# Is serialism/dodecaphony a waste of time for composers today?



## C95 (Feb 6, 2017)

I mean, let’s be honest: most of people don’t care about that kind of music. What do they (composers) do for a living? I enjoy contemporary music. In fact, I prefer it to the baroque/classical era.


----------



## ido66667 (Aug 29, 2016)

You can say that composing classical music as a whole is a waste of time because not many people actually hear it, especially not by new composers. But, this is not the reason why one should compose...


----------



## Daniel Atkinson (Dec 31, 2016)

You need to specify WAY more.

Music is a personal thing and the processes of composing music and the artistic visions they have vary from composer to composer. 
Is serialism a waste of time? no. 
Do many contemporary composers Lachenmann, Ferneyhough, Murail et al use this compositing method? no. 
Can great music still come from serial techniques? yes.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

I have to admit, I have no idea whether contemporary composers still use 12-tone techniques. I know that it was all the rage back in the mid-twentieth-century, but I don't know if anyone uses it nowadays. I would be interested in finding out...does anyone here know anything about this?


----------



## Andolink (Oct 29, 2012)

Charles Wuorinen uses serial techniques and, on the evidence of this CD, is producing fascinating and vital music with those techniques:


----------



## Phil loves classical (Feb 8, 2017)

Composers should compose whatever they like regardless of who listens. I'm not a fan of serialism in general. Straight 12-tone still ok for me, but my view is composers are putting limits on their expressiveness, with additional rules in total serialism. Like to hear arguments and views otherwise.


----------



## arnerich (Aug 19, 2016)

Compose whatever you want.


----------



## DaveM (Jun 29, 2015)

'Compose whatever you want' means keep your day job.


----------



## Bettina (Sep 29, 2016)

DaveM said:


> 'Compose whatever you want' means keep your day job.


Good point. Non-professional composers have the freedom to explore whatever style appeals to them. However, if a composer wants to succeed in the marketplace, then it is important to engage with the current conventions to some extent. (That said, I don't think that serialism is required, or even expected, nowadays.)


----------



## arnerich (Aug 19, 2016)

DaveM said:


> 'Compose whatever you want' means keep your day job.


It also means you can die happy knowing you never compromised your art for the sake of the masses


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

Bettina said:


> I have to admit, I have no idea whether contemporary composers still use 12-tone techniques. I know that it was all the rage back in the mid-twentieth-century, but I don't know if anyone uses it nowadays. I would be interested in finding out...does anyone here know anything about this?


My first thought was "Well, I assume Charles Wuorinen is still at it," and Andolink has already confirmed this to be the case. He's never made much of an impression on me, but for all I know maybe he's really good now.

That aside, as far as I know, no prominent composer uses it today. Which just proves once again that the complaining was never really about serialism, it was about atonality (insofar as it wasn't just about _everything_ new). As for whether atonality is a waste of time, well, it's making Sofia Gubaidulina, Kaija Saariaho, Georg Friederich Haas, Wolfgang Rihm & Jörg Widmann more famous than anybody here is ever likely to be, so...


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Recently, I attended the world premiere of Wuorinen's opera "Brokeback Mountain", and his musical language sounded to me so akin to traditional tonality...

Maybe 12-tone/serialism and traditional tonality are just like Aureliano and Juan de Panonia in the eyes of God...


----------



## Omicron9 (Oct 13, 2016)

Not any more than tonal composing or <insert any other school of composing> is a waste of time. Would you ask a painter if using the color red was a waste of time today?

Compositional techniques can be thought of in a similar way: they're all tools or paint colors on a composer's palette. Why would any one color be a waste of time?

-09


----------



## Magnum Miserium (Aug 15, 2016)

Omicron9 said:


> Would you ask a painter if using the color red was a waste of time today?


Soulages would say, "Yes."


----------



## AlanStreet (Jun 28, 2017)

I'm sure that there are composers still using serial techniques but it seems to me that the whole movement from Schoenberg to Boulez was a waste of time and effort. 
I much prefer the works of say Bartok, Shostakovich and Messiaen (each pf whom tried serial methods on occasion)


----------



## Pugg (Aug 8, 2014)

AlanStreet said:


> I'm sure that there are composers still using serial techniques but it seems to me that the whole movement from Schoenberg to Boulez was a waste of time and effort.
> I much prefer the works of say Bartok, Shostakovich and Messiaen


Good to see you found this forum, welcome to Talk Classical.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

Serialism as a movement, no; but Elliott Carter was composing using 'serial' procedures right up to his 90th birthday. The set theory and symmetry ideas used in serialism are still relevant, and can be used.

What really distinguishes serial music is its chromaticism, not its use of set theory and other aspects.

I think the modern aesthetic of "reinventing music every time a composition is created" is still relevant.

