Re: Chord Function?

tkorth1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 wrote:
>I mentioned Webern, because I don't hear much difference between his free

>and series based atonality.  Although Schoenberg is reputed to have said 
>that "schoolchildren will be whistling 12 tone rows by the year 2000", I 
>agree with you about not hearing the rows and frankly, don't think it's
that 
>im****tant.

I think most dodecaphonic composers sincerely hoped listeners would 
tem****arily build up expectations based on the implications of each row. 
This is of course unlikely because tonal expectations take lifetimes to 
build.

>But do you get a sense of the chromatic whole along with various 
>motivic, contrapuntal, rhythmic timbral and dynamic processes in Webern?

Certainly.

>I do and find most of his output to be very listenable - more so than
much of 
>Schoenberg and Berg (except for the Piano Sonata and Violin Concerto).

I personally like Berg's works best.

>I guess that Webern's use of the row primarily to both control intervals
and 
>assure an even distribution of the 12 pitch cl***** makes sense to me -
at 
>least for his style, but the expansion of the series to control non-pitch

>elements proved to be a dead end.

Why must the twelve pitches be distributed evenly if the listener is not 
keeping track of that process? As long as the same sonorities are not 
repeated too often, the piece will never sound tonal.


Orlando