# A progressive view of tonality



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

I've recently been getting into a bit of Schoenberg, Berg & Webern. So I ask, what are people's favourite atonal/serial pieces of music? I suppose the former can include the earlier progressive approaches to tonality advocated by Mahler, Scriabin & Nielsen. They can also include music that is less tonal, although not literally "atonal" such as Ligeti, Varese, Lutoslawski or Penderecki.

Here are some pieces I'm beginning to understand, after owning (some of) them for say 6 months. It takes time and effort to appreciate some of this music, it's complexity and richness, but in the end the investment is really worth ones time. (& please don't let this thread degenerate into a mindless slinging match about the lack of merit of such music, we don't want it locked down like some other threads. If you don't like this music, better to just walk away. I hate the music of Saint-Saens & Glazunov, but you don't see me expressing this in a primitive way on those threads).

So, here's my list:

*Schoenberg*: Violin Concerto - a brilliant piece of musical craftsmanship. Heifetz said it was unplayable ("I'd need a sixth finger") but was clearly wrong. It has grace, lyricism, brutality, drama, whatever you care to imagine. I'm currently enjoying Hilary Hahn's performance.

*Berg* - one of my favourite composers, full stop. Everything I have heard by him has made an impact on so many different levels, emotionally and musically. Perhaps the greatest tragedy in C20th classical was his premature death at the age of only 50.

*Webern *- again, everything by him that I've heard strikes a chord. His music is obviously very concise, but there are so many subtleties and nuances in his writing. I particularly like the _Six Pieces for Orchestra_.

*Josef Tal *- think of atonality/serialism mixed with the "Jewish" music of Ernest Bloch, and you get the picture. He composed a brilliant set of 6 symphonies. Quite experimental, but not widely known - I only discovered him after picking up a cpo recording in the bargain bin of a classical CD store here in Sydney.

*Ives* - a true individual whose music I'm only beginning to fathom. The _Piano Sonata No. 1_ is just brilliant, based on American gospel & ragtime. But unlike say Gershwin or Copland in their more popular works, Ives never gives everything to the listener on a plate, you have to go away & think about it to truly understand & perceive.

*Ligeti *- Not always "atonal" & definitely not serial, but he can be counted as following on from the revolutions made by earlier composers.

*Debussy*: Jeux - Well this might come as a surprise to some people, but I include this piece specifically here because it really pushed the boundaries of music as much as Schoenberg et al (or Stravinsky's contemporaneous _Rite_, which I think is overrated compared to Debussy's masterpiece). Debussy almost never looks back in this work, the thematic development is far from traditional, and he only gives you remnants of themes (much like say Carter later).

*Varese*: Ionisation (& all his other surviving works!) - Well this is no surprise, to people who know me on these boards. There's an exploration of the essence of sound itself (or lack of) in his music. Ionisation - what is it about? The scientific process of the title, or the urban jungle, a factory/industrialisation, or warfare? We'll never know, & maybe that's a good thing.

*Nielsen*: Symphony No. 4 "The inextinguishable" - again, not strictly "atonal" but it definitely explores a progressive view of tonality. The mournful (?) slow movement grabs me every time, built up from the minimum of materials. & the finale's showdown between two sets of timpani must be a sight to behold live.

*Xenakis*: Shaar - An amazing piece for string orchestra, which I had the benefit of seeing done live by the Australian Chamber Orchestra last year. It's so visceral & powerful, hits you like a wave, and I still feel it's aftershocks. It's the only piece of his that I have heard so far.

*Villa-Lobos*: Choros No. 8 & 9 - Again, quite complex music which reminds one of Varese. It's as much Brazilian as European, but there are so many exciting ideas coming out of these pieces.

*Elena Kats-Chernin* - There's definitely an atonal streak running through the music of this "minimalist" Australian composer (if you want to pin her varied style down). Some of her works have more to do with the rhythms of clocks and machines, which is more akin to Ligeti or Kurtag, than say Brahms or Beethoven. With this, she combines an interest in the classics, but in a new post-modern way.

*Messiaen*: Quartet for the End of Time; Harawi; Turangalila Symphony; Vingts regards sur l'enfant Jesus; Poemes pour Mi; etc. etc. - need I say more?

