Why transpose at the octave?

Question

If an instrument has a range too high or too low for composers to easily write its music on bass or treble clef, the music may be written either an octave higher or an octave lower than it sounds, in order to reduce the use of ledger lines. —Wikipedia

So I'm playing piano, and there's suddenly a passage where I need to play the notes written on the bass staff, but an octave lower. The notation for this is the bass clef, possibly ornamented with a written notation to play an octave lower.

Or I'm playing some instrument that normally plays in two octaves, one corresponding to the treble clef and the other an octave higher than the treble clef, and — both are written on treble clefs, one above the other??

This seems terribly confusing. Why not use another clef symbol, one that unambiguously indicates the correct octave? (I'm assuming such a symbol exists; if not, why not?)

Answer 1

There is a (modern) convention for representing octave shifts "at the clef":

• an "8" above the clef is equivalent to "8va",
• an "8" below the clef is equivalent to "8vb",

and applies throughout the piece.

Answer 2

It's not confusing as long as it's consistently done in a particular way for particular instruments whose players are used to the notation.

For example, classical guitarists don't care that when they play the middle C, what actually comes out of the instrument is the C below middle C.

It would be confusing if different pieces for the instrument, or different publications of the same music, had different conventions.

The differing conventions might be confusing to composers who write for many instruments. But (the composer hopes!) music is read and performed many more times than it is written, so the conventions of those who read are more important.

Answer 3

Alternative clefs have been proposed, but are not in common use. In the appendix of Rossing's The science of sound, there are clefs called the "super-treble" which is notated as two consecutive treble clefs, and the "supra-super-treble" written as three clefs, which indicate one and two octaves above standard treble clef, respectively. Similarly, there are extensions to the bass clef. Since other solutions are traditionally accepted (8va notation and C-clefs), there is really no reason to use Rossings unconventional notations.

To add to the confusion, I thought from the title of the question that I should mention the tritave that arises in the Bohlen-Pierce scale. In other words, why do we transpose at the octave, and not some other interval?

Answer 4

Two aspects that have not yet been mentioned:

• For a performer to sight-read music, the performer must know at a glance that e.g. a note on the top line is F, the top space is E, etc. Examining the position of each note relative to e.g. the center of the C clef would be way too slow. From a sight-reading standpoint, it's easier for most performers to deal with a smaller number of note assignments (e.g. just treble and bass clef) than to have some pieces where the top line is F, some where it's A, some where it's E, some where it's G, etc.)

• In some cases, two instruments or vocalists that are told to play the same notes will in fact be expected to play an octave apart. For example, when grown men and women are singing in unison, most of the men will usually sing an octave lower than most of the women. Likewise, if a cello and string bass are given the same notes, the string bass will usually be expected to play them an octave below the cello. There is thus a convention that, except when otherwise noted, male parts written for the treble clef, or string bass parts written for the bass clef, should be assumed to play an octave below what's written.

Note that it's common for male parts to be written "at pitch" using the bass clef; the use of the bass clef rather than the treble clef indicates that the part is being written assuming the men's lower range. Since there isn't any common clef lower than the bass clef, however, one cannot very well use the clef to indicate object transposition or lack thereof for that instrument; music that wants something other than the standard octave transposition must include a directive saying so.

Answer 5

There's a bit of confusion that I feel OP has with regard to the quote. The quote describes transposing instruments, who are always written higher or lower than they sound, and 8va and 8vb notation, which are temporary effects that displace music by an octave. The property of the instruments that transpose by an octave is not the same as just changing clef on, say, piano. 8va and 8vb notation can occur for almost any instrument, but is most commonly used in instruments for which playing something an octave higher or lower is not a matter of a whole new physical motion (ie. octave valves, pianos). Instruments that transpose at the octave (like guitar, bass, etc) are done this way specifically to avoid always having to write 8va and 8vb.

Answer 6

I feel this question could be re-phrased quite successfully. However, I think the answer lies in the other clef sign - called the C clef, as used by, for example, viola players, which puts 'middle C' wherever the composer wishes - for example on the middle line of the five. This obviates the use of ledger lines, up or down, the pitch of the instrument is central to the clef sign.

Possibly the question is asking why not alternate and use different signs for the same instrument. This would be totally unnecessary . 8va etc.is more than adequate.To me when this is used, on the piano, it becomes a transposition. Only temporarily, though, unlike, say, a guitar, which actually uses a tiny 8 under the treble clef to show that the whole music is transposed by an octave.

The important factor is surely to use all of the staff to hang notes on for an instrument to play when reading, rather than needing to count up or down how many ledger lines are there. This is sorted for most instruments with a 3 or 4 octave range using one clef (treble or bass), and 8va /8vb signs. With a piano of 7 octaves, the problem is overcome using two clefs, AND 8va etc.

Answer 7

You can put an 8 on the clef to indicate that it is higher:

From https://www.freemusicdictionary.com/definition/octave-treble-clef/ :

A normal treble clef is said to be an "octave treble clef" when a number 8, or sometimes 8va, is placed above or below the clef symbol, which indicates to the musician to play an octave higher or lower. If the the number 8 (or 8va) is placed above the clef the musician is directed to play the notes an octave higher than they are written. If the number 8 (or 8vb) is placed below the the clef the musician is directed to play an octave lower than written.

Wikipedia, however, suggests that the clef is used to indicate that the note will sound higher than written due to the instrument:

To indicate that notes sound an octave higher than written, a treble clef with an 8 positioned above the clef may be used for penny whistle, soprano and sopranino recorder, and other high woodwind parts.

Answer 8

This seems terribly confusing. Why not use another clef symbol, one that unambiguously indicates the correct octave?

This is only your opinion, or guess. What you are proposing is replacing one set of symbols with another set. Neither of them are actually ambiguous. The alternative can easily be just as confusing to someone, perhaps even yourself.

An annotation like └ ─ ─ ─ 8vb ─ ─ ─ ┘ under a group of notes clearly shows where the transposition begins and ends and it can be inferred to which notes it applies.

Clefs have their own problems: they change the letter note values of staff lines. In the standard treble clef, the lowest staff line is an E, whereas in the standard bass clef, it is a G. Clefs take up horizontal space and two are needed to indicate the temporary change and the return to the original clef.

Someone confronted with a clef change might complain of the confusion caused by the changing note values of the staff lines, and opine that it would be less confusing to have an octave transposition indicated over a range of notes instead.

No matter the notation, the performer's brain has to adjust to the staff lines temporarily having different absolute note values. I suspect that the source of your difficulty may be that adjustment, rather than the means by which it is indicated. Once you are in the middle of that passage, you have gone past the transposing indication and are reading the individual note values. If you are struggling at that point, it must actually be the altered semantics of the staff lines that is the problem. In your mind you have associated the staff lines with absolute positions on the piano keyboard and are reluctant to liberate them to refer to other octaves.

Reading through transpositions is just another reading skill that has to be practiced.