Atonality explained in 7 minutes

[@LudmillaTSF]

I don’t care about the blinking AND that is a HELL of a good music lesson!

[@robkunkel8833]

He is probably experiencing the electrical component dry heating system people in cities have grown to accept. Blinking comments are useful?

[@eppiehemsley6556]

@@robkunkel8833 He's a blinking interesting bloke.

[@imnothere202]

I CARE ABOUT THE BLINKING

[@LudmillaTSF]

@@imnothere202 I’m sorry for you :d

[@saczikom]

Have these people never heard of tics? It's very rude to point them out in such obnoxious fashion. When you see a person doing tics in public do you also point your finger at them and say something stupid? Sad to see that such well-made educational video has so many of its comments saying absolutely nothing about the actual subject and just behaving like middle school children. It's more common than you may think, especially when speaking in public or recording a video. I'm saying this as someone who also has tics and I just got very annoyed that people in this comment section are so immature that they make such a big deal of them as they are not that noticeable and don't get in the way of the lesson at all.

[@samuel_andreyev]

Thanks. I think I’ve got them under control now :-)

[@saczikom]

@@samuel_andreyev I'm still in the process of trying to get them under control, but it's getting better. I hope you didn't mind me pointing out these comments. As someone who relates to your position, I just hoped this would make at least some of the people reconsider their behaviour. BTW I really enjoyed your interview with Jim O'Rourke, maybe one day you'll make an analysis of one of his songs?

[@samuel_andreyev]

I don’t mind at all :)

[@baloothedrummer]

Man I can’t believe how great your videos are, I love how you tackle really deep subjects with ease, and explain them in a really comprenhensive manner

[@samuel_andreyev]

I truly appreciate your kind remarks -- thank you!

[@octave11thpianist58]

Take a shot every single time he blinks

[@EpixManz]

dead in the first 3 seconds

[@eppiehemsley6556]

Blinking is said to be an indication of telling lies. Perhaps he doesn't believe what he's saying?!

[@kentcampbell122]

I gamed your try

[@Danny-fg4gg]

@@kentcampbell122 oh no 😂😂😂

[@OriginalKingRichTv]

@@eppiehemsley6556 there’s always an or. Or the room he’s in is dusty. Who’s reading all those books? Nobody. It’s all for show

[@OrchestrationOnline]

I would define the opening examples as "non-tonal" rather than "atonal." Otherwise, nice concise explanation. I usually define atonality as the lack of a key centre and its associated common practice harmonic strategies. I think we shouldn't apply too rigorous definitions past that, for fear that we replace inspiration with quibbling.

[@TheStuF]

I would not distinguish between two terms that have the exact same meaning, myself. Otherwise, a decent comment :)

[@VioletSky115]

I'm feeling like this is one of the best ways to write emotional music but I could be wrong. (However the examples he uses here aren't good examples of how atonality can be emotional)

[@daousdava]

Well said, me too

[@FernieCanto]

That was a brilliant video. Also, kudos for mentioning the "obsession" with harmony in detriment of other aspects. There are a lot of KZbin channels about music theory, but almost all of them talk *exclusively* about harmony, and when I say "harmony", I mean *functional harmony* as if it's the only possible kind. This is getting really absurd.

[@karolakkolo123]

It's just like physics youtube channels talking only about quantum mechanics all the time

[@machida5114]

@@karolakkolo123 Atonal music (contemporary music) and quantum mechanics (modern physics) have something in common.

[@karolakkolo123]

@@machida5114 what exactly?

[@machida5114]

@@karolakkolo123 Ideas need to be expressed in that language (style). This was Schoenberg said.

[@machida5114]

"The language(style) of contemporary music is complex because the ideas it expresses are complex."

[@machida5114]

I like this definition. “atonal(anti-tonal)”-structured to avoid or undermine listener’s tonal schemata.

