# Does Gregorian chant have a "tonality?"



## millionrainbows

Does Gregorian chant have a "tonality?" Watch out, this is a trick question.


----------



## Kopachris

The trick being the question has no answer that will satisfy you.

I'm curious to see where this goes though.


----------



## Kopachris

I guess I'll start by supposing that "tonality" is a psychoacoustic phenomenon that music doesn't have. Rather, tonality is observed, perceived by the listener.

So no, Gregorian Chant doesn't have a tonality, but a tonality may be perceived by listeners of a Gregorian Chant who didn't realize it was actually in, say, Lydian mode.


----------



## EdwardBast

Kopachris said:


> The trick being the question has no answer that will satisfy you.
> 
> I'm curious to see where this goes though.


Curious? You've been here since 2010 and you don't know where it's going? Just for that I'm going to spoil the end of Casablanca for you: Rick doesn't get the girl!


----------



## isorhythm

You can call Gregorian modes tonality if you want. Language is flexible!


----------



## millionrainbows

I'd be interested in hearing some subjective responses, and also if "knowing it's in Lydian mode" changes that response.


----------



## isorhythm

Some chants might sound tonal-ish, others not. It depends on the mode and the features of the particular melody. I find this stuff interesting and fun to talk about, so here goes!

In Gregorian chant there were eight modes, each defined by a range and a final (ending note). The four "authentic" modes were basically defined by white-note scales starting on their finals: Dorian (D to D), Phrygian (E to E), Lydian (F to F), and Mixolydian (G to G). Sometimes they also went one note below the final. (I'm using letters corresponding to white keys on a piano for convenience, but in the middle ages these weren't absolute pitches - it would be more accurate to say Dorian ran from re to re, Phrygian from mi to mi, etc.)

Each authentic mode had a corresponding "plagal" mode with the same final but with a range running from a fourth below the final to a fifth above; these were called Hypodorian, Hypophrygian, etc.

In the Dorian, Lydian, Hypodorian, and Hypolydian modes, B flat was sometimes used in place of B natural. This means that in practice they were often more like our major and minor modes. Later theorists would recognize two other modes, the Ionian (C-C, major) and Aeolian (A-A, minor), but the medieval theorists didn't.

Each mode also had a reciting tone, which was a melodic point of emphasis, usually sounding more often than the final.

An important thing to note is that the medieval chant composers didn't like the sound of the leading tone cadence that basically defines tonal music (i.e., E-->F) and consciously avoided it. That certainly weakens any sense of tonality in Gregorian chant.

So what does this mean for how it sounds, whether it has tonality?

Here's a seasonally appropriate chant in the Hypophrygian mode or mode 4 (medieval theorists mostly used numbers): 




To most modern listeners unused to Gregorian chant this will sound like it ends on the wrong note. The melody and in particular the reciting tone of this mode, A, suggest to us a home of D, but in the medieval system it ends on its proper final, E.

Here's another beautiful and relatively well-known chant, though not seasonally appropriate: 




This one is in mode 1, Dorian. Note the B flats, except the B natural descending line in the middle - that kind of switching between B flat and B natural is characteristic of the medieval Dorian mode.

To me, this one sounds more tonal. It sort of sounds like it's in F but then veers to the relative minor D for the final alleluia. But again, within the medieval modal system, it makes perfect sense.

And here's the most famous chant melody, the Dies Irae: 




Straightforward Dorian melody here - pretty easy for our ears to understand and fit with our tonal expectations, IMO. This one was written later, 13th century, and it has a big range, going down to the A below the final...earlier chants in mode 1 wouldn't do this.

You asked about Lydian (mode 5) specifically. Here's an example I found: 




Notably, it uses B flat a lot. We might say it sort of vacillates between major and Lydian...or maybe between F major and A minor.

When Beethoven and Bruckner decided to use the Lydian mode for a special effect, they stuck to the Lydian scale strictly and avoided B flat. But medieval and Renaissance composers never really did that.


