#1
I was glancing over my music history textbook in preparation for a course next semester, and I found the following quote from George Frideric Handel regarding the use of modality in compositions in his day.

As concerns the Greek modes [church modes], I find that you have said everything that there is to say. Their knowledge is doubtless necessary to those who want to practice and perform ancient music [the music of the sixteenth and seventeeth centuries], which formerly was composed according to such modes; however, since now we have been freed from the narrow bounds of ancient music, I cannot perceive what use the Greek modes [church modes] have in today's music.


It was striking to me how you could replace every instance of "modes" with "functional tonality" and you would have a pretty good summation of the state of affairs in music today.

So, opinions: is the use of functional tonality in music today what the use of modes were to Baroque composers? Is tonality a dying art form?
#3
The breakdown of tonality began in the Romantic period and eventually came to 12 tone music and stuff like that. Schoenberg claimed he had brought Germany to the forefront of musical innovation and that people would one day be singing 12 tone melodies on the streets.

As you can see, he was pretty wrong...


Tonality is not a dying art, it lost some prominence for a while but both tonal and atonal music have their own places in the arts today.
#4
Quote by nmitchell076
So, opinions: is the use of functional tonality in music today what the use of modes were to Baroque composers? Is tonality a dying art form?

Your question is fairly ambiguous. To what domain of music are you referring, and what specifically constitutes dying in this discussion?

To tentatively answer your question: I don't think the analogy is proper.
#5
In serious art music, there's modern composers who oppose the abandonment of tonality (Burstein, Stocken). These are vastly outweighed by the opposite side however, and I don't think art music will return to tonality anytime soon.

Pop music I think will always stay tonal.

Film music contains the best of both worlds and I think will always contain a mixture of tonal and atonal aspects.
#6
Why would you replace the word "modes" with "functional tonality" in a piece which is describing how we have moved to major and minor keys as the primary "tonality" rather than modes?
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#7
Quote by AlanHB
Why would you replace the word "modes" with "functional tonality" in a piece which is describing how we have moved to major and minor keys as the primary "tonality" rather than modes?

I suppose my point is this. Handel noticed that with the new system of major and minor-based functional tonality, the use of modal progressions and harmonies was now an obsolete compositional device that, although it could be used (and was used by Handel's contemporaries, for example the "Credo in unum Deum" from Bach's Mass in B minor is in A mixolydian), would soon be outdated, almost non-existent.

Similarly, many composers in the 20th and 21st centuries have had the understanding that now that music is "freed" from functional tonality, it is only a matter of time before the use of functional tonality as a successful compositional device becomes outdated.

I guess the most striking comparison I can draw is between the following passages:
"since now we have been freed from the narrow bounds of ancient music, I cannot perceive what use the Greek modes [church modes] have in today's music." -Handel

"Anyway, I have long been occupied with the removal of all shackles of tonality. And my harmony allows no chords or melodies with tonal implications any more" -Schoenberg

The comparisons between the spirit of those two statements (that of music being liberated from an antiquated system) is what I am drawing a comparison between.


Quote by XianXiuHong
The breakdown of tonality began in the Romantic period and eventually came to 12 tone music and stuff like that. Schoenberg claimed he had brought Germany to the forefront of musical innovation and that people would one day be singing 12 tone melodies on the streets.

As you can see, he was pretty wrong...

Well, his predictions haven't come through yet, but I don't think it follows that it will never come true. Handel's statement was 29 years removed from the success of Corelli in solidifying tonality in his Sonatas. As I mentioned, Bach was still using Church modes in the B minor mass, which was 25 years after Handel's statement. Thus modality was still in use (though much less often then tonality) a full 54 years after its solidification and initial popularity.

We on the other hand are almost 100 years removed from Schoenberg, and not only is atonality a break from tonality whereas tonality was a solidification of the use of a single type of modality (ie, major and minor still existed in the form of Ionian and Aolian before tonality was fully solidified, so listeners were already somewhat secure in the sound the harmonies of that type produced), but we also have greater access to music of the common practice era through recordings and video.

So all these factors might make us hold onto tonality in ways that people didn't hold onto the system of modal composition, but I don't think it means definitavely that tonality will always have a successful place in composition.
Tonality is not a dying art, it lost some prominence for a while but both tonal and atonal music have their own places in the arts today.