[@bassoonistfromhell]

Really makes my day when i see a new video of yours come up in the subscription feed

[@1234helloguy]

It's good to see such a misused term narrowed, because I think it can be useful to very specifically describe a deliberate obfuscation of perceived pitch hierarchy. The danger of the term is that there really is a pretty wide range in clarity in perceived pitch hierarchy between, say, early 18th century tonal harmony and a random pitch generator where most music called atonal lives. I also don't really perceive serial music in the same way--it certainly shifts importance away from specific pitch classes, but it creates a hyper focus on sequences of intervals. Really appreciate your analysis videos on 20th century music, by the way.

[@TheStuF]

I appreciate this comment and agree.

[@jeffjones8062]

Since discovering your postings on KZbin, I have been tremendously delighted with your information. Have subscribed and everything. I have my PhD in musicology, and wrote my dissertation on Zappa's "Civilization", and despite that, find remarkably little to quibble with. But here, I have one. You use the term "pitch" a couple of times, and this is good, because the term refers to the actual frequencies of the notes. And "note" is a good one. at least in the equal-temperament universe, because we all can agree that., yep, that's a C, and that's a F#. But "tone" is when the note, or pitch, has a harmonic function. All those now-ancient scores of "magnificat sur le deuxieme toni" or whatnot are named for their fundamental pitch, known as the "tonic", which of course is the adjectival version of "tone". This is why when Schoenberg complained about calling his younger atonal ventures "atonal", because he said that they a have tones in them, he was confusing the notes with their function in, if not tonal, one could say harmonically coherent music. So my gripe is that a note is a tone when it has harmonic significance, and when it does not have this, it is better to refer to them as notes or pitches. At any rate, I dig your stuff immensely. Your take on Stravinsky's late music was fabulous, as was your analysis of "Pierrot Lunaire" And as for the two-hour interviews with Art Tripp and Jeff Cotten - pure gold, my undying gratitude

[@samuel_andreyev]

Very glad to hear this. Thanks for your message.

[@zacharyspencer8321]

Thanks for the educated overview. I used this video as a ‘expert opinion’ source when I got into a disagreement regarding atonality, when a stranger on Facebook asked for suggestions for atonal piano pieces to play. As a pianist, my thoughts immediately went towards the fact that a piano is basically a fixed-tone instrument, where even a glissando is simply a chromatic scale, and not truly atonal, let alone microtonal. My initial response was that “A piano can actually never be purely atonal. Even a detuning gives you a limited number of tones, which cannot be easily altered during a performance. One cannot simply 'bend' a note to get a microtonal interval. The best you can do is 'mis-tune' the notes that have two or three strings each.” Another stranger complained that I “knew what she MEANT [emphasis mine] - just recommend some pieces”. I replied that “If she's looking for piano pieces that eschew tonality, that's different from 'atonality'. Just as pieces for "prepared" piano are different.” I continued by citing some of the previously given suggestions: “For instance, one of the suggestions is the Berg Piano Sonata, which is a lot of chromaticism, whole-tone scales, and wandering key centers, giving the tonality a very unstable feel, which only resolves in the final few bars. It's not 'atonal'. “Someone else suggested Josef Matthias Hauer's 1946 work "Zwölftonspiel per pianoforte", which certainly explores 12-tone, the lack of a tonal center, all manner of motion, and constantly shifting four-tone chords. It's a 12-tone piece, and certainly not atonal. “Another person suggested Messiaen's "Vingt Regards". Also not atonal. At best it's 'non-tonal'. “And THAT's the real problem here, is that she's asking for 'atonal' piano music, when she's actually looking for piano music that is 'non-tonal", or without a tonal center. “Pianos have a limited number of strings that are hard tuned. Unlike a wind instrument or violin or timpani or a voice (or a cat), it cannot play any old microtone at whim. It CAN play microtones, but only SPECIFIC ones, ones that cannot change without retuning. “GRANTED, there's a lot of people who misuse the term 'atonality', making it a nebulous 'garbage' word. The word is inaccurately used broadly to describe music that lacks a tonal center, or key, or, even more narrowly, the term atonality describes music that does not conform to the system of tonal hierarchies that characterized classical European music between the seventeenth and nineteenth centuries. “But pure atonality is the use of ALL tones or frequencies in our range of hearing, which can only be described as 'atonality', making the use of microtonality in search of a better descriptive. You know, all those frequencies heard during a glissando on a violin, or a double bass, or a police siren. THAT's atonality.” I felt that HER inaccurate and vague use of the word "atonal" was the source of the argument. Tonality vs. non-tonality vs. microtonality vs. atonality. There’s a difference. True atonal music cannot be legitimately be transcribed for piano. I'm merely a professional accompanist (for well over 50 years) with a pretty good understanding of musical styles, genres, terminology, performance practice, conducting, music analysis, and whatnot. Especially "terminology". Using words incorrectly leads to unnecessary misunderstandings. Don't use vague words, or poorly defined words when one could be specific. Care to weigh in on whether a piano piece can be atonal?

