"figuring out" free atonality

>
>However, I "balked" at purchasing Forte's work on the serial
>construction of *TONAL* music. Maybe that could work for *some*
>people, but the concept seemed pretty "lame brained" to me...

Haven't heard of this one, ; I thought forte was one of those "American
Schenkerians?" when it came to tonality. . .

>(George Perle's _The Structure of Atonal Music_ is a *much* finer
>read... which you probably know...)
>

Well, it's an easier read. . . but as far as the free atonal music goes,
it doesn't do much better than the Forte book.

I think that music was composed by ear (at least at first), largely, and
so discussing via "overtone imitations" might in fact be the best we can
do. (i.e. what Monz et al have mentioned recently).

> From: Christopher Bailey <cb202@...>
> To: <metatuning@yahoogroups.com>
> Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 6:47 AM
> Subject: [metatuning] "figuring out" free atonality
>
>
> . . . but as far as the free atonal music goes,
> it doesn't do much better than the Forte book.
>
> I think that music was composed by ear (at least at first),
> largely, and so discussing via "overtone imitations" might
> in fact be the best we can do. (i.e. what Monz et al have
> mentioned recently).

Thanks for the vote of confidence, Christopher.

I think that for the "free atonality" repertoire, it's best to
keep in mind what Schoenberg wrote in a letter to Busoni in
August of 1909 (just after finishing _5 Pieces for Orchestra_
and just before composing _Erwartung_): that he wanted to
free his music from *all* formal restrictions and compose
"pure feeling".

... And also to keep in mind that at this point in their
careers Webern and Berg were still slavishly following their
master.

-monz

_________________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Get your free @... address at http://mail.yahoo.com