A fair opinion, I'm really not sure what I think to be honest. I compose tonally, but I think its more because I can't (or at least, I'm not good at it) compose atonally rather then a preference for one or the other.
#8
I would also like to note that I said "dying" not "dead." I am not refering to the current state of music. I am refering to a prediction of a century, perhaps even two or three into the future. I am fully aware that tonality is still being used successfully by composers today, but I wonder if it will remain so or if there will be a shift against tonality altogether as time goes on.
#9
Quote by nmitchell076
but I wonder if it will remain so or if there will be a shift against tonality altogether as time goes on.

why would there be? really most casual music listeners find atonal music to be.... unmusical or not generally enjoyable to listen to. i personally am somewhere in the middle, i can listen to a song or 2 of good atonal stuff and enjoy it, but no way could i sit there for an hour.
#10
history shows that musical practices evolve. That won't change, so you're better off not worrying about it. No matter what happens tonality will be a very important part of the evolution, and I don't expect it will disappear in our lifetimes.
shred is gaudy music
Last edited by GuitarMunky at Jul 2, 2011,
#11
Well, if Handel could have lived long enough, Debussy would have shown him what use the church modes have in art music. Enough said.

Despite their similar attitudes, I think Handel's statement has very different implications than Schoenberg's. Modality is the root of tonality. Tonal music makes use of all the modal conventions. The development of tonality was a very natural one. It's like "We don't need modality because tonality gives us all of what it has to offer plus more." But Schoenberg's dodecaphony is more a reaction against tonality. It casts aside the logic and accessibility of tonality. Here's what Hindemith had to say about it:

This rule of construction is established arbitrarily and without any reference to basic musical facts. It ignores the validity of harmonic and melodic values derived from mathematical, physical, or psychological experience; it does not take into account the differences in intervallic tensions, the physical relationship of tones, the degree of ease in vocal production, and many other facts of either natural permanence or proven usefulness.

Paul Hindemith, Composers World (1952), p.121
(The rest of Hindemith's critique is also worth reading)

Schoenberg wanted to "emancipate" dissonance, making it equal to consonance. But, as genius as he was, he didn't fully appreciate the continuing role of music as entertainment, not just art, or the limitations of listeners. Tonal music is logical, it's easy to listen to and understand. The accessibility of music is a major determinant of its acceptance and popularity (and as a result, its longevity). Atonal music is an acquired taste for most (if they acquire a taste for it at all). Theodor Adorno comments:

...the production of art, its material, the demands and tasks that confront the artist when he works, have become divorced in principle from consumption, i.e., from the presumptions, claims, and possibilities of comprehension that the reader, viewer, or listener brings to the works of art.

Theodor Adorno, "Why Is the New Art So Hard to Understand?"
(the rest of this essay is also worth reading)


Art music will continue to explore new territories (no matter how good or bad it sounds), but tonal music is so accessible and so logical, that it will probably always be popular.
#12
Quote by Harmosis

Schoenberg wanted to "emancipate" dissonance, making it equal to consonance. But, as genius as he was, he didn't fully appreciate the continuing role of music as entertainment, not just art, or the limitations of listeners. Tonal music is logical, it's easy to listen to and understand. The accessibility of music is a major determinant of its acceptance and popularity (and as a result, its longevity).

While I would agree about acceptance, it would seem like the largest determining factor in longevity would be a music's place within a style. Though you said that Schoenberg's music is accepted, though not wildly popular with the common listener, I would imagine that his music will have an incredible amount of longevity due to its theoretical implications.

Academic longevity is much different then the natural life cycle of a piece with the public, but I think the Academic world can impose longevity on a piece in a way public enjoyment can't. Something that is theoretically revolutionary but aesthetically unpleasing can have an immense degree of longevity simply because theory and history textbooks will praise them for their place in the history of theory.

We humans get bored with things, however. So it would seem to me that since what is popular changes based on changing tastes, that sheer popularity does not lead to (near) infinite longevity. Hence why I feel that academic value-placement is more important then popularity when it comes to longevity of a composition.
Last edited by nmitchell076 at Jul 2, 2011,
#13
I must be really missing something here, the original quote is about the dominance of major and minor keys over modes, and somehow it's being interpreted as "soon all music will be atonal".
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#14
Quote by AlanHB
I must be really missing something here, the original quote is about the dominance of major and minor keys over modes, and somehow it's being interpreted as "soon all music will be atonal".