[@vishmonster]

Andreyev is the closest we'll get to 'Dial-an-Epiphany.'

[@beefling5390]

Your blinking is triggering my blinking

[@srpradiopodcast6867]

I'm convinced it's some sort of subliminal message from the Deep State to my ex-wife's lawyer.

[@Davidnuhldefariacruz]

It moves with his mouth lmao

[@marichristian1072]

I've been putting off listening carefully to Schoenberg compositions. But I've decided to listen while following the score, better to understand the twelve tone method of composition for which Schoenberg was an innovator. Webern is another composer for whom listening with a score truly helps to dispel the impression of randomness.

[@riseagainsttheunion]

excellennnntttttt. affirmed my intuition and gave me a reason as to why i have been finding myself having such a difficult time attempting to apply classical harmony to my compositions whilst trying to freely express, utilizing emotion and rhetoric as the driving force.

[@felixdevilliers1]

I had a very good professor of music in Germany and he denied that the music of Schoenberg and friends was atonal. I still think of Schoenberg , Webern and others as atonal. It is a useful label for music that tries to find a way out of the formal patterns that Classical music established. I cannot ignore the sociological aspect of alienation from the norms. Already the Romantics felt it and were inspired by the critical way in which Beethoven and others treated their norms. Wordsworth lamented the loss of nature which led preciselyy to a romanticised.worship of nature. The effect of alienation bcomes evident in writers like Kafka and Beckett, who dispenses completely of social normality. - I think of Webern and friends as atonal in their middle period and as tweve tone composers later.- One could go on with examples like the Romantic poet Eichendorff who instinctively banned all representations of social norms from his poetry and Shelley but I would have to write a whole essay.

[@JustMiluna]

Very instructional here 7 minutes of pure gold 🎶💕

[@43forlife]

Holy cow this guy blinks like 3 times a second :O

[@luismanuel2612]

Thank you for upload this video. Very interesting ...

[@alanbauch2815]

Just really another fascinating video, Samuel... yep, Atonality.... pretty cool...

[@pablov1973]

"Atonal" is used as a synonymous for "amusical" piece. For me, that is a nonsense, a lot of works that I love, fall in the category of "atonal" music. I remember as it was today, the way in which Lutoslawski "Livre pour orchestre" blows my mind, I was 16 yrs old, and I never said "oh, I'm listening atonal music", no! just enjoy with that masterpiece and almost every Lutoslawski's works.

[@musiclassic1]

Well, Lutoslawski is fucking awesome

[@psijicassassin7166]

Since I can't stand listening to atonal music for five minutes, I play it at night to make my hyperactive dog sleepy. Serialist composers arrange notes usefully.

[@raultoichoa1574]

Somebody help this man cause he's definitely been kidnapped.

[@gepmrk]

A fellow student was trying to enlist the services of a cello player for a piece he’d written and needed to present for an end of year assessment. The cellist enquired as to how difficult to learn the part would be. The composer replied “it’s easy... it’s all atonal.”

[@marichristian1072]

As a cellist, I find your story funny and also terrifying, Arne.

[@ukdavepianoman]

Very good, concise talk. I've never liked the word atonal - neither did Schoenberg. I think almost all music falls into a spectrum of tonality non-tonality and really it boils down to how far composers move along this spectrum. Schoenberg and Berg drifted between the two. Some of the 60s/70s avant garde stuff is hell bent on sticking at the non-tonal end.