But now, it's post-history. Post modernism allows for any historical territory to be staked out and exploited. I don't think the fruits of serialism have really had time to "take," historically speaking.

I see some of the rhythmic advances (hocketing, 7 against 8 figures, irrational rhythms, etc.) as seeing fruition in the music of Frank Zappa, whose music was extremely complex rhythmically.

The overall progress is the modern aesthetic of "total control" of all aspects, via notation, which takes a lot of the imprecision out of music, and takes control out of the hands of interpreters moreso than before.

In an age of digital technology, which gives us that control, I see these serial methods as still being relevant and valuable. After all, what modern composer does not use computers, and composition programs like Logic and Pro Tools? It's everywhere in soundtrack work.


----------



## Minor Sixthist (Apr 21, 2017)

Omicron9 said:


> Not any more than tonal composing or <insert any other school of composing> is a waste of time. Would you ask a painter if using the color red was a waste of time today?
> 
> Compositional techniques can be thought of in a similar way: they're all tools or paint colors on a composer's palette. Why would any one color be a waste of time?
> 
> -09


I don't think this analogy works very well. The question, I think, was asked in the sense of the tradeoff between effort and popularity/acclaim: because tonal music is obviously more popular than serial music, OP is asking if it's still 'worth it' for composers to put out serial/atonal music, I'm assuming because it may be too much work to put great energy into music that does not achieve a large audience.

You really would have to look past colors for that. I mean, you're not taking account the popularity of the color red in your comparison, given the assumed context of the question, because surely we can all agree that no art is a waste of time from the point of view of the artist, if capitalistic or popular gain is disregarded.

I understand where you're coming from. But I really think that it's a clear implication that this question has to do with low level of respect and recognition that serial music receives, especially compared to tonal music. It's slowly being kicked off the palette.


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

arnerich said:


> It also means you can die happy knowing you never compromised your art for the sake of the masses


My motto exactly...........and is how I do my stuff

"The present day Composers refuse to die"


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

An interesting side discussion would be: "If someone were to compose art music (not soundtracks or commercial jingles, etc) with the sole objective of making the MOST money, what would they compose?"

So then one thing to check out in answering this question, is...."Of all concert hall composers, who is making the most money?"

I would venture to guess that it is those with the most notoriety such as John Adams, Thomas Ades, Wolfgang Rihm, etc. which, if that is the case, I would say that the OP has a point, that dodecaphony is NOT lucrative, as evidenced by the fact that (to my understanding) none of these three composers use it.


----------



## ArtMusic (Jan 5, 2013)

C95 said:


> I mean, let's be honest: most of people don't care about that kind of music. What do they (composers) do for a living? I enjoy contemporary music. In fact, I prefer it to the baroque/classical era.


Composers today who compose contemporary serialism do it for their view of art's sake (key words: "their view of art's sake"). You are right most people don't care about that kind of music even among classical music listeners. There is a smaller group who do care and appreciate. The same can be said of anything today, art, film, theater, movies, books and genres. Collectively, it's an interesting group. Social fact.


----------



## Daniel Atkinson (Dec 31, 2016)

ArtMusic said:


> Composers today who compose neo-classicism and neo-romanticism do it for their view of art's sake (key words: "their view of art's sake"). You are right most people don't care about that kind of music even among classical music listeners. There is a smaller group who do care and appreciate. The same can be said of anything today, art, film, theater, movies, books and genres. Collectively, it's an interesting group. Social fact.


You need to get your facts straight. Historical Fact.

Daniel


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

20centrfuge said:


> An interesting side discussion would be: "If someone were to compose art music (not soundtracks or commercial jingles, etc) with the sole objective of making the MOST money, what would they compose?"
> 
> So then one thing to check out in answering this question, is...."Of all concert hall composers, who is making the most money?"
> 
> I would venture to guess that it is those with the most notoriety such as John Adams, Thomas Ades, Wolfgang Rihm, etc. which, if that is the case, I would say that the OP has a point, that dodecaphony is NOT lucrative, as evidenced by the fact that (to my understanding) none of these three composers use it.


I would say not a composer at all but someone like Andre Rieu eeeek


----------



## Ziggabea (Apr 5, 2017)

20centrfuge said:


> I would venture to guess that it is those with the most notoriety such as John Adams, Thomas Ades, Wolfgang Rihm, etc. which, if that is the case, I would say that the OP has a point, that dodecaphony is NOT lucrative, as evidenced by the fact that (to my understanding) none of these three composers use it.


Um, yes Rihm and Ades actually do


----------



## 20centrfuge (Apr 13, 2007)

Thank you Ziggabea. I didn't know if they did or not. 

