A Discussion About Tonal and Atonal Music

It's not the first time you've tried to dodge a question by pointing your finger at me.

That's fine. I've wasted enough of my time on ya... moving along.

And yet you continue. I hope you DO move on rather than replying to this very reply!

Just the mere fact that the OP described himself as a "tonal composer" is enough to dismiss this thread outright.

Just sayin.

then dismiss it... lock the thread please.

Everyone's an expert.

Tonal Composers: You think that tonal music can cover all the human feelings if you have to discribe them in music?

No. An emotion is a personal, individual psychological state. Maybe a given composer can translate his own emotions into music, but certainly not all human emotions, since he can't feel the emotions of another person the same way that person does.

Futhermore emotion in music is personal experience. Some may think Beethoven sounds cold and cool, while others disagree. So even if a composer tries to convey emotions into his music he might aswell be the only one who is able to retract them from that his music.

"Rules" ultimately are tools which help us work and compose music. The tools we choose are for our own choices and reasons pretty much.

There is the selfish part in me which says that I'm too advanced in my aestetics (as a listener), so my compositions are also advanced in that sense... I'm too used to more 'advanced' or 'stretched out' or whatever you want to call it "rules" and I can't help it really. Even my commercial work is far more out from tonality than other composers. I'd hate to stick to Am-F-C-G (ala Zimmer)... although I've done it once and found out I was copying 2, not 1, different movie themes!

"Rules" ultimately are tools which help us work and compose music. The tools we choose are for our own choices and reasons pretty much.

:D This.

Echoes my post a couple of pages back.

I find it very sad that some people would dismiss a discussion because it involves some ambiguous terminology. I'm convinced that with a little goodwill everyone knows what the OP meant, in which case a little "btw, you should be careful using terms such as tonal & atonal" would have been enough. I can only hope the OP (whose last post was on page 2 by the way) has stuck around to read the actual responses to his question.

To which I have little to add. I really don't even think of myself as an atonal or tonal composer. In terms of emotion, it's pointless to try to capture the same emotions in atonal as in tonal, diatonic as in chromatic music. Atonal, free tonal, dissonant, noise etc. music is a different form of expression, and often attempts to express different things. So like others have said: just write what you write.

If there's one thing I know to some degree of certainty in music, it's that music itself isnot inherently emotional. It's the way it's interpreted by individuals (ourselves) that causes it to invoke emotional responses in us, which (and here we get into much less certain stuff) is probably mostly cultural.

I find it very sad that some people would dismiss a discussion because it involves some ambiguous terminology. I'm convinced that with a little goodwill everyone knows what the OP meant, in which case a little "btw, you should be careful using terms such as tonal & atonal" would have been enough. I can only hope the OP (whose last post was on page 2 by the way) has stuck around to read the actual responses to his question.

To which I have little to add. I really don't even think of myself as an atonal or tonal composer. In terms of emotion, it's pointless to try to capture the same emotions in atonal as in tonal, diatonic as in chromatic music. Atonal, free tonal, dissonant, noise etc. music is a different form of expression, and often attempts to express different things. So like others have said: just write what you write.

Oh right I forgot, Gmaj = HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY, Dmin = sad sad sad :sadtears::sadtears::sadtears::sadtears:

Sounds logical

I find it very sad that some people would dismiss a discussion because it involves some ambiguous terminology. I'm convinced that with a little goodwill everyone knows what the OP meant, in which case a little "btw, you should be careful using terms such as tonal & atonal" would have been enough. I can only hope the OP (whose last post was on page 2 by the way) has stuck around to read the actual responses to his question.

To which I have little to add. I really don't even think of myself as an atonal or tonal composer. In terms of emotion, it's pointless to try to capture the same emotions in atonal as in tonal, diatonic as in chromatic music. Atonal, free tonal, dissonant, noise etc. music is a different form of expression, and often attempts to express different things. So like others have said: just write what you write.

I don't think there is such a big difference between tonal and atonal and I don't want to capture the SAME emotion.My point was that I can't capture the tragedy in tonal music cause sounds to me very ''fake'' for an emotion like this.

Oh right I forgot, Gmaj = HAPPY HAPPY HAPPY, Dmin = sad sad sad :sadtears::sadtears::sadtears::sadtears:

Sounds logical

I think noone is thinking this way!!!

If there's one thing I know to some degree of certainty in music, it's that music itself isnot inherently emotional. It's the way it's interpreted by individuals (ourselves) that causes it to invoke emotional responses in us, which (and here we get into much less certain stuff) is probably mostly cultural.

You're probably right, but in any case there seems to be some kind of consensus, with, I suppose, lots of grey. The fact that you say it's culturally defined already implies that it's not completely random.

And music itself doesn't contain emotion until it's processed by individuals, but I would dare say that music isn't even music until it's processed by individuals. But I'm not trying to oversimplify: there's no labeling specific emotions to specific sounds.

I don't think there is such a big difference between tonal and atonal and I don't want to capture the SAME emotion.My point was that I can't capture the tragedy in tonal music cause sounds to me very ''fake'' for an emotion like this.

Sorry, I misunderstood. But I'm not sure I get what you mean. Are you saying tonal music can't capture tragedy? Because tragedy is too complex for a tonal system? I don't know... what exactly do you mean with "tragedy"?

You're probably right, but in any case there seems to be some kind of consensus, with, I suppose, lots of grey. The fact that you say it's culturally defined already implies that it's not completely random.

