There, I’ve had a minor AHA moment. After really looking at the scale for each key of whistle I think I’ve got it figured out for identifying the key of a song…
Using a D whistle as the example, in it’s scale there are two sharps, F & C. This changes with each key change. Therefore, you must as a basic, memorize the scale for each key of whistle you play in order to automatically recognize the key and/or understand the key signature.
Another example being the key of A. There would be three sharps noted on the staff F,G & C denoting the three sharps in the A scale.
I don’t think i want to go there yet! I went to this link www.musictheory.halifax.ns.ca/23modes.html and , uh, well, I think I’ll keep working on a full understanding of signatures first.
Standard key signatures are basically roadmaps for diatonic scales.
If you’re in the Key of D, you will be using all the notes from the D scale. The D scale is.. in the key of D
The little trick about going a semi tone, or looking at the second to last marking, etc is just a trick for recognising the key signature.
I know if I look at a key signature and its got 2 sharps (which will be F# adn C#) I can go up a semi tone from the last sharp and tell you what key its in. After years of reading sheet music I can do that just by looking at the piece, but the little tricks come in handy for figuring out inversions and minor keys when you get to that point in your career.
The funny thing about music is people do the ‘right’ thing all the time and have no background whatsoever. Before I was properly trained I had figured out a pentatonic scale on my guitar for soloing and had absolutely no idea that it was a pentatonic scale.. it sounded right.
Music sounds right, there’s math to back up all the stuff people were doing way before they started worrying about pitch differentiation and stuff. The math just justifies what our ears already told us.
All theory aside - a tune usually ENDS on the note of the key it’s in. It can start most anywhere and have accidental sharps or naturals in it, but if it has a “regular” ending, that note probably the tonic.
I use a “cheat sheet” with the first 2 measures of tunes I know. It really helps when practicing so you continue to play tunes you learned earlier.
No offense but these types of ‘tips’ are counterproductive to learning. A lot of musical resolution has songs ending in their ‘First’ which would be representative of the key the song is in, but just as many songs end on thirds, fifths, sevenths even. If you really want to learn how to read music, recognise keys, and actualy get some theory under your belt, learn the right way. Not with gimmicks, they’ll fail you when you need em, proper theory never will.
And I’m saying I don’t think it’s you that’s necessarily dense about musical theory, or that I am, or that anyone else is for that matter. It’s just that musical theory seems dense. Its never made any sense to me. And a great many people who have learned it by seeming rote admit to me they don’t understand the logic of it well enough to explain it either - you just have to memorise it. Perhaps only a mathemetician understands musical theory? Fortunately, once you’ve learned a tune you don’t need sheet music. You just close your eyes as you play and get lost in the magic, only to wake up to the applause of any audience you might have attracted… A flautist from one of the large internationally prestigous London symphony orchestras “taught” me silver flute for a year and never let me play a tune. I had to buy my own sheet music secretly to play tunes like Moon River, The Dream, Lullaby, Joy etc., and finally gave up. Fortunately, musical theory after you’ve learned the bare basics of EGBDF and FACE is irrelevant to being able to play good music well. Perhaps musical theory is for the anally challenged? Is it a bit like the bible - if you understand it, you don’t have to read it; if you have to read it, you won’t understand it…?
You don’t need theory to play music, and you don’t need to play music to understand theory.
Once you delve deep enough, theory actualy starts to make a lot of sense. Everything is circular, it all comes back onto itself and the incremental values of notes, tones, and semi tones make things easy to look at once you get it down.
Theory can’t make you a worse musician unless you stop playing music and start working music. That’s something I explain to my classicaly trained guitar friend all the time, I don’t care what mode you’re playin in or how it makes sense, you’re playin like a robot.
I compare it to cooking. You can cook an excellant dish by putting a pinch of this, a dash of that and baking it just long enough.
You can also make an excellant dish by putting exact measurements of each thing in, in a specific order and cooking at a specific temperature for a defined period of time.
The best meals though are made by the people who know how much to put in in its exact quantity but recognise how to pinch it here and dash it there to make it taste like a work of art.
I really believe that making music is not really so different from making dinner as you say. You need to know enough of the science to understand what you’re doing in basics before altering it enough to change the omlette into a soufle. I want to be able to understand the basics of what I’m reading in sheet music so that I may apply it, gain experience from it and later alter it to suit my taste. I will decide when I have satisfied my curiosity in music theory as I certainly am not intending to make a career in music or ever hook-up with a band for that matter. I’m doing this for the fun of it, because I like the whistle and want to understand a bit better how to make the sounds I want and produce the songs that I want to hear. I’m not a purist nor am I so anal that I must learn theory to the nth degree. When it becomes work the hobby is no longer fun.
AHA!!
I went to this link 
And it’s off to the modes now.
