

[crazy for ivan moravec]

i'm not that good with organizing my thoughts.. hope it was clear.

[prometheus]

This is the totally wrong idea. A modulation from C to G would be the same as a C chord and then a G chord.

C and G chords are the same, except they start at a different frequency. Same with C and G scales. But of course a G chord in the key of C will be very different from a G progression in the  key of G.

If a piece starts in C and then goes to G, the relation would be the same as that of a C and G chord, only on a bigger scale. It would be the same I-V relation.

But yes, you could start off on G and then go to D, no matter if you talk about individual chords or segments of music. That would be the same I-V relationship. So it is about relative relations between keys, chords, or on any other scale.

But there is a difference between a C to G, I to V progression and a G to D, I to V progression. Sure, the quality 'inherited' from the I to V relation are the same, whatever the actual chords are. But the starting frequencies are different. So this does make a difference. Just transpose your favorite piece to a different key. It will sound very different while the harmonic relationships and the melodies and all the other qualities will be the same. There will be a different vibe or colour to it.

So to wrap it up. A chord progression would be harmonic motion or pulse on the local scale while modulations are harmonic motion on the large scale. In Schenkerian analysis every piece can be reduced to three chords, I to V and then back to I, in a way just like a story.

[sergei r]

I still don't think anyone's really answered the question as to why all pieces of music aren't just written in C Major or A Minor. Personally, I don't think there is any difference between keys and that a piece sounds the same when transposed into a different key. The only post that makes sense so far is the person who suggested that composers simply fiddled around and came up with an idea in a certain key and decided to stick with it. Nowadays, since there is no difference between the keys, why bother writing something in C# for reasons other than the technicality of playing it?

[pianalex]

did'nt beethoven refer somewhere to bminor as a 'black' , in an emotional sense, key?  That is in and of itself, irrespective of context.  Do keys have absolute character?  Eb can have hunting horn associations,say, but those types of thing are due to particluar historical reasons of tuning etc.   I think for the performer the feel of a key under the fingers does matter, but whether it affects the interpretation is unclear. Transcribing and recording a simple piece in several keys and comparing might be interesting.  Really it is the relations between keys that tells more imo

[prometheus]

Keys are very different. Just try it out yourself. Like I said above. It is just that the music itself will be the same, same melodies, same harmonies, but with a different vibe/colour.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

i used to accompany Widmung in Ab major. when somebody handed me the same piece in Bb major, it changed my whole concept of the piece right there.

ok... another example, rachmaninoff 3rd concerto for piano, 2nd movement.... i can't point out the measure numbers but it's the CLIMAX of this movement (everyone knows which part it is, right?) ok ok... so rachmaninoff repeats it twice. the 1st time is in D major, the 2nd time is in Db!!! i haven't studied the score of this yet, but i just noticed the wonderful difference because of the colors. the 2nd time sure was warmer in feeling! what a genius!

[prometheus]

In your last example it is totally different. The piece is a tonal piece in D minor. That means that any note or passage relates to the note D. It gets their quality from the relation it has in D minor. So it is not strange that it sounds different.

[maxy]

in a perfect world all would be in c major   

there is no need to explain the need of "modulation".  feel it, live it. 

[g_s_223]

It's worth noting that singers commonly expect their pianists to be able to transpose the songs/lieder/mélodies up or down by arbitrary amouts, at sight: this is quite an impressive skill of course.

However, the point is the singers put the perfect placement and support of their voices as the highest priority, rather than the notional original key (which may or not be right anyway due to the actions of the editors and publishers). In fact Schubert (and many other) songs are printed in three separately transposed editions (High/Medium/Low voice).

In the Schubert song cycles, where successive songs follow each other, it is generally recommended to maintain the tonal relationships between each and the next by having a uniform relative transposition, so as to maintain the modulation between songs which occurs.

[ahinton]

in a perfect world all would be in c major   

there is no need to explain the need of "modulation".  feel it, live it. 

May God - and/or anyone else capable - preserve me from such a dull demi-monde as that one - and, while we're at it, let us not forget that the 20th century composer famed for his apparent comment about there still being much fine music to be written in C major wrote his second chamber symphony around that time - and this is in E flat minor...

Best,

Alistair

[crazy for ivan moravec]

In your last example it is totally different. The piece is a tonal piece in D minor. That means that any note or passage relates to the note D. It gets their quality from the relation it has in D minor. So it is not strange that it sounds different.

but i think we're also talking about modulation within the piece? i think mayla's asking what's the use of modulation if the "destination" is not that different (unlike in old tuning where the destination/new key is totally different). no? hehe, actually, i'm a bit at loss with this thread.

i also interpret mayla's question as: why did composers keep on using modulation even after it has changed to equal temp where "there is no difference among keys".