I am not saying that the implications are exactly the same, I am not saying the two are directly analogous and that modern conclusions may be drawn from it. What I am saying is that the spirit of Handel's statement (that of music being "liberated" from what he saw as an antique system) is similar to the spirit of early twentieth century composers who sought to break away from tonality.

Now, all I am asking is opinions on what the future of music will be, for example, whether or not tonality will ever become an obsolete compositional device, or if it will continue to be in use for an indefinite (or infinite) period of time; or whether or not atonality will ever come to gain not just acceptance, but also popularity as the years pass and composers grow more efficient in its production and audiences become more used to the aesthetic of non-tonal music of that sort.

All these do not follow from the comparison of the spirit of two composers, but I think they are legitimate questions, and I am just looking for opinions on them.
#15
While I would agree about acceptance, it would seem like the largest determining factor in longevity would be a music's place within a style. Though you said that Schoenberg's music is accepted, though not wildly popular with the common listener, I would imagine that his music will have an incredible amount of longevity due to its theoretical implications.


Well, Schoenberg was a standout; he will be remembered. But the serial music movement has come and gone already.

Academic longevity is much different then the natural life cycle of a piece with the public, but I think the Academic world can impose longevity on a piece in a way public enjoyment can't. Something that is theoretically revolutionary but aesthetically unpleasing can have an immense degree of longevity simply because theory and history textbooks will praise them for their place in the history of theory.


Well, we're not talking about a piece of music we're talking about tonal vs. atonal. Yes, Schoenberg and Webern will always be in textbooks because they represent a specific school of composition. But, let's be real here - Mozart, Beethoven and Haydn are currently performed WAY more than Schoenberg, even though Schoernberg's music is more recent. I think serial/atonal music will survive (in academia if nothing else), but it will never supplant, or extinguish, tonal music. Even in art music, we have neotonality and pantonality which are newer composition styles than serial/dodacaphonic music.

We humans get bored with things, however. So it would seem to me that since what is popular changes based on changing tastes, that sheer popularity does not lead to (near) infinite longevity. Hence why I feel that academic value-placement is more important then popularity when it comes to longevity of a composition.


Tonal music has never not been popular. Tonal music has been around as far back as we can see. The earliest extant examples of written music is tonal. For example, there's a Hurrian hymn in cuniform on a clay tablet from ancient Ugarit dating c. 1400 B.C.: tonal. The earliest extant examples of ancient Greek music, like the famous Epitaph of Seikilos (2nd cent. B.C.), are tonal. The academic world has never been able to steer the course of music, and it never will. Music is too primal, too basic to the human experience. Music exists outside of academia. Tonal music will always be around and will always be popular because it is completely natural for humans to gravitate towards it.
#16
At the root of tonality is a logic related to how our ears react to sound ratios, for this reason I believe that tonality will hang around for many years to come.
#17
sorry i've only read halfway through, i'm tired, i'll read the rest tomorrow. i think if anything atonal music will die out. i know your in a college and stuff, but no one listens to or likes that stuff outside it. plus you look at the decreasing level of interest in art in general, there's gonna be no audience. now look at the music traditions that have arisen in the 20th century other than atonal stuff. jazz, pop, pock, etc, basically the catch all term of popular music. this is a much more potent musical form than most modern classical music. simply put, it's much better, people like it more and it'll last because of that. don't get me wrong, i love classical and can appreciate 20th century stuff, but the other music written in the 20th century is a mile better. this will be looked at as the "classical music" of the 20th and 21st century more so than atonal stuff after maybe the 40s.
#18
Quote by gavk
sorry i've only read halfway through, i'm tired, i'll read the rest tomorrow. i think if anything atonal music will die out. i know your in a college and stuff, but no one listens to or likes that stuff outside it. plus you look at the decreasing level of interest in art in general, there's gonna be no audience. now look at the music traditions that have arisen in the 20th century other than atonal stuff. jazz, pop, pock, etc, basically the catch all term of popular music. this is a much more potent musical form than most modern classical music. simply put, it's much better, people like it more and it'll last because of that. don't get me wrong, i love classical and can appreciate 20th century stuff, but the other music written in the 20th century is a mile better. this will be looked at as the "classical music" of the 20th and 21st century more so than atonal stuff after maybe the 40s.



Atonal music won't die out because writing atonal passages or pieces achieves certain effects that tonal music can't. Film/video game scores make use of both music quite often but for the more 'serious' movies, you'll definitely find the use of both tonal and atonal music.

Besides, could even argue that 'atonal' music existed in Handel's time.