That only scratches the surface, my knowledge is not limited to these, but still limited. I'm just beginning to explore these directions & currents in music that originated in the late C19th, and are probably still having an effect today...


----------



## emiellucifuge (May 26, 2009)

Hooray thats fantastic.
you shod try Schoenbergs Five Orchestral Pieces, one of his first such works and it is brilliant.
also try his operas such as Moses and Aaron, as well as Bergs Wozzeck and Lulu. These are the true masterpieces.

Ives is great the essential work is Three Places in New England. Also his final project the Universe Symphony is such a fascinating concept, ive been meaning to check out a completed version.


----------



## Boccherini (Mar 29, 2010)

You should listen Nielsen's 5th, not exactly the atonal but his greatest IMO.


----------



## JAKE WYB (May 28, 2009)

*Scriabin sonatas *5 onwards intrigue me to a far greater degree than other music i a similar harmonic vein

*Stravinsky - Agon *- the closest ive come to enjoying anything half serialist
*
Schnittke - faust cantata* - harmonicaly unpindownable - bits of all types of traditional and atonal harmonies for immense and scary effect


----------



## HarpsichordConcerto (Jan 1, 2010)

Andre said:


> Here are some pieces I'm beginning to understand, after owning (some of) them for say 6 months. It takes time and effort to appreciate some of this music, it's complexity and richness, but in the end the investment is really worth ones time.


Time and effort, as in repeated listening? Seriously, I would like to understand them too. Just not really sure how.


----------



## Boccherini (Mar 29, 2010)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Seriously, I would like to understand them too. Just not really sure how.


Same here for all Scriabin works.


----------



## jurianbai (Nov 23, 2008)

Here we go again and exactly what I also need to read. The term atonal/serrial is again remain mystery to me by reading your list of repertoire. In my 'Atonal with violin...' thread I got a bit conclusion that tonality / atonality is not solely what we heard but also it's a concept that sometimes can 'please' the ear thus disguise as tonal works. Your list by composer Debussy and Stravinsky having said not an atonal composer by other thread. And yet you got Nielsen, Vila Lobos? Or maybe composer's name along can't decide.

My last listening habit now switch to Violin Concerto (rather than String Quartet , as usual). And I find much easier to listen modern 20th century music (my general term) because the way the orchestration done in sound atonal phrase seems very fit the situation (rather than in string quartet). I wonder what will be Britten's Violin Concerto Op.15 labeled as? I am now listening to it.

and also Andre, your list did not include any string quartet, can you elaborate a bit in this genre? what do you think about Schoenberg's , Britten's, Bloch's , Bartok and Shostakovich string quartet. Those are I still not get it.


----------



## Argus (Oct 16, 2009)

HarpsichordConcerto said:


> Time and effort, as in repeated listening? Seriously, I would like to understand them too. Just not really sure how.


Don't just dive in. If it's too far outside of your regular listening habits, repeat listening probably won't help. Say you listen to and like mostly Baroque and Classical works, then trying to get straight into someone like Ligeti or Stockhausen will probably be too difficult for you. Your ear will be unaccustomed to the music and probably won't like it. Try finding composers that are closer to your tastes but just outside your comfort zone then keep expanding upon this and before you know it your ear will have been 'eased' into the music. The unusual will have become usual, the harmonies will be more palatable. It just takes time. How long depends on the person. It may just not be to your tastes but at least you'll have a better chance of liking it than just straight forward sonic attrition.

It shouldn't require any effort though. For me it was a natural progression. I never thought I'd like anything by the guys in the OP, but I like at least a couple of pieces by all of them. And I've barely explored some of them. I just like hearing sounds that I've never heard anything like before.


----------



## starry (Jun 2, 2009)

I don't worry whether something is considered atonal or tonal, just listen to it as music trying to communicate to the listener through various expressive and structural means.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

starry said:


> I don't worry whether something is considered atonal or tonal, just listen to it as music trying to communicate to the listener through various expressive and structural means.


I suppose that's what I was getting at (in a roundabout way?). That's why I included some "less tonal" though not completely atonal or even serialists. I was not tryping to be black and white, but more broad.