[franz_dwarak]

but i think we're also talking about modulation within the piece? i think mayla's asking what's the use of modulation if the "destination" is not that different (unlike in old tuning where the destination/new key is totally different). no? hehe, actually, i'm a bit at loss with this thread.

i also interpret mayla's question as: why did composers keep on using modulation even after it has changed to equal temp where "there is no difference among keys".

I agree with Ivan...The perspective of the question is very important...Modulation itself means changing tonal perspective within a piece, the question was not about why write in a Certain Key(that in itself is a different discussion topic!!!), So all answers pointing to being technical or instrumental physiology (including String instruments being tuned in certain ways and Open strings..)doesnt really answer the fundamental question, why Modulate? Also m1469 posted the question and assumed certain thing...Why Modulate because of modern tuning is the question that assumes Modulation is primarily done on aspects of tuning...not necessarily...

Ok, Why modulate within a piece....

There is a reason, most of the modulations are not arbitrary but done contrapuntally or writing contrapuntal  inversions...Ok, why why do this...will be the next question....THe answer has to lie in the fact, all technical answers for music or theoretical answers for musical questions has to ultimately lie in the fact that the ears feels great pleasure aurally, emotionally when it percieves certain key changes but for a wee bit still assumes the tonic as the original Key before modulation....
E.G Veyr beautiful but simplistic example
Grande Sonate Op 33 20 ANS buy Valentin Alkan when the piece moves to a very slow but romantic melody...How Alkan beautifully uses the same theme but  B --Efalt Fsharp Fsharp ...thats the melody but in the next phrase uses the same texture but this time F sharp, A, C Sharp C Sharp.....but when this change happens the ears percieves the tonic is still in key of B but he has modulated contrapuntally to F sharp and after 6 or 7  beautiful bars he comes back with a Tremendoues burst of melody on the original tonic B, but by the time he comes to B the ear has used to F sharp so it again percieves this variation aurally with respect to F sharp, ultimately it feels great but technically or theoretically this modulation is done contrapuntally and adds for harmonic variation beautifully, the more the voices(or instrumentation) the better this becomes, writing contrapuntally is so rich with more voices that modulating is such an exciting phenomena...I hope to elucidate with the notation, but I dont know how to add that here....Anyway I hope I added some dimension to this question/answer....thanks

[prometheus]

but i think we're also talking about modulation within the piece?

I was making a distinction between the two examples you gave.

if the "destination" is not that different (unlike in old tuning where the destination/new key is totally different).

No. This does not undertand the main point.  In a sense this question would be: "Why use more than one chord." The answer is the same. Now one may assume that this suggests the question is not profound. Actuually it is because using more than one chords is an unique feature of western music. Many other kinds of music only use one chord throughout the piece, or not any chord at all.

So the use of modulations has the same reason as the use of chords, only at a larger scale.

i also interpret mayla's question as: why did composers keep on using modulation even after it has changed to equal temp where "there is no difference among keys".

Its about tonality. A C and G chord are the same, but totally opposite as well when it comes to harmonic function. As far as I know modulation in the old tunings wasn't even possible because the notes would become out of tune(right?).

I find it kind of strange this is not understood because this is the essense of classical music; large scale form and development. Modulations are a way to be able to create a story-like plot. A build-up. A tension arch. Read the definitions of a sonata-allegro and look up the ideas behind Schenkerian analysis.

In pop music many people consider a modulation to be essential as a variation. Often you will see a bridge or interlude in a different key. One could consider a passage in a new modulation essential even in a pop song.

As for jazz, that's way too complex to get into here, for now.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

As far as I know modulation in the old tunings wasn't even possible because the notes would become out of tune(right?).

i agree with that. i even mentioned that "equal temperament composers" started to even modulate some more and made even daring ones (like beethoven).

ok... how i interpreted mayla's question was a nonsense. i was just trying to answer that "destination" thingy she was trying to say ("destination" = keys)... what would be a "destination" in the equal temperament if they all sound the "same"?

actually, it does make sense that IF modulation was common in early music, then "destinations" do exist because the change of color was more noticeable with meantone (but then i also tried to insert chronological issues, coz we now live in a different world and how we notice the change of color is different from how they used react to it).

so now i realized that in the first place, modulations were not even common during that time.. so what did they know about it then?

I find it kind of strange this is not understood because this is the essense of classical music; large scale form and development. Modulations are a way to be able to create a story-like plot. A build-up. A tension arch. Read the definitions of a sonata-allegro and look up the ideas behind Schenkerian analysis.

it's not strange. i know what you're talking about. we were not in the same line of thought, that's all. my forms and analysis professor's training was schenkerian analysis as well.