----------



## Phil loves classical

Interestingly, there are 8 meanings/senses of the word tonality.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonality

Whichever turns your crank.


----------



## Tikoo Tuba

Tonality has identity . aum

Does the Gregorian chant still exist as monastic daily ritual ?


----------



## isorhythm

Tikoo Tuba said:


> Does the Gregorian chant still exist as monastic daily ritual ?


It does for monks....


----------



## Flamme

Dont knoe bout tonality but Im certain about Totality!!!


----------



## millionrainbows

Are they wearing underwear under those robes?


----------



## anahit

millionrainbows said:


> Does Gregorian chant have a "tonality?" Watch out, this is a trick question.


It has modality - a compound of pitches.

Tonality is a compound of harmonic progressions. So, it doesn't have tonality.


----------



## millionrainbows

Kopachris said:


> I guess I'll start by supposing that "tonality" is a psychoacoustic phenomenon that music doesn't have. Rather, tonality is observed, perceived by the listener.
> 
> So no, Gregorian Chant doesn't have a tonality, but a tonality may be perceived by listeners of a Gregorian Chant who didn't realize it was actually in, say, Lydian mode.


What did you think I meant? I'm glad to see you worked it all out by the end of your post.


----------



## millionrainbows

anahit said:


> It has modality - a compound of pitches.
> 
> Tonality is a compound of harmonic progressions. So, it doesn't have tonality.


So when you hear it, you don't hear it as tone-centric in any way? I always thought it sounded rather drone-y.


----------



## millionrainbows

Phil loves classical said:


> Interestingly, there are 8 meanings/senses of the word tonality.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonality
> 
> Whichever turns your crank.


For the purpose of this discussion, these two definitions are best:

5. Referential tonic 
In a general way, tonality can refer to a wide variety of musical phenomena (harmonies, cadential formulae, harmonic progressions, melodic gestures, formal categories) as arranged or understood in relation to a referential tonic.

7. Synonym for "key" 
The word tonality has more recently been used by amateur musicians and in popular music as a synonym for "key"-in this sense meaning "keyness"[/h]This is the most common usage, referring to the arrangement of musical phenomena around a referential tonic, as found in European music from about 1600 to about 1910, using two modal genera, major and minor

P.S. For all you geniuses out there, It has nothing to do with whether A=435 or A=440.


----------



## isorhythm

millionrainbows said:


> For the purpose of this discussion, these two definitions are best:
> 
> 5. Referential tonic
> In a general way, tonality can refer to a wide variety of musical phenomena (harmonies, cadential formulae, harmonic progressions, melodic gestures, formal categories) as arranged or understood in relation to a referential tonic.
> 
> 7. Synonym for "key"
> The word tonality has more recently been used by amateur musicians and in popular music as a synonym for "key"-in this sense meaning "keyness"[/h]This is the most common usage, referring to the arrangement of musical phenomena around a referential tonic, as found in European music from about 1600 to about 1910, using two modal genera, major and minor
> 
> P.S. For all you geniuses out there, It has nothing to do with whether A=435 or A=440.


I would say Gregorian chant fits under 5, minus the harmonic component.


----------



## millionrainbows

isorhythm said:


> I would say Gregorian chant fits under 5, minus the harmonic component.


Okay, agreed.
What are we on now, page two?


----------



## isorhythm

millionrainbows said:


> Okay, agreed.
> What are we on now, page two?


I think it's a more interesting question than just yes/no, that's why I wrote the longer post above. But if you disagree no need to belabor it.


----------



## millionrainbows

isorhythm said:


> I think it's a more interesting question than just yes/no, that's why I wrote the longer post above. But if you disagree no need to belabor it.


It just seems like people are more concerned with definitions than they are with actually discussing the question, which I think they all understand enough "play along."


----------



## isorhythm

millionrainbows said:


> It just seems like people are more concerned with definitions than they are with actually discussing the question, which I think they all understand enough "play along."