In which case, I guess it is either 1)lucrative, or 2)doesn't matter

(At any rate, I really love the music of both Ades and Rihm)


----------



## Ziggabea (Apr 5, 2017)

20centrfuge said:


> Thank you Ziggabea. I didn't know if they did or not.
> 
> In which case, I guess it is either 1)lucrative, or 2)doesn't matter
> 
> (At any rate, I really love the music of both Ades and Rihm)


It's ok. I think many of their works are highly enjoyable, the case is #2, it doesn't matter 

I can't understand what Artmusic is raving on about several posts upwards, seems I'm not alone there. It really doesn't matter at all if something is "tonal" or "atonal", by definition: it's irrelevant


----------



## isorhythm (Jan 2, 2015)

Wuorinen has moved pretty far from anything strictly resembling dodecaphony or serialism of any kind.

Do contemporary composers write "serial music" or "12-tone music" anymore? By and large, no.

But are they informed by those techniques, and draw on them as needed? Absolutely. They're in the composers' toolbox now, and not going anywhere.

So no, not a waste of time.


----------



## Daniel Atkinson (Dec 31, 2016)

isorhythm said:


> But are they informed by those techniques, and draw on them as needed? Absolutely. They're in the composers' toolbox now, and not going anywhere.
> 
> So no, not a waste of time.


Every word of this is completely correct, it is just another part of the natural, modern language.

Daniel


----------



## nature (Jun 25, 2017)

Short answer: Probably.

Long answer: I believe atonal stuff has very limited appeal, especially today. The amount of people who are going to be convinced and drawn to orchestral music without traditional harmony is going to be relegated to a much smaller slice of an already relatively niche market.

If a composer is okay for writing for that smaller audience then sure its worth it. Just still can't see large amounts of new listeners being convinced that atonality is very important. How many more are going to be convinced that the music is worth hearing more than once when much of it throws away the basic elements that makes music pleasurable to listen to? It was cute about a century ago but I think the novelty has definitely worn off.


----------



## BabyGiraffe (Feb 24, 2017)

20centrfuge said:


> An interesting side discussion would be: "If someone were to compose art music (not soundtracks or commercial jingles, etc) with the sole objective of making the MOST money, what would they compose?"
> 
> So then one thing to check out in answering this question, is...."Of all concert hall composers, who is making the most money?"
> 
> I would venture to guess that it is those with the most notoriety such as John Adams, Thomas Ades, Wolfgang Rihm, etc. which, if that is the case, I would say that the OP has a point, that dodecaphony is NOT lucrative, as evidenced by the fact that (to my understanding) none of these three composers use it.


Out of these only John Adams is semi-popular. It is funny that the composer that used many excerpts out of Harmonielehre in the Matrix movie is probably a millionaire, but Adams didn't get any royalties or even credit.
You are not going to make any good money with contemporary orchestral music (unless you are the next "great" composer that manages to pull back the audience to classical and undo the damages done by the 20th century avantgardists).


----------



## Selby (Nov 17, 2012)

I want composer to create the music they feel passionate about. I will chose whether or not I wish to listen to it.


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

One problem I see is with musical materials in themselves: the diminished and whole tone scales are both "tonal" and geometric. They can be used tonally, or in a modern way. Music is too capable of ambiguity to be pigeonholed into any sort of materials or styles.


----------



## Scopitone (Nov 22, 2015)

I am going to guess that the only way to make money in orchestral music is to compose film scores for big blockbusters. And thanks to John Williams, these scores have a specific sound. 

And it ain't atonal. :lol:


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

I'm sure that dissonance will come back into style. Suspense and psychological thrillers have always used it.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

millionrainbows said:


> I'm sure that dissonance will come back into style. Suspense and psychological thrillers have always used it.


It never went out of style. Dissonance constantly becomes 'normalised' and accepted. There is so much music today that rests on tonal expansions once called 'dissonant' or 'atonal' or whatever label is slapped upon it.


----------



## eugeneonagain (May 14, 2017)

Scopitone said:


> I am going to guess that the only way to make money in orchestral music is to compose film scores for big blockbusters. And thanks to John Williams, these scores have a specific sound.
> 
> And it ain't atonal. :lol:


Not all composers write solely for money. Anyway, John Williams is basically a recycler of other composers' works (hello Holst, Wagner, Bernard Herrmann even).


----------



## millionrainbows (Jun 23, 2012)

eugeneonagain said:


> Not all composers write solely for money. Anyway, John Williams is basically a recycler of other composers' works (hello Holst, Wagner, Bernard Herrmann even).


Speaking of recycling, don't forget Scheherazhade, copied in Dune...


----------



## EddieRUKiddingVarese (Jan 8, 2013)

millionrainbows said:


> I'm sure that dissonance will come back into style. Suspense and psychological thrillers have always used it.


First example that came to my mind on reading your post - think might be more recent with more dissonance thou


----------

