Lots of alternating between two notes, but as far as I understand that's normal in serialism. I'm gonna make the wild guess it's serial but I'm probably wrong.
Serial or free atonal? (Game)
Thanks to dim7's suggestion, this is a game. Serial or free atonal?
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
I'm a ignorant and I can be wrong but listening to the first five minutes I'd say that it's definitely not serial.
It's probably the easiest to follow serial piece ever if it is serial.
Possibly I'm wrong, but to me it sounds neither serial nor free atonal - if for "free atonal" we mean pieces such as the Schoenberg's ones preceding the serial ones.
I think free atonal means any atonal that's not serial in this game.if for "free atonal" we mean pieces such as the Schoenberg's ones preceding the serial ones.
In that case I'd lean towards the atonal...I think free atonal means any atonal that's not serial in this game.
Serial or free atonal:
No, that's this, which is, after all, child's play:It's probably the easiest to follow serial piece ever if it is serial.
Sorry, I still feel uncomfortable if I have to classify those pieces serial or free atonal...
Crumb's music is not serial, and I wouldn't say it's free atonal either. To me, free atonality is a specific way of composing at the end of the 19th-century/beginning of the 20th-century which preceded the 12-tone technique and the serialism...
Wozzeck is free atonal, Moses und Aron is serial (or better, written in the twelve-tone technique).
Maybe a better question could be serial or not serial?
Crumb's music is not serial, and I wouldn't say it's free atonal either. To me, free atonality is a specific way of composing at the end of the 19th-century/beginning of the 20th-century which preceded the 12-tone technique and the serialism...
Wozzeck is free atonal, Moses und Aron is serial (or better, written in the twelve-tone technique).
Maybe a better question could be serial or not serial?
So was the first one serial or not?
The first piece I believe is neither serial nor free atonal. Too bad I don't have the scoreSo was the first one serial or not?
so that I can look at it closely.
Serial method does not automatically include atonality. Serial method does not automatically exclude tonality.Sorry, I still feel uncomfortable if I have to classify those pieces serial or free atonal...
Crumb's music is not serial, and I wouldn't say it's free atonal either. To me, free atonality is a specific way of composing at the end of the 19th-century/beginning of the 20th-century which preceded the 12-tone technique and the serialism...
Wozzeck is free atonal, Moses und Aron is serial (or better, written in the twelve-tone technique).
Maybe a better question could be serial or not serial?
There are now, over a quarter century after I trained, easily a half-dozen at least terms for the various "specified by a quality / method" types of atonality which are not serial, and of which "free atonality" is probably just one. There's the atonal of set theory -- which itself has several sub-genre formalist permutations and specifically 'qualified' kinds of atonality.
Me, I'm waiting for the It is not tonal, it is not progressive tonal, nor is it any paricular stripe of formalist atonality because I started composing the piece on a wednesday mid-morning variety of atonality.
I wouldn't then worry if such a general "free atonal" here means the non-formalist atonality of just the earliest part of the 20th century... i.e. I think it is here used as a blanket term for anything which does not sound -- irony bit here -- like early to mid-20th century atonal serialism.
Many a contemporary composer has dropped interest in even defining the 'issue' or giving much lip service to naming a piece as tonal, atonal, etc. Thomas Ades has all the array of what has been done before him, as do other composers: they pick, choose, and pick, mix, and choose -- including bits of something by way of principle vs. actual strict adherence to any particular systematic M.O. -- and use whatever they wish however it suits them.
To me, "serial" implies a use of a method, using the full possible 12-pitch spectrum, which as a result avoids any feeling of tonality. It is therefore non-tonal.
"Free atonality" is the result of increasing chromaticism, both in voices and in root-movement of chord functions, to the point where the tonality is ambiguous, and tonality is too hard to pin down. It is still the result of tonality.
Since chromatic root movement is based on minor-second intervals, which correspond to movement by fifths via tritone substitution, freely atonal root movement is not "atonal" chromaticism (see interval projection, noting that the only two intervals which "cycle" through all 12 notes when projected, or stacked, are the minor second and the fifth).
As long as a chromatic note can be related back to a root movement, it is not truly chromatic in a free sense; it is tonal.
Therefore, we have to demonstrate the presence of root movement in order to call something "freely atonal." The root movement might be vague or ambiguous; in other words, the functions might belong to more than one possible key area, but nonetheless they are tonal because of vertical chord structure, which might be the strongest indication of tonality.
Serialism, by contrast, will not have the same degree of vertical consistency, harmonically; it will be seen as confluences of separate melodic elements, not as aggregates of chords with functions.