I agree, someone who doesn't listen to late C19th - C20th music can't just "dive in" to some of this type of music. Maybe it's a good idea to listen to some of the more "tonal" works by (say) Schoenberg before getting to know his more groundbreaking works. It takes a bit of background knowledge as well to listen to some of this music, you really have to be broad. But there's many connections, eg. between the late string quartets of Beethoven & many C20th string quartets. Composers like Tippett, Bartok & Carter were expanding on what Beethoven did more than 100 years before (listen to the _Grosse Fuge_).

There's alot of commonalities between different pieces of music from similar periods. Take Sibelius' _Tapiola_ & Varese's _Ionisation_, from the 1920's. I think what's common between them is they don't state a theme per se, virtually the whole work IS the theme. They are both also very kind of organic in the way the music grows from a few key ideas. Then again, there are many differences also, take the "mechanical" aspect of Varese's masterwork. It takes time but if one reads about, talks about & listens to these pieces, one can locate them along the (continuing?) continuum of classical music history. & the beauty of it is, it's never finished, there's always room for more revolutions & development, eddies & currents of ideas & thought...


----------



## MJTTOMB (Dec 16, 2007)

Joker64 said:


> Same here for all Scriabin works.


It's pretty easy to understand Scriabin. Start with Op. 1, and follow him by opus numbers into his madness. To understand the music you have to understand the person behind it.

Edit: If, after that, you still cannot understand it, simply be aware that of all composers he still has the coolest mustache.


----------



## Boccherini (Mar 29, 2010)

Op. 1 reminds me Chopin which is a good start. following him into his madness is a dangerous journey in my humble opinion.
Can't argue about his mustache as long as Strauss II is Number II...


----------



## Lukecash12 (Sep 21, 2009)

Joker64 said:


> Op. 1 reminds me Chopin which is a good start. following him into his madness is a dangerous journey in my humble opinion.
> Can't argue about his mustache as long as Strauss II is Number II...


He may have been mad, but I believe I speak for plenty of people, when I say his music isn't mad. It's harmonics stretched to the limit. Simply put, his musical language is different, so his developments unfold differently. It can be just as evocative, but you need to listen with your head, and then it will become ear friendly.


----------



## JAKE WYB (May 28, 2009)

Joker64 said:


> Op. 1 reminds me Chopin which is a good start. following him into his madness is a dangerous journey in my humble opinion.
> Can't argue about his mustache as long as Strauss II is Number II...


No Elgar is number two

scriabins late works are extremely worth getting familiar with - and in order helps a lot - I found that without sonata 5 i could never have 'accessed' the latter 5.

Progressive tonality requires generally a listening set of stepping stones - im sure that there is one particular piece or two for each person that lets everyone appreciate more progressively tonal/atonal music


----------



## jurianbai (Nov 23, 2008)

I haven't dig many of Scriabin, but in piano, I considered some of Listz and Ravel works to be in this category.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

On the first listening, I thought that Scriabin's _Poem of Ecstasy_ should've been called the poem of boredom! But now that I've listened to more "atonal" composers from around the turn of the C20th during the past year to 18 months, I've come to appreciate this masterpiece. There's plenty happening in this music, it's just all under the surface. Scriabin takes Liszt's & Wagner's tonal explorations one step further, by abandoning any sense of tonal centredness, but you do get the resolution with the big "red C Major" chord at the end. This is a truly gripping "homecoming." I have heard some of his piano sonatas, but years ago, so it's probably worth acquiring a couple of those soon...

& as for a progressive view of tonality, it's deeply connected to other aspects of music, such as colour, structure & thematic development. Innovations happened (& happen!) in those other areas as well, sometimes independent of, sometimes connected to, different views of tonality (i.e. whether it was "centred" or not)...


----------



## MJTTOMB (Dec 16, 2007)

Andre said:


> On the first listening, I thought that Scriabin's _Poem of Ecstasy_ should've been called the poem of boredom! But now that I've listened to more "atonal" composers from around the turn of the C20th during the past year to 18 months, I've come to appreciate this masterpiece. There's plenty happening in this music, it's just all under the surface. Scriabin takes Liszt's & Wagner's tonal explorations one step further, by abandoning any sense of tonal centredness, but you do get the resolution with the big "red C Major" chord at the end. This is a truly gripping "homecoming." I have heard some of his piano sonatas, but years ago, so it's probably worth acquiring a couple of those soon...
> 
> & as for a progressive view of tonality, it's deeply connected to other aspects of music, such as colour, structure & thematic development. Innovations happened (& happen!) in those other areas as well, sometimes independent of, sometimes connected to, different views of tonality (i.e. whether it was "centred" or not)...