That's because the question you've posed depends on definitions. Once we agree on a definition the answer is trivial.


----------



## millionrainbows

isorhythm said:


> That's because the question you've posed depends on definitions. Once we agree on a definition the answer is trivial.


Not to me. I'm more interested in subjective reactions than I am on definitions.


----------



## anahit

millionrainbows said:


> So when you hear it, you don't hear it as tone-centric in any way? I always thought it sounded rather drone-y.


Modality can also have a tone center. One or more centers (example: plagal modes).



Phil loves classical said:


> Interestingly, there are 8 meanings/senses of the word tonality.
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tonality


Never consult Wikipedia for anything serious.


----------



## isorhythm

millionrainbows said:


> Not to me. I'm more interested in subjective reactions than I am on definitions.


OK, let's talk about subjective reactions. I gave my take in my long post on the first page. What did you think? Was my take wrong? What's your take?


----------



## millionrainbows

isorhythm said:


> OK, let's talk about subjective reactions. I gave my take in my long post on the first page. What did you think? Was my take wrong? What's your take?


I think you're right. The tonality is often ambiguous in chant, and that's why I find it interesting.

Some of it has been added to, so it's interesting to see how someone turns it into harmonic music.

The Resurrexi (Easter Sunday, Introit) sounds minor.

The Hodie Christus Natus Est (Christmas, Antiphon, Female voices) starts out sounding major, but ends up sounding minor. I also noticed one note, in only one instance, that sounded Lydian or b5-ish.

I recognize the Sequentia: Dies Irae from "The Shining." It sounds Dorian.

The Introitus: Laetare Ierusalem is ambiguous; it seems to vacillate between the I major and iii minor, as you said, F and Am. I do hear that Lydian b5 creeping in on occasion, and it sounds out of place here.

I think we are hearing things the same.


----------



## visionquest1972

So I am just going to reply to this without reading the other replies (don't worry, I will). My gut tells me that there was tonality in Gregorian Chant. I say this because I think that we naturally know which tones are "pleasing" to the ear. But to be technical, I don't think that the chants have tonality because tonality hadn't been defined yet.


----------



## Flamme

millionrainbows said:


> Are they wearing underwear under those robes?


I dunno but...


> A traveler stopped at a monastery and they invited him to stay for a delicious dinner of fish and chips.
> After dinner he went in the kitchen and asked a guy "Are you the fish friar?" and the guy said "No I'm the chip monk."


:wave:


----------



## millionrainbows

anahit said:


> Modality can also have a tone center. One or more centers (example: plagal modes).
> 
> Never consult Wikipedia for anything serious.


I think WIK is a great source of accurate info. I see you have been pro-active in offering your superior alternatives.


----------



## millionrainbows

visionquest1972 said:


> So I am just going to reply to this without reading the other replies (don't worry, I will). My gut tells me that there was tonality in Gregorian Chant. I say this because I think that we naturally know which tones are "pleasing" to the ear. But to be technical, I don't think that the chants have tonality because tonality hadn't been defined yet.


Then the tonality of it is "art" or whatever. Still, I think there is some "tonality" going on in a lot of it, although it hasn't been defined, because I think it's a natural human propensity to hear, or search for, tonality. I think definitions are often irrelevant and can actually get in the way of whatever it is you're trying to achieve.


----------



## EdwardBast

millionrainbows said:


> Then the tonality of it is "art" or whatever. Still, I think there is some "tonality" going on in a lot of it, although it hasn't been defined, because I think it's a natural human propensity to hear, or search for, tonality. *I think definitions are often irrelevant and can actually get in the way of whatever it is you're trying to achieve.*


Definitions do tend to get in the way if ones intention is to sow confusion and avoid meaningful discourse.


----------



## millionrainbows

EdwardBast said:


> Definitions do tend to get in the way if ones intention is to sow confusion and avoid meaningful discourse.


Conversely, I think definitions are used to slow-down, invalidate, and impede discourse.


----------

