# Have we already exhaustively explored all the possibilities of tonality?



## silentio

...before moving into atonality.

Please discuss


----------



## Weston

Well, no. We never even exhaustively explored all the possibilities of _modality_. But maybe not every possibility should be explored, only the compelling ones.

(Dang! I'm starting to sound like an old pedant.)


----------



## Mahlerian

We never did move into atonality.

It's just not a thing. What is called atonality is in fact an expansion of the possibilities of tonality.


----------



## silentio

Sometimes I wonder if Bach, Mozart, Beethoven had been the generation right after Brahms, Debussy, and Mahler, what would they have done?


----------



## Mahlerian

silentio said:


> Sometimes I wonder if Bach, Mozart, Beethoven had been the generation right after Brahms, Debussy, and Mahler, what would they have done?


Why not look to the group of composers who worshiped the music of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven for your answer?


----------



## silentio

Mahlerian said:


> Why not look to the group of composers who worshiped the music of Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven for your answer?


Well, they are not the trinity themselves, so they will react differently


----------



## tdc

silentio said:


> Well, they are not the trinity themselves, so they will react differently


The trinity could only exist in their own time. If they came after they would not be the same people because the circumstances that contributed to them becoming who they were would not occur.

If they did turn out to be composers I don't think they would do anything too different from what you see composers doing today. Even with brilliant composers the music still sounds of its time - they did not invent their styles out of nothing. The music is built on whatever came before it.


----------



## Woodduck

tdc said:


> The trinity could only exist in their own time. If they came after they would not be the same people because the circumstances that contributed to them becoming who they were would not occur.
> 
> If they did turn out to be composers I don't think they would do anything too different from what you see composers doing today. Even with brilliant composers the music still sounds of its time - they did not invent their styles out of nothing. The music is built on whatever came before it.


Is this the old "historically necessary and inevitable" theory of artistic evolution rearing its head, or just something that looks suspiciously like it?


----------



## tdc

Woodduck said:


> Is this the old "historically necessary and inevitable" theory of artistic evolution rearing its head, or just something that looks suspiciously like it?


I didn't say anything about what is necessary or inevitable in music - simply pointing out that if you look at Bach, Beethoven or Mozart's (or any other famous composers music) it sounds of its time. Some composers add more new elements than others, but it is pretty easy to detect the influences.

The difference today is due to many factors we have a wider range of styles being explored at once - you have many composers that are more conservative and working within older forms and many who are doing newer things. I'm just pointing out that if Bach or Mozart or Beethoven existed today and were making music - maybe it would be brilliant - but it would sound similar to something that is already being done right now.


----------



## arpeggio

We have already addressed the issue of 20th century tonality in many other threads. For example: http://www.talkclassical.com/22194-retro-classial-music-21st.html

Also in many post and other threads it has been stated that Schoenberg never meant atonality to replace to tonality.


----------



## Woodduck

I don't believe we can ever say what would have happened if what happened hadn't happened.


----------



## millionrainbows

silentio said:


> Have we already exhaustively explored all the possibilities of tonality?...before moving into atonality.
> 
> Please discuss


No! With this many monkeys, sitting in front of that many typewriters (computer music programs), and creating random music data, I'm sure that one of them will come up with a new masterpiece in a thousand years or so.


----------



## millionrainbows

As long as there are 15-year-old girls in pink bedrooms talking on phones, there will be tonality.

As long as there are 15-year-old boys full of angst and insecurity, there will be tonality.

As long as there are men dying in wars, there will be tonal fanfares to commemorate them.

As long as mankind accepts clichés instead of real answers, there will be tonality.

As long as there is a God in heaven, there will be tonality.


----------



## Dim7

I fear we might have exhausted the possibilities of the tonality vs. atonality debate.


----------



## millionrainbows

The less notes, the more definite the tonality. Therefore, if "less is more," we can't "exhaust" the possibilities of an ever-shrinking system. We are headed towards "one note" as we get nearer to ultimate tonality. La Mont Young is already there.

Atonality, on the other hand, has an ever-increasing index of possibilities, if we divide the octave further than 12 notes. We can have 19-tone, 31-tone, or 56-tone music. Just think of the possibilities!


----------



## Che2007

millionrainbows said:


> The less notes, the more definite the tonality. Therefore, if "less is more," we can't "exhaust" the possibilities of an ever-shrinking system. We are headed towards "one note" as we get nearer to ultimate tonality. La Mont Young is already there.
> 
> Atonality, on the other hand, has an ever-increasing index of possibilities, if we divide the octave further than 12 notes. We can have 19-tone, 31-tone, or 56-tone music. Just think of the possibilities!


La Monte Young hasn't ascended a higher plane, he just thinks he has because he believes in all the guru ********. As far as the higher EDOs go, people are writing in them and no one seems to be that interested... Also, if you look into the history of those propositions it is to reenable tonality not to stretch atonality. It is a conservative wet dream.


----------



## millionrainbows

Che2007 said:


> La Monte Young hasn't ascended a higher plane, he just thinks he has because he believes in all the guru ********. As far as the higher EDOs go, people are writing in them and no one seems to be that interested... Also, if you look into the history of those propositions it is to reenable tonality not to stretch atonality. It is a conservative wet dream.


Ah, so your true colors emerge. Sic 'im, Morimur!


----------



## Che2007

millionrainbows said:


> Ah, so your true colors emerge. Sic 'im, Morimur!


I'll bite: what do you think my true colours are?


----------



## millionrainbows

Che2007 said:


> I'll bite: what do you think my true colours are?


Oh, I don't want to accuse you of any biases. That might get me reported. Morimur posted the Lamont Young and Pandit Pran Nath composer threads, so why don't you ask him about that guru ********.


----------



## Che2007

To return to the topic at hand...

From a combinatoric point of view we haven't exhausted the possibilities of tonality.

From an aesthetic standpoint, tonality persists as a medium for musical expression so clearly it is still of use.


----------