"He Sent A Thick Darkness Over The Land" from Israel In Egypt was basically all about using harmony as a symbol for the darkness that was cast over Egypt by constantly changing keys to avoid a definite tonal centre. The movement resolves to an E major chord but it's definitely nowhere near E major for pretty much the entire score.

Atonal music isn't just the use of tone rows or lots of dissonance, atonal music dates back much farther than you really think. Atonal music does not have to be unpleasant to the ear.
#19
Quote by gavk
sorry i've only read halfway through, i'm tired, i'll read the rest tomorrow. i think if anything atonal music will die out. i know your in a college and stuff, but no one listens to or likes that stuff outside it. plus you look at the decreasing level of interest in art in general, there's gonna be no audience. now look at the music traditions that have arisen in the 20th century other than atonal stuff. jazz, pop, pock, etc, basically the catch all term of popular music. this is a much more potent musical form than most modern classical music. simply put, it's much better, people like it more and it'll last because of that. don't get me wrong, i love classical and can appreciate 20th century stuff, but the other music written in the 20th century is a mile better. this will be looked at as the "classical music" of the 20th and 21st century more so than atonal stuff after maybe the 40s.


I find it strange that people somehow believe that popular music was invented in the 20th century. Pop music has been around forever and, broadly speaking, is forgotten in a matter of decades. The popular audience is fickle, whereas the academic audience remembers. People always like pop music over art music, always has been always will be, but the idea that art music will be forgotten quicker is nonsense. I can almost guarantee that someone like Schoenberg will be remembered far longer than Madonna.

As for the thread, I think it's a pretty valid comparison, and I can't see how you can really argue that. It's exactly what's happening today, with composers trying to find a new harmonic language, it's just that we're maybe 100 years before someone like Handel would be saying something like this. Someone has to find a new harmonic language (Shoenberg tried and ultimately failed) that is widely accepted and then we can declare tonality dead. It'll happen, but it's possible that it's dependant on pop music following the trends of art music and adapting it's harmonic language. But that'll happen eventually too.

Yes, I said "find" a new harmonic language. I don't think that we're in the position any more where our new harmonic language will develop from the modal/tonal evolution.
#20
Quote by XianXiuHong
"He Sent A Thick Darkness Over The Land" from Israel In Egypt was basically all about using harmony as a symbol for the darkness that was cast over Egypt by constantly changing keys to avoid a definite tonal centre. The movement resolves to an E major chord but it's definitely nowhere near E major for pretty much the entire score.


If a song modulates (changes keys), this doesn't mean it's atonal. It means the tonal center has shifted. If it resolves to E major (or anything), it's not atonal. The mere presence of a tonal center eradicates any notion of atonality.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#21
Quote by AlanHB
I must be really missing something here, the original quote is about the dominance of major and minor keys over modes, and somehow it's being interpreted as "soon all music will be atonal".


I think you are probably missing the analogy he's setting up between two eras of music, one of which is definitely 'over': the church modes. The other is tonality, which was perceived through the 20th century as on the way out, with atonality seen as the freedom to break with all of the common practice era conventions.

However, it's just an analogy; a way of saying "tonality is dying", and the case for it is neither strengthened nor weakened by any analogy. One could find an article from a fashion magazine saying that pink was out this season and replace "pink" with "tonality" and "this season" with "this century".
#22
Quote by Jehannum
I think you are probably missing the analogy he's setting up between two eras of music, one of which is definitely 'over': the church modes. The other is tonality, which was perceived through the 20th century as on the way out, with atonality seen as the freedom to break with all of the common practice era conventions.


But modes fall within tonality...they aren't atonal. There's a tonal center.

The most curious issue I have is that the quote refers to the shift from modes to a key based basis for music and theory.

On the scale of "tonality", consider this little crappy diagram.



Strength of tonal center

Nil -----------------Weak------------Medium-----------------------Strong

Atonality-----------------------------Modes-------------------------Keys



Now this may cause an argument amongst readers, but the basic illustration is that atonal music lacks a tonal center. Modes have a tonal center but it is not as "firm" as keys per se, it can sometimes be hard to identify. Keys have a very "firm" tonal center, and you can hear it immediately, and when it shifts it's just as obvious.

If one were to say that the relevance of the tonal center has shifted from modes to keys, it would be getting stronger. If we were to get even stronger than that, one could argue that songs without modulation would be the future, even though it's simply a shifting tonal center. I don't see however why a person would then say that the next progression is all the way to the other side of the spectrum where tonality is meaningless.