"Free atonality" is the result of increasing chromaticism, both in voices and in root-movement of chord functions, to the point where the tonality is ambiguous, and tonality is too hard to pin down. It is still the result of tonality.
Since chromatic root movement is based on minor-second intervals, which correspond to movement by fifths via tritone substitution, freely atonal root movement is not "atonal" chromaticism (see interval projection, noting that the only two intervals which "cycle" through all 12 notes when projected, or stacked, are the minor second and the fifth).
As long as a chromatic note can be related back to a root movement, it is not truly chromatic in a free sense; it is tonal.
Therefore, we have to demonstrate the presence of root movement in order to call something "freely atonal." The root movement might be vague or ambiguous; in other words, the functions might belong to more than one possible key area, but nonetheless they are tonal because of vertical chord structure, which might be the strongest indication of tonality.
Serialism, by contrast, will not have the same degree of vertical consistency, harmonically; it will be seen as confluences of separate melodic elements, not as aggregates of chords with functions.
Funny thing about serialism, is that it looks like an incredibly restrictive system on paper. You've got basically just 4 different orders for the 12 notes plus the transpositions - almost like you have just 4 melodies or themes, though tone row is not exactly a melody.. its like somewhere between a melody and a scale. But the main complaint that most people have about most 12-tone music that it sounds "random" - the opposite of too predictable.
You certainly can write otherwise quite traditional and lyrical 12-tone music, but I suppose in such context the method may seem like a straightjacket. Is this why the method is associated with those extreme leaps and jagged rhythms?
You certainly can write otherwise quite traditional and lyrical 12-tone music, but I suppose in such context the method may seem like a straightjacket. Is this why the method is associated with those extreme leaps and jagged rhythms?
No, that's because those things were already a part of Schoenberg's style (where they derived from Beethoven, Mahler, and Wagner). I find Schoenberg's music is very lyrical, though, in the sense that all of the lines sing and have melodic contour.You certainly can write otherwise quite traditional and lyrical 12-tone music, but I suppose in such context the method may seem like a straightjacket. Is this why the method is associated with those extreme leaps and jagged rhythms?
Well, if he derived them from those composers, he sure took those elements up to eleven so to speak.No, that's because those things were already a part of Schoenberg's style (where they derived from Beethoven, Mahler, and Wagner).
In fact, I think that Schoenberg's Piano Concerto is one of the finest poetic statement ever devised in the history of Western music. It also scares off my dad.
And as serial as it is, it's definitely tonal for my ears.
Here is another atonal example:
That example has NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO tonal center whatsoever. Thus atonal definitely to me.
On the other hand, Feldman is strictly tonal to my ears.
This being a prime example.
So electroacoustic music could be 95% atonal to me.
And as serial as it is, it's definitely tonal for my ears.
Here is another atonal example:
That example has NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO tonal center whatsoever. Thus atonal definitely to me.
On the other hand, Feldman is strictly tonal to my ears.
This being a prime example.
So electroacoustic music could be 95% atonal to me.
No, that's because those things were already a part of Schoenberg's style (where they derived from Beethoven, Mahler, and Wagner). I find Schoenberg's music is very lyrical, though, in the sense that all of the lines sing and have melodic contour.
I can hear Wagner and Mahler's influence throughout this.Well, if he derived them from those composers, he sure took those elements up to eleven so to speak.
...and of course, Beethoven would be a great influence.
There's actually no Mahler influence in the Gurrelieder (except in the orchestration of Part 3), contrary to popular belief. When he composed the work in 1900-01, he had only heard Mahler's First Symphony and despised it as worthless. He had subsequently declined the opportunity to hear the Vienna premiere of the Fourth because he was convinced that it would itself be terrible. Only with a performance of the Third a few years later did he convert, and according to a gushing letter he wrote to Mahler after the event, the piece struck him "like a thunderbolt." After that he revered Mahler as the most perfect composer of his age.I can hear Wagner and Mahler throughout this.
What one might hear in Gurrelieder, however, is the influence of Strauss, which is prominent in his works, I feel, all the way up through the Five Orchestral Pieces.
1 - 20 of 40 Posts
- This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Classical Music Forum
A forum community dedicated to classical music musicians and enthusiasts. Come join the discussion about arrangements, collections, techniques, instruments, styles, reviews, classifieds, and more!
Full Forum Listing
Top Contributors this Month
View All
Seattleoperafan
485 Replies
Art Rock
453 Replies
PHOENIXFIRERAPTOR
390 Replies
Recommended Communities
