Is atonal music dead?

Originally Posted by ablyth

tastes are is a good point. If your music cant relate to the people you are closest too, who are you relating to?

I think the best music would relate not only to your close friends/family, but to musicians and composers. In other words, music that everybody enjoys. These are the pieces that have stood the test of time.

Originally Posted by ablyth

However, I think that with the advances in sampling technology and computers what you will be learning to do is write for orchestra so that a computer can realise it.

I think in all honesty, a piece can only fulfill its potential, when played by real musicians. Plus I would argue that it is difficult to get down what you have in your head on a computer, because the sound of a fake orchestra kinda restricts your musical thought. I have used a computer for every piece I've written so far, but now I am learning to write music properly so I can get down what's in my head without having to hear an inferior version of it played back to me!

Originally Posted by Nirvana69

After all, are there really that many people out there who remember Henry Cowell?

Yes. Most of them are professional musicians or music theorists, but that was the case even when Cowell was alive.

I like atonal as long as it doesn't make my ears bleed, something like John Adams.

Originally Posted by seellingsen

Yes. Most of them are professional musicians or music theorists, but that was the case even when Cowell was alive.

Outside of musical circles I doubt hardly anybody has heard of him at all. Rachmaninov on the other hand...

Originally Posted by almacg

Outside of musical circles I doubt hardly anybody has heard of him at all. Rachmaninov on the other hand...

Rachmaninov is likely just as unrecognizable a name as Henry Cowell. Once you stray from Bach, Beethoven, Mozart: the BIG THREE in classical music, John Q. Public doesn't know anyone.

Originally Posted by Maxx

I like atonal as long as it doesn't make my ears bleed, something like John Adams.

??

John Adams isn't in ANY way "atonal". His music is about as TONAL as it gets.

Originally Posted by robinjessome

Rachmaninov is likely just as unrecognizable a name as Henry Cowell. Once you stray from Bach, Beethoven, Mozart: the BIG THREE in classical music, John Q. Public doesn't know anyone.

Actually I made a joke to a friend of mine that he should be more 'cultured' and needed some Rachmaninov in his life. He thought I was talking about a Pokemon, so I guess you are right. The big three as you put it are the recognisable names, but I guarantee most people will be able to recognise music written by tonal composers, even if they don't know who they are. Most English people surely by now have hear the middle bit from Jupiter. Pretty much everyone alive can recognise and sing along with ET or Star Wars.

Originally Posted by QcCowboy

??

John Adams isn't in ANY way "atonal". His music is about as TONAL as it gets.

I dunno, I think he wrote an atonal violin concerto...?

Originally Posted by almacg

I dunno, I think he wrote an atonal violin concerto...?

Important words underlined in your post.

I'm listening to that very violin concerto as I type this.. and it's NOT "atonal" in any way.

I think it's very important to make a distinction between music that isn't "I - IV - V" tonal, and music that is NOT tonal at all.
I hate the term "atonal" because really in the end, all it says is what the music is not... not-tonal. Except not-tonal can mean SO many things.

I happen to think that Berg's violin concerto, for example is not a "not tonal" work. It might be serial, but it has such heavy tonal implications all the way through, even in its most dissonant passages that one can't really say "this music is NOT tonal".

The Adams violin concerto you mentionned uses more pungent harmony than he normally uses, but it's still quite firmly anchored to a tonal centre. So, more dissonant than, say... Brahms?... but definately not "atonal".

Is "atonal music" dead?
I think the question should rather be "is the concept that 'tonality is not a valid compositional element' dead?"

I believe we live in a period where composers of true talent will find ways of combining tonal elements as well as the more experimental (well, they WERE experimental at SOME point) techniques into a musical langauge that truly reflects the age in which we live. No more rejecting of the past, no more denying the recent past, only integrating and becoming whole and healthy creative artists, aware of our heritage and eager to forge forward in a positive and creative atmosphere.

Originally Posted by almacg

...I guarantee most people will be able to recognise music written by tonal composers, even if they don't know who they are.

I don't get your point. They can recognize music as...music? I guarantee anyone can recognize music written by any composer - tonal or otherwise.