Klarinet Archive - Posting 000041.txt from 2001/12

From: Neil Leupold <leupold_1@-----.com>
Subj: Re: [kl] Chromatic FUNCTIONAL Modality System
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2001 09:25:29 -0500

Re: functional. The term is likely, in at least once sense, intended to distinguish
the use of chromatic modality for purposes of ornamentation or embellishment vs. having
a substantive impact on the structure and direction of the music. Consider chords with
added 9ths, 11ths, and even 13ths. Tack one of these notes onto a triad, and there is
no effect on harmonic function. They serve as an embellishment to the sonority, but
they do not have an impact on how the rules of harmony will be applied to the chord.
Tack a 9th, 11th, or 13th onto a 7th chord, however, and the harmony now takes on a
new meaning, the additional member of the chord not only adding density to the harmon-
ic texture, but altering the manner in which that chord will be treated, as well as
how it impacts the structure of the music to follow. "Functional" is indeed a signi-
ficant term when applied to considerations of harmony, so much so that many college
theory courses include the term in their course titles, e.g., Functional Diatonic
Harmony. It is not merely used to embellish the English language.

Neil

--- Tony Wakefield <tony-wakefield@-----.net> wrote:
> Does the term 'functional' have any significant meaning? To me it`s almost
> superfluous. Even the term 'system' seems to screw the whole diverse
> dimension of writing music down into a common and convenient 'scientific'
> pigeon hole for the sole purpose of enlightening the unintelligent, for
> example the 99% of college students who won`t make it to the professional
> concert platform with their compositions, (which is in the main, a prime
> concern for the educational institutions). So why do we have these terms
> then? Surely we are all entitled to write with whatever intellect we wish to
> use - with whatever 'system'. If someone enjoys playing it, and it has
> style and balance, then anything goes, to coin a phrase. All of us have
> different goals in our writing lives. If some of us wish to write a
> composition in a major key, then end it abruptly on a minor chord, (for
> example - a pierce de ticardie by the way :</ ) experienced composers in
> the world of examinations would leap upon this to award a fail. This is an
> over simplification of course because I`m trying to think as lucidly and as
> quickly as possible before I get into my day. Are these terms only useful to
> us then in students` study? Bear Woodson tells us that his work is being
> studied by a composition student. That`s fine in itself. But he also tells
> us that there are no other exponents of C.F.M.S. writing other than he, yet
> simultaneously in his post he also tells us that 100`s of other writers use
> it in jazz and films!
> So I ask myself is this 'system' a system at all? With respect, is Bear
> trying to invent an already existing 'system', with a view to claiming a
> credit which we associate with Rameau`s thesis`.
>
> I would say that even the Great Masters themselves have even ventured, long
> before Bear was born, into the world of C.F.M.S. at times.
>
> I would say that it is not a 'system', but mearly a variant of different
> tonalities coming together.
>
> There will be many others in the coming decades.
>
> Tony W.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>

Do You Yahoo!?
Buy the perfect holiday gifts at Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com

---------------------------------------------------------------------