Atonality as a method of modulation?

Is the above possible?

If so I think it would be a good way to combine tonality and atonality... if its possible...

Thanks,

Ferret

If you're talking about modulating by a having a tonal section, then an atonal bridge, and another tonal section, I'm quite sure it's possible (although I don't know if modulation is the right word in that case). I don't know if it would sound coherent, which would really depend on the context anyway. Try experimenting with it and tell us how it works out! :P

In general, though, I would avoid viewing atonality as a "method" for anything.

Sure, you can. As far back as Liszt, composers have been using passages of ambiguous tonality to act as a sort of "bridge" between keys. It's not a particularly new concept really. Though it could certainly be handled in different ways.

Well, it depends of the OP means very ambiguous tonality as a means of modulation in a traditional sense, or outright atonal sections.

One problem is that the perception of "atonality" can be very fragile. Listeners who are very used to tonal music (i.e. probably all of us) are very prone to hearing tonal functions even when none are intended. You can also hear most of Sch

Hmmm...reminds me of Frederic Rzewski's "Four Pieces" and "Down by the Riverside". Kind of awkward at first but you get used to it if you listen to it a lot.

It's an interesting idea, though I'm sure (as Nirvana said) its been done before. I think it depends largely on what you mean by atonal. I could easily see any melody mutate into a serial row and transcend the harmonic confines - would be interesting even to see such a thing then mutate further into a new harmonic territory far removed from the harmonic foundation of the piece.

Ambiguity in tonality and atonality are not the same thing, although I guess one of the many definitions of atonality could be assigned to the former.

Something to think about: if you have set up the expectation of atonality throughout your piece up to that point, the sudden outbreak of atonality will sound like it has come out of left field, and depending on how long said period of atonality is between the beginning of the next tonal section, it may not necessarily come across as atonal.

Ultimately I think the question would be "why?" Why have a section of atonality within a piece that is primarily tonal? If the primary purpose is modulation, why that method? How is it justified in and of itself? What is holding the music together through the lack of tonality?

I think we'd need to define atonality in this context to really get at anything here.

Ambiguity in tonality and atonality are not the same thing, although I guess one of the many definitions of atonality could be assigned to the former.

Something to think about: if you have set up the expectation of atonality throughout your piece up to that point, the sudden outbreak of atonality will sound like it has come out of left field, and depending on how long said period of atonality is between the beginning of the next tonal section, it may not necessarily come across as atonal.

Ultimately I think the question would be "why?" Why have a section of atonality within a piece that is primarily tonal? If the primary purpose is modulation, why that method? How is it justified in and of itself? What is holding the music together through the lack of tonality?

I think we'd need to define atonality in this context to really get at anything here.

I think it depends on the type of tonality used... and how strict the adherence to it is. If the tonal language used was more advanced, then no the passage wouldn't sound as if it came out of left field at all with the proper expectations put into place (myriad of ways to do this, i think).

I think that atonality is possible as a bridge in most tonal works. You simply have to employ it correctly to fit the style. More modern classical music can quite easily use atonality in the bridges, especially if what the atonality bridges is atonal or polytonal.

I dunno. In the context of a tonal work, sounds like a cop-out to me. By the way: tonal ambiguity and atonality are two very different things.

my point of view, and it will be curt: no. "atonality is not a "valid" method of "modulation".

why?

modulation is a process of passing from one "harmonic region" to another (I'm trying to use as ambiguous and generalized terms as possible here, please don't start picking at my definitions. I am attempting to leave this as "open" as possible) within a system that requires a hierarchy of "harmonic regions".

"atonality" by its very nature rejects the concept of the hierarchy of regions.

So a section of "atonality" between two regions of "hierarchical organization" would simply sound like two areas of "tonal organization" with a jumble of atonality in between.

The only way for the atonality to be meaningful would be for it to be related in some way to the "tonal" region, and for it to be related to the tonal region would deny its atonality! the atonal region would have to logically come OUT of one tonal region, and lead logically to another tonal region. meaning that it would, in effect, NOT BE ATONAL.

so no, atonality is not a good means of modulation.

Thanks for some of the responses, its been quite interesting :)

The only way for the atonality to be meaningful would be for it to be related in some way to the "tonal" region, and for it to be related to the tonal region would deny its atonality!

Would it be possible to take thematic material from the tonal regions and harmonise it in a way that would make it atonal? Or would this not make the atonal section 'truly' atonal? Is it even possible to do this? (i appologise greatly for my ignorance, atonality is not something I understand very well...)

Thanks

Ferret

That (or taking the same rhythm etc.) would certainly relate the tonal and the atonal parts, but technically that doesn't make it a "modulation", just a "related passage". A modulation in its strict sense is a -harmonical- process from one tonal centre to another, so the relation should also be harmonical, which is the fundamental problem. But as I said before, in the end that's just semantics and depends on how strictly you want to define modulation. Just call it an "atonal intermediate zone" or something, instead of a modulation and you're fine.