I tend to not listen to late Scriabin in the same way I'd listen to, say, Brahms. When I listen to Scriabin, I do almost exactly what you described, I listen to the things below the surface. His music can be ugly on the surface if you're only listening to the notes themselves. His music contains so much brilliant color, and he's one of the first composers I know of that became obsessed with using "light" in music, both figuratively and literally.

Honestly, after listening and becoming very familiar with his harmonic language, one can become accustomed to it. To me it no longer sounds strange.






Link leads to the opening movement from Scriabin's first Symphony. You'd be surprised at how tonal it sounds.


----------



## anacrusis (Mar 21, 2010)

I just posted this in another thread, but it seems more relevant here.

Scriabin, Sorabji, Feinberg, Ornstein, Griffes, and Roslavets!


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

To me, whether tonality is "chromatic," "progressive," "atonal," or "serial," it doesn't matter to me. All of them are connected in some way, & fed off, bounced off eachother. I like to listen to all of this music to get the "big picture" of what was going on in the music from the late C19th until now (or even before, as I have learned, Gesualdo used chromatic harmonies in the C16th!)...


----------



## Eusebius12 (Mar 22, 2010)

Andre said:


> *Elena Kats-Chernin* - There's definitely an atonal streak running through the music of this "minimalist" Australian composer (if you want to pin her varied style down). Some of her works have more to do with the rhythms of clocks and machines, which is more akin to Ligeti or Kurtag, than say Brahms or Beethoven. With this, she combines an interest in the classics, but in a new post-modern way.


I'm surprised that you include her, I don't find her music particularly atonal, at least not compared to Bach, Beethoven Mozart and Chopin. It has more the whiff of the cafe, than the 2nd Viennese school in my opinion. Maybe it has a certain 'klezmer' quality, but then certain kinds of Russian music does, and she is certainly influenced by her Russian (Kazakh? no Borat jokes please) roots. I think if you are looking for an Australian composer with an original approach to tonality, you need go no further than our very own Percy Grainger. Old Perce was trying strange tonal experiments fairly early on, and ended up being a pioneer of electronic music and musique concrete.
His 'Gumsuckers March' is an example that comes to mind of Grainger being virtually atonal.



> *Messiaen*: Quartet for the End of Time; Harawi; Turangalila Symphony; Vingts regards sur l'enfant Jesus; Poemes pour Mi; etc. etc. - need I say more?


I think that Et expectio resurrectionem mortuorum is one of his most interesting pieces.
You could also mention Mahler, Rautavaara, Bartok (most of his works but the Miraculous Mandarin is maybe his most brutal), and a lot of Prokofiev, especially early Prokofiev. Ginastera is stylistically related to Prokofiev, in the sense that he is at times tonally experimental and at others even conservative.

And talking of Chopin, listen to the Prelude no.2 in A Minor, or parts of the E Minor etude and the Ballade in F, and you will see that really it was Chopin who stretched tonality more than any other 19th century composer bar none (critics of the time spoke of his "ear splitting dissonances")


----------



## Sebastien Melmoth (Apr 14, 2010)

I find that listening to Skryabin during daylight hours gives the music a different ambience than the nighttime.
I adore his Sonatas--(Glenn Gould gave us the finest Fifth, and its tragic he didn't give us Nos. 6-10 and Vers la Flamme).
John Ogden is reliable, as is Roberto Szidon; Hamelin's good, Laredo okay.


Anyone heard the 12-tone Spiele of Joseph Hauer? He used hexachord blocks instead of 12 descrete notes. Sounds not as Expressionistic as Schönberg.


----------



## Sid James (Feb 7, 2009)

Yes, Eusebius12, I agree that Kats-Chernin is pretty "tonal." I think I included her because of her work "Clocks," which reminded me of Ligeti, another composer who is sometimes hard to pin down (as to what "camp" he was in?). & I really didn't know that regarding Grainger - that's very interesting. I knew that he was eccentric in his habits/personality/etc, but not in his music as well. Come to think of it, I haven't heard any orignial pieces by him, only some of his arrangements on the radio. These seem to get more airtime here in Sydney...


----------