And music itself doesn't contain emotion until it's processed by individuals, but I would dare say that music isn't even music until it's processed by individuals. But I'm not trying to oversimplify: there's no labeling specific emotions to specific sounds.

Sorry, I misunderstood. But I'm not sure I get what you mean. Are you saying tonal music can't capture tragedy? Because tragedy is too complex for a tonal system? I don't know... what exactly do you mean with "tragedy"?

Well, there have been countless studies that due state music *evokes* a sense of emotional connection. However, its a very subjective debate on what connections are evoked by listening to a piece.

Sorry, I misunderstood. But I'm not sure I get what you mean. Are you saying tonal music can't capture tragedy?

Yes that's what I'm telling.

Because tragedy is too complex for a tonal system?

No,

all I said is that the most saddest piece in tonal music can't describe the real tragey.

I don't know... what exactly do you mean with "tragedy"?

If you have to describe it in music or a tragetic picture/video.

No,

all I said is that the most saddest piece in tonal music can't describe the real tragey.

Historically, logically, and insultingly wrong.

Historically, logically, and insultingly wrong.

It's not wrong if he really can't find any tonal piece to mean tragedy in what his opinion of tragedy should sound like musically.

But then, that's a statement he can only make from his own perspective, not universally. Otherwise that's true, it's all kinds of wrong.

Historically, logically, and insultingly wrong.

Maybe you're right I'm not absolute in my opinion this is why I started this thread to hear some other thoughts.

So you say it's historically wrong can you tell me one tonal work that you think describe tragedy better?

To repeat myself I compose tonal music.Just for the history.

Look up Liebstod from Tristan Und Isolde, which quite wonderfully expresses the emotions of 'tragedy'.

Something else you might want to think about, Glass000, these 'emotions' you keep discussing are, in and of themselves, subjective in their own right. Perhaps putting emotions into a more concise context would help explore your question in more specificity.

A lot of people have implied that atonality can't evoke feelings of happiness or joy in a listener. Here's an example of an atonal piece that, to me, is pretty happy:

YouTube - Mitsuko Uchida plays Schoenberg Piano Concerto part 4

I could also pull examples of atonal sections of Messiaen's works.

So, what do you guys think?

Hi! I'm a dire traditionalist, and that having been said, I can definitely maintain it takes at least as much talent to squeeze out anything of poetic or emotional value from atonal approaches as it does from tonal. Schoenberg himself said there was still much great music to be written in C - unfortunately, there are many "posers" on both sides of the aisle who want recognition and encouragement without really having the harmonic chops to deserve either. Then there's the two thorny and relevant questions of personhood and talent. Talent is easy - all one has to do is do what others have done your own way (requires listening and study) - those who consider themselves "legends in their own minds" will have issues with this. Sad but true. Personhood is rather difficult, requiring one to observe, empathize, and otherwise CARE about other folks long enough to learn something from them - generally non-musical but poetic circumstances in life which provide impetus and context for all the music we write. Someone lacking in both talent and personhood cannot rightly be called a composer - no matter how many degrees they've "earned."

Hi! I'm a dire traditionalist, and that having been said, I can definitely maintain it takes at least as much talent to squeeze out anything of poetic or emotional value from atonal approaches as it does from tonal. Schoenberg himself said there was still much great music to be written in C - unfortunately, there are many "posers" on both sides of the aisle who want recognition and encouragement without really having the harmonic chops to deserve either. Then there's the two thorny and relevant questions of personhood and talent. Talent is easy - all one has to do is do what others have done your own way (requires listening and study) - those who consider themselves "legends in their own minds" will have issues with this. Sad but true. Personhood is rather difficult, requiring one to observe, empathize, and otherwise CARE about other folks long enough to learn something from them - generally non-musical but poetic circumstances in life which provide impetus and context for all the music we write. Someone lacking in both talent and personhood cannot rightly be called a composer - no matter how many degrees they've "earned."

Totally agree!!!:thumbsup:

As far as the issue with terminology goes- don't worry about it, I completely understand what you mean. I have written for both, but the majority of my work is atonal. I strongly disagree with the arguement that atonality is incapable of expreesing human emotion, Through atonality, I feel as though I am personally more successful in portraying the emotional concept of a piece. Tonality is a clearer and more defined, but human emotion isn't always black and white. Feelings meander and stray without a definate center. Or maybe I'm just entirely insane. haha Nice post.

As far as the issue with terminology goes- don't worry about it, I completely understand what you mean. I have written for both, but the majority of my work is atonal. I strongly disagree with the arguement that atonality is incapable of expreesing human emotion, Through atonality, I feel as though I am personally more successful in portraying the emotional concept of a piece. Tonality is a clearer and more defined, but human emotion isn't always black and white. Feelings meander and stray without a definate center. Or maybe I'm just entirely insane. haha Nice post.

Thank for you're reply and for understanding me :P

I was speaking about a certain emotion/situation the tragedy I can't imagine a feeling like joy or happiness on atonal piece maybe I'm wrong but this is the reason that i start this discussion

Someone lacking in both talent and personhood cannot rightly be called a composer - no matter how many degrees they've "earned."

And since there are universal standards for what constitutes "talent" and whatever "person hood" is...

Subjectivity, children, it gently caresses up your arguments. Learn.

^ A term being subjective does not make it meaningless. It only means it needs to be discussed. Not everybody has the same amount of talent for something, and not everyone is equally mature (which I consider a better term than "personhood").

I would only disagree that someone lacking maturity can't be called a composer. If someone is an asshole, but composes good music, he's a composer. And they do exist.