I know this is an SDMB naughty, and I promise to behave in future, but can I just chime in with something that isn’t actually an answer to the OP but which I feel is worth saying anyway?
Namely, that I do wish all of you who care about music, know about it, understand it, want the world to appreciate and love it and share it more, would please do something to simplify the sheer unadulterated mind-squishing logic-lite dumbness of conventional musical theory. Then, perhaps, sane and normal people might be able to get on with it.
Look, I’m probably not the sharpest tool in the box. But I’m not thick either. I did well educationally, and I can get my head around most subjects. But music… aaargh. I’ve learned to play three or four instruments in my time. I’ve had good music teachers. I’ve had good, talented musical friends who can explain stuff to me. And I am still stunned to gobsmacked that nobody wants to update music theory a little, just to chuck out some of centuries-old barnacle junk, so that it even comes close to sensible.
First of all, some big news for ya. ‘C’ is not the first letter of the alphabet! So if we’re going to have one key which is the ‘plain vanilla’ one, without sharps and flats, and which is usually taught first, then, hey, let’s use the first letter of the alphabet. Which is ‘A’. It is not ‘C’.
Secondly, what in all of sweet creation does raising the pitch of a note have to do with ‘sharpening’? Or lowering pitch to do with ‘flattening’? Answer: nothing at all. Can’t we even use words to mean what they mean? What would be so criminally wrong with referring to ‘raised’ or ‘lowered’ notes?
Thirdly, why express some notes as ‘raised’ or ‘lowered’ versions of others? B and G are different notes, so they get different names. Well, C and C sharp are different notes. So… different names. Do you hear mathematicians referring to ‘2 sharp’ or ‘2 raised’? No, they refer to ‘3’. And the world gets by just fine. Do you hear writers referring to ‘N plus 1’ or ‘N sharp’ or ‘N raised’? No, it’s a different letter, so it has a different name: O.
Fourthly, would y’all please stop reciting the same junk you were fed by your music teachers and which you have never, ever questioned, even though it’s crap? I refer to all this stuff about music in certain keys ‘sounds happy’ or ‘sounds sad’. This is palpable nonsense. You keep saying it because you were taught it. There’s plenty of music that cheers me up which is written in a minor key, and plenty of dreary crap that is written in a major key. And it’s subjective anyway.
What’s more, you can take any piece of music you want, in any key, and transpose every single note down by exactly one tone, and 99% of laymen will tell you it’s exactly the same piece of music - and it is, because the relationships between every note are preserved. This will not affect whether it sounds ‘happy’ or ‘sad’ even though you’ve changed the key.
Fifthly, and a real brain-derailer if ever there was one, please get rid of scales which contain certain notes on the way up and different notes on the way down. Melodic and harmonic minors, I think. Please, a scale is one set of notes. Not two, or three… one set of notes.
I could go on. But that’s enough for now. And I promise to be good from now on, but this did need saying.