[crazy for ivan moravec]

im so lost. hehe 

[martha argerrrrrich]

im so lost. hehe 

You feel Lost?! ;....probably that is modulation, May be this Thread(topic) has Modulated in its discussion too!!!!!!!!!

[crazy for ivan moravec]

talk about a thread with the subject : to posting vs. not posting, or so. jokes do lighten up things.

[g_s_223]

Isn't there a piece called "The Lost Chord"?

[m1469]

May be this Thread(topic) has Modulated in its discussion too!!!!!!!!!

And perhaps it's time to modulate back home 

[martha argerrrrrich]

And perhaps it's time to modulate back home 

Agreed!    May be its time to explain with examples: Based on some forumers' post I went and listened to some pieces....
Here's just a Snippet from Alkan Grande Sonate Op 33 played by HAMELIN....(attached mp3)

I found out it starts with Key of B (goes to B Minor quickly app 5 Secs in to Piece) but moves to Key of F Sharp around Time...18th sec  Careful...quite gorgeous and the melody comes back to B again around 27 Secs this is spectacular....Why Modulate, may be for this reason, I dont really know to explain this technically may be thats what everyone's lookin here....Can someone explain???

[prometheus]

Cadence on the large scale on B: I-V-I, just a way to prolong the segment in B with variation and strenght.

So the piece 'stays in B', but modulates to the dominant.


[edit]Wait, it is a segment from the middle. Ok, look at the end and you will find the answer. Listen to the last 30 seconds and remember the Schenker idea, I-V-I, should be the whole plot outlining of the story.

[steve jones]

Modulation and tonicization are the spice of life imo. Without these devices, you'd have pretty boring tonal music. Just look at a piece like Chopin Prelude 20! I dont have the score to hand, but if memory serves, he's modulating to related keys pretty much ever measure, resulting in far more chromaticism in the voice leading.

I like to think of modulation in this sense as being like Tai Chi - like the tonality of the music is in a constrantly liquid state, and you never know where its going to head off to next (especially with big Chop!). When modulation is used like this, to point and new tonalities all over the place, it becomes such an intrinsic part of the music.

[pianohenry]

This may have already been mentioned, i havent read the whole post.

If a piano/keyboard piece was written with a very wide range of notes, extending for several or more octaves, one reason to change the key could be to avoid playing extremely deep, booming notes in the bass or extremelyhigh pitched, harsh sounding notes, simply because they can sometimes sound... bad. in this case its probably better to shift the piece up or down a few tones.

again if a piece written in C extended very high in the right hand but not lower than middle C, for conveniences sake it would be easier to write the piece slightly lower to avoid many ledger lines above the stave.

that wasnt really answering the question "why modulate" i was more answering to why not all pieces are written in C Major/A Minor

[earl]

Let's say for the sake of argument that there is no difference between the "sound" of various key centers in a tempered system, there still is at least a couple of reasons (alluded to by other answers already) to modulate from one key to another in a piece:

Just the act of moving from one key center to another produces an effect, which will be different based on the relationship between the two key centers. A modulation will have a different effect moving to the key of the dominant versus to the key of the flat submediant for example. If for no other reason than the key center's pitch is higher or lower than the previous, that too is an effect. (The Barry Manilow principle cited above.)

The effect will be different if the modulation is smooth (moved into gradually using common chords) or abruptly. Beethovan used the latter to great effect.

A larger question brought up by someone else is: Why don't they write everything in one key?

Go to the piano and play any chord and voice it anyway you like. Now, transpose it to other keys and move up and down the keyboard. The sound of the same chord will be different because of where it lies in the audio spectrum. The lower you go the more muddy it will sound, especially if there are a lot of close intervals in the voicing. The higher you go the  less body and resonance it will have. Now, take that idea and apply it to a main theme of a sonata for example. In some keys it will sound too muddy or too thin. It will mainly have to do with the tessitura (spelling?) or the overall range of the theme and the arrangement of the accompaniment.

All of the above will be dictated by the the goals of the composer. Maybe what's wanted is a thin sound or a muddy sound, so the choice of key will be a determining factor in the sound of the piece.

Finally, music is not just played on the piano of course. The same notes sound different on different instruments, the ranges of the instruments vary of course. So the composer will choose the main key center of the piece based on instrumentation, the overall texture, and,to a degree, on what can be played on that instrument. Some wind and brass instruments have certain areas of their range that have awkward fingerings or 'weak spots'.  The composer will avoid those problems by writing in a key that stays out those problem areas.

I'm sure there are other reasons but these seem to be the main ones, in my opinion.

Earl