Now if the argument is that the general public will simply "get over" tonal music and resort to atonal music for the next hundred years or so, I'm not buying it. All the popular music we know of both present and historic have had a tonal center, probably because it sounds good.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#23
Quote by AlanHB
But modes fall within tonality...they aren't atonal. There's a tonal center.

The most curious issue I have is that the quote refers to the shift from modes to a key based basis for music and theory.

As I've said, it was a comparison of spirit to which I was referring, spirit of "liberation" from what is seen as an antique system. I wasn't attempting to make an argument for or against the continued existence of atonality in the first post, I've made that argument in the other posts, but I was simply stating how interesting it was that the spirit was similar, that is all.

If one were to say that the relevance of the tonal center has shifted from modes to keys, it would be getting stronger. If we were to get even stronger than that, one could argue that songs without modulation would be the future, even though it's simply a shifting tonal center. I don't see however why a person would then say that the next progression is all the way to the other side of the spectrum where tonality is meaningless.

I would say that the development of music has been about more then the relative strength/weakness of a tonal center. You also have the tradition of motivic saturation to deal with. After Beethoven, the classical tradition has slowly shifted to a greater emphasis on motives to control the flow of a composition then harmonic progression.

Thus, atonal music was originally a step towards the "free" use of motives. A system where a composer did not have to compromise the development of his or her motives in order to accomplish some goal-oriented harmonic progression.

I think these two traditions of classical music (one of key centered harmonic development and one of motivic use) have been pulling music in different directions for centuries. As you mentioned, key centers were strengthened by the development of tonality in the Baroque period, but the other tradition has been pulling us away from that. Its been saying to us "you don't need a key center for the logic of a piece, you only need a motivic idea and the ability to develop it to create a coherent piece."

Thus I don't see a strengthening/weakening tonal center as the only thing that drives the development of harmonic languages, for to do so ignores other aspects of composition that are equally important.
#24
yeah i'm quite aware popular music in relation to classical music didn't just spring up in 1940. but what it didn't have was the ideals of art music. you look at the idea of art music, of innovation and self awareness etc, most of these are present in a lot of music acts today.

but i dunno, i don't think tonality will ever die out in the way the modes did, or atonality in any way become the norm in the way some people predicted or predict. basically because people like listening to music. most don't listen in a critical way the way musicians do, and they don't care what clever goings on you have, they want to listen and get something out of it after a hard days work, not have to do more work to even get anything out of it.
#25
Quote by AlanHB
If a song modulates (changes keys), this doesn't mean it's atonal. It means the tonal center has shifted. If it resolves to E major (or anything), it's not atonal. The mere presence of a tonal center eradicates any notion of atonality.



Yes it is, "He Sent A Thick Darkness Over The Land" lacks a tonal centre because it does keep changing keys. You wouldn't be able to tell me what key it's in at all at any point even if you looked at the score.

All serial music is atonal but not all atonal music is serial.
#26
Quote by XianXiuHong
Yes it is, "He Sent A Thick Darkness Over The Land" lacks a tonal centre because it does keep changing keys. You wouldn't be able to tell me what key it's in at all at any point even if you looked at the score.


Surely you can see the paradox, a key has a tonal center. If there is no tonal center, it's not in a key.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud
#27
but i dunno, i don't think tonality will ever die out in the way the modes did, or atonality in any way become the norm in the way some people predicted or predict. basically because people like listening to music. most don't listen in a critical way the way musicians do, and they don't care what clever goings on you have, they want to listen and get something out of it after a hard days work, not have to do more work to even get anything out of it.

That is a fair assessment, but what I don't agree is that atonality is inherently a music for critical thought instead of one that could be suited for leisurely listening (though serialism, i think, is).

I think about it like this. You have a particular harmonic language that we are used to that functions like verbal language. When you hear a great poem in English (something like T.S. Elliot's "The Waste Land"), you can enjoy all the aspects of it: the interworkings of the parts, the depth of the poem, the way the lines and ideas flow into one another, etc. However, if you were to show the same poem (not a translation, mind you) to an average German person who had no knowledge of the English language, he would be at a loss to understand any of it at all. Indeed he would have to work hard, painfully looking up almost every word, in order to appreciate the poetry at all.

