The Future of Music?

[Ballaw de Quincewold]

Originally Posted by Composer

Not in the same way as Schönberg or the others.

Of course they all fought in some way, Mozart fought too.

Of course he didn't! No composer fought in the same way as any other!
If you look back at the music that preceded Beethoven you will see that Beethoven was perhaps even a greater innovater than Schoenberg.

[Composer]

But he still composed music inspired by older music. His harmonies were known too. Its not like he made a new system of composing with no relation to older music. Beethoven neither had sad back for 8 years because of a decision to create a whole new system. He just slowly developed. And people liked his music. He was the first composer beeing able to compose freely.

[Shiva]

Originally Posted by Composer

. He was the first composer beeing able to compose freely.

I would agree with that, because most composers before him were comissioned to compose.

The future of music is in the composers of todays hands and of course the listening audience. I'm sensing a revival of the tonal style and a demise of atonality...well I hope so

[Ballaw de Quincewold]

Originally Posted by Shiva

I'm sensing a revival of the tonal style and a demise of atonality...well I hope so

Why would you hope for something like that? Atonality is more than just disjunct intervals and rhythms, which is what most people see it as.

[martinzufall]

I am not sure tonality ever really left, it just isn't the "Common Practice" type anymore. While the second Viennese school did its thing a small group still composed largely tonal works (Hindemith for example).

It is just that, since Wagner, tonality has never been the same and I think that is a good thing. Imagine all of the basically tonal works that would be missing because they broke too many rules. Even Mozart experimented with breaking common practice rules (see the opening section of his 19th String Quartet "The Dissonant" K465).

I shy away from calling any of my work atonal (partly because of the negative response generated by that word). It's not like I am avoiding using tonality, as in serialism, it just isn't the most important part. Instead of atonal, I use the word nontonal to describe a piece where I prioritize other musical qualities (like counterpoint and highly chromatic thematic material) above tonality.

[Thorolf]

We really agree on this, martinzufall. There is no such things as atonal music, really. as long as it got tones, well, it’s tonal, in some way or another. I use tonality rather freely, with multiple tonalities going simultaneously (when I’m lucky!). Musical conventional people easily find bitonality too much already and label it atonal, as it doesn’t sound like the stuff they are used to but in horror movies.

The modernistic stance, where you try to cancel everything with a reference—musical tonality, rhythmicality, and eventually, everything (Cage’s 4:33)—sometimes has something going for it, as musical research, but seldom as music. I think one has to be positive rather than negative about music: It’s not enough to know what you don’t want, but you need to search for what you really want. And if everything that you want already exists, then why be a composer?

Regards

[Student]

Music in the post-modern era is the epitome of post-modernism. What else should we expect?

Music goes in every direction and people bury themselves in what they are most comfortable and ignore everything outside their areas of expertise. It's like being surrounded by high-school cliques again.

The future will hardly be different until the world changes, music will continue to follow culture. If post-modernism becomes subdominant, then post-modern views of music will cease to be dominant, but I'm not arrogant enough to predict how things will change, or even if they will.

[Shiva]

Originally Posted by Student

The future will hardly be different until the world changes, music will continue to follow culture. If post-modernism becomes subdominant, then post-modern views of music will cease to be dominant.

I can agree with that. Music has been shapped by the events in the world. Take jazz music as an example here. As you say music will continue to follow culture.

[Will Kirk]

I think that the so called "modern" composers hide behind the mask of atonality and dissonance. And the main excuse they have for their music is simply "You just don't understand it" IMO this is the worst excuse you can have for your music. In my opinion music is supposed to connect with a person, and I sure haven't seen anyone cry over Ligeti's Atmospheres. And if the dissonance continues, I feel that music will be reduced to the level of simply pounding on pianos and the like. But if harmony is allowed to rule, I feel that heavy dissonance will die and the true face of music will rule!

That's just my opinion

[Ballaw de Quincewold]

Originally Posted by Sor Is My Hero

I think that the so called "modern" composers hide behind the mask of atonality and dissonance. And the main excuse they have for their music is simply "You just don't understand it" IMO this is the worst excuse you can have for your music. In my opinion music is supposed to connect with a person, and I sure haven't seen anyone cry over Ligeti's Atmospheres. And if the dissonance continues, I feel that music will be reduced to the level of simply pounding on pianos and the like. But if harmony is allowed to rule, I feel that heavy dissonance will die and the true face of music will rule!

That's just my opinion

You know why you feel this way? Because you have failed to understand modern music! Sure there are a bunch of people who don't know what their doing, but ther are a bunch of truely great composers and craftsmen out there. Why do you not think that dissonant music can be real music. And what do you mean when you say "if harmony is allowed to rule." The term "harmony" doesn't just apply to tertian harmony you know.