Or just call it "modulation" anyways and say "LOL", which is always a good argument!

P.S. Another question is how suddenly you move into atonality. If you go through a passage of ambiguous tonality to something "truly atonal" and back through some ambigous zone it's all harder to define, but probably doable. Most people still wouldn't call it a "modulation" though.

P.S. Another question is how suddenly you move into atonality. If you go through a passage of ambiguous tonality to something "truly atonal" and back through some ambigous zone it's all harder to define, but probably doable. Most people still wouldn't call it a "modulation" though.

Could you perhaps phase it in gradually by perhaps making it modal to begin with, then moving onto something like Hindemith's sense of tonality before making it completely atonal? (or any other subdivisions that would make the transision smoother) I suppose the problem with that is for it to work you would probably have to do the same but in reverse when you return to 'true' tonality, so most of the *cough* modulation *cough* would not occur in the atonal 'zone'. It would also make the entire shift quite long...

Could you perhaps phase it in gradually by perhaps making it modal to begin with, then moving onto something like Hindemith's sense of tonality before making it completely atonal? (or any other subdivisions that would make the transision smoother) I suppose the problem with that is for it to work you would probably have to do the same but in reverse when you return to 'true' tonality, so most of the *cough* modulation *cough* would not occur in the atonal 'zone'. It would also make the entire shift quite long...

As I said earlier in this regard, what I could see - and I agree with Gardener on the modulation thing - is that perhaps what would work best would be to end your 'tonal' section on a static chord and then expand the melody itself into the atonal sense you are looking for yourself. Looking at other scores shows that alot of composers used highly chromatic passages to achieve very remote tonal regions... perhaps using such would help you achieve the atonal feel your looking for? Mess around with it, iono.

Well, I can offer a wonderful resource for 20th century tonal practices. Gardener raises a few points this book investigates - context and our hearing tendencies. But anyway the book is Vincent Persichetti's " 20th Century Harmony". Very worthwhile read.

Here is one passage:

"Any tone can succeed any other tone, any tone can sound simultaneously with any other tone or tones, and any group of tones can be followed by any other group of tones, just as any degree of tension or nuance can occur in any medium under any kind of stress or duration. Successful projection will depend upon the contextual and formal conditions that prevail, and upon the skill and the soul of the personality of the composer."

Thanks for some of the responses, its been quite interesting :)

Would it be possible to take thematic material from the tonal regions and harmonise it in a way that would make it atonal?

Of-course it is possible.

Take, for example, the "fate motif" in Beethoven's 5th. You know the one: DA DA DA... DUM!

It's a purely rythmic motive (3 short notes and one long one), which can be developed atonally just as well as tonally. Of-course, an atonal bridge would sound completely out-of-place in a Beethoven symphony, but the motif itself allows for such treatment.

The thing is, every tonal theme has lots of characteristics things about is that have nothing to do with tonallity par se: patterns of ascending or descending notes, rythem, articulation, dynamics, repititions, etc.

I dunno. In the context of a tonal work, sounds like a cop-out to me.

I don't think it is anymore of a cop-out than using a simple chromatic scale as a means of "modulation", which is something that classical composers have been doing for centuries.

In any specific case, the question is this: Does it sound right, or does it sound like the composer put it there to get himself out of a sticky harmonical situation? If it sounds like a cop-out, it probably is.

By the way, there is at least one composer on YC that used such a device in his otherwise classical sonata. Checkout Cygnusdei's 3rd Piano Sonata. In the Rondo movement, he has a wild stormy Ligeti-style interlude before the final return of the main theme. I'm not sure whether I want to give this guy a Nobel Prize for being so refreshingly original, or slap him in the face for his nerve... But one thing is certain: In Cygnusdei's Sonata, it doesn't sound like a "cop-out" at all.

I don't think it is anymore of a cop-out than using a simple chromatic scale as a means of "modulation", which is something that classical composers have been doing for centuries.

In any specific case, the question is this: Does it sound right, or does it sound like the composer put it there to get himself out of a sticky harmonical situation? If it sounds like a cop-out, it probably is.

By the way, there is at least one composer on YC that used such a device in his otherwise classical sonata. Checkout Cygnusdei's 3rd Piano Sonata. In the Rondo movement, he has a wild stormy Ligeti-style interlude before the final return of the main theme. I'm not sure whether I want to give this guy a Nobel Prize for being so refreshingly original, or slap him in the face for his nerve... But one thing is certain: In Cygnusdei's Sonata, it doesn't sound like a "cop-out" at all.

Its not a cop out to do it, particularly when done successfully. If anything, just as you said with chromatic alteration and/or modulation, it is a tool available to composers and should be treated as such. Cygnus has quite a few works that are really good :P