I see somewhat of the same thing in harmonic languages. We are so used to our diatonic language and the systems that came before, (much like we of the English language can still know and understand the English of Shakespeare) that anything that appears outside appears incomprehensible. But I do think it is a language that, once you get used to it, is equally as potent for beauty and expression as the tonal language.

I, for instance, listen to the Book of the Hanging Gardens often, and not for any sort of intellectual journey, but because I sincerely believe it is a gorgeous piece of music.

Now, my tastes are my own, but I don't think atonal music must be thought about instead of enjoyed, I think it, as all forms of music, seek an aesthetic effect. some are successful, some aren't, just like examples of tonal music.
#28
Quote by XianXiuHong
Yes it is, "He Sent A Thick Darkness Over The Land" lacks a tonal centre because it does keep changing keys. You wouldn't be able to tell me what key it's in at all at any point even if you looked at the score.

All serial music is atonal but not all atonal music is serial.


The tonality wanders, but is tonality that's wandering (like a wandering in the darkness as per the text). There are very clear tonal resolutions and cadences. Handel gives the listener a tonal base with the three solitary C notes right at the beginning. Then we get a clear cadence on C at measure 9 (8th full measure). Then at measure 15, another clear cadence on C. Then it moves into Eb, then Bb (a very clear cadence at measure 23), then it moves into the most tonally ambiguous area but with arrivals on C and Dm. Then right at measure 31, Handel finishes the piece with V65/V V42 i63 iv V I in E. Handel leads us through a few left turns, but this piece is not atonal at any time. The harmony is either changing with common tones or just regular functional harmonic motion.

As a side note, this piece has really great voice-leading, and worth studying just for that.
#29
That is a fair assessment, but what I don't agree is that atonality is inherently a music for critical thought instead of one that could be suited for leisurely listening (though serialism, i think, is).


I agree - I listen to a lot of nominally atonal music (like Ligeti) for enjoyment.

I think about it like this. You have a particular harmonic language that we are used to that functions like verbal language. When you hear a great poem in English (something like T.S. Elliot's "The Waste Land"), you can enjoy all the aspects of it: the interworkings of the parts, the depth of the poem, the way the lines and ideas flow into one another, etc. However, if you were to show the same poem (not a translation, mind you) to an average German person who had no knowledge of the English language, he would be at a loss to understand any of it at all. Indeed he would have to work hard, painfully looking up almost every word, in order to appreciate the poetry at all.


I get the point you're making, but you have to realize that tonality is like a language that we are born speaking. I can't think of an indigenous music that isn't tonal. For example, I have studied Arabic and Indian music in some depth, and even though their cultures and verbal languages are extremely alien to me as an English speaker, I understood their music right away at the tonal level - because their music is tonal. Tonality (in the most general sense) is built in to the physical universe, and we perceive it via the harmonic series and the acoustic properties of physical space and objects. Even Schoenberg had to concede that

Tonality's origin is found - and rightly so - in the laws of sound.
Arnold Schoenberg, "Opinion or Insight?" (1926)

Again, I think atonality will survive, but the success of atonality does not constitute the demise of tonality.
#30
Quote by Harmosis
The tonality wanders, but is tonality that's wandering (like a wandering in the darkness as per the text). There are very clear tonal resolutions and cadences. Handel gives the listener a tonal base with the three solitary C notes right at the beginning. Then we get a clear cadence on C at measure 9 (8th full measure). Then at measure 15, another clear cadence on C. Then it moves into Eb, then Bb (a very clear cadence at measure 23), then it moves into the most tonally ambiguous area but with arrivals on C and Dm. Then right at measure 31, Handel finishes the piece with V65/V V42 i63 iv V I in E. Handel leads us through a few left turns, but this piece is not atonal at any time. The harmony is either changing with common tones or just regular functional harmonic motion.

As a side note, this piece has really great voice-leading, and worth studying just for that.



I lose

Thanks for correcting me though (AlanHB too!)
#31
Quote by XianXiuHong
I lose

Thanks for correcting me though (AlanHB too!)


Haha. No worries. I actually listened to the song after I wrote my answer and I was thinking "err, how is this atonal?"

A lot of people think that atonal (or modal) simply means something complicated and/or fast. I think on this occasion you may have accidentially fallen into this trap. Through listening to a lot of songs in keys, modes and atonal land you'll be able to identify quickly what category a song falls into regarding tonality.
And no, Guitar Hero will not help. Even on expert. Really.
Soundcloud