[@candacejune416]

i'm taking a music appreciation class rn and this was very helpful for it, thanks!!

[@composerprov]

Your definition of Atonal music added to the definition I always used, mainly that an Atonal piece has no key signature and the usual tonality rules. Especially the inclusion of non-pitch sounds.

[@chillzillaful]

Fantastic library behind you.

[@marcbrasse747]

Complex music does not need a negative adjective. It is already chastened enough by simply being ignored.

[@franciscosanchezcabrera2157]

Great Job Samuel .Congrats

[@Alexagrigorieff]

1:30 - drums produce pitched sounds.

[@KadeKalka]

Great video! Wouldn't mind some more videos on the topic.

[@tribudeuno]

Around 1971, two nights in a row, I heard Aaron Copland conduct the Los Angeles Philharmonic. He performed the same program each night. The first piece he performed was his own composition. I don't know if it was from the program or why I came to understand that it atonal. It was absolutely gorgeous, it shimmered. I don't think I've ever heard anything characterized as atonal being so beautiful. I wish I could remember the name of the piece, but it is many decades ago. The other two works performed were a Mozart piano concerto, and a performance of the suite from his ballet Rodeo. For the latter, Copland himself looked like he was at a hoedown, stomping his foot...

[@edwardgivenscomposer]

Wendy Carlos has pointed out that atonal music utilizes the intervals of 7ths, 9ths, and tritones a whopping 55% of the time, as opposed to 8% in common practice music. That's pretty hierarchical! Short version: atonal music "theory" only really works if one is bad at math. Divide the octave into say 11 or 13 parts and voila! No tonic dominant relationships, assuming that's what flips your whig. For my part I'm fine with the style where appropriate. However I still resent that it got shoved down our throats in school to the exclusion of much and much better music, followed by the question "how are you going to earn a living?"

[@samuel_andreyev]

Do you have a source for that Wendy Carlos assertion? i'd love to know how she came up with those figures, which pieces she studied, etc.

[@edwardgivenscomposer]

@@samuel_andreyev www.wendycarlos.com/resources/2ed-nyt.html

[@samuel_andreyev]

Thank you. But I think there might be a slight misapprehension here. My video deals mainly with atonality, not dodecaphonic music, which functions very differently. Still, I am aware that there was tons of bad academic music of this sort being written in the USA for decades. Carlos' perspective is very interesting historically.

[@edwardgivenscomposer]

@@samuel_andreyev Well, you do mention that "atonal" is a vague term so I'll let that go :)* It was the word "hierarchy" that got me thinking.(thanks btw) Like most musical folks, I seldom count much past 4 , but I see it like this. 12 has multiples of both 3 and 2. The frequency ratio of 3 to 2 is what in musical terms? A fifth. What this means is that you don't have many opportunities to avoid implying a harmonic relationship twixt adjacent tones. Somewhere along the line without a great deal of gyration, you will "hear" that implication and want it defeated (atonal) or confirmed (tonal) er, so long as you are going with 12 parts to the octave - and that applies whether rigidly, in tone rows or freestyle. (heya heya heya! get'cher fresh picked densities, durations, and amplitudes!) If music by say Schoenberg is great music (I think it is) it's not because of their advanced reasoning. It is specious reasoning. Still good art! I imagine a great deal of it has to do with what we expect to hear. Context. Now then, how about scales based on fractals? * you should do one on the myriad inaccurate musical terms, like atonal, english horn et al

[@rosscraig8587]

Sir, you are adored.

[@panzerkampfwagen6968]

Take a shot every time he blinks

[@whycantiremainanonymous8091]

But "atonal" is an adjective for music I *do* like!

[@samuel_andreyev]

;)

[@davidbrant390]

Same

[@naomisalama430]

Exactly ;)

[@machida5114]

i'm addicted to listening to atonal

[@murimk]

Thank you! This is great, so insightful.

[@Alexagrigorieff]

I wonder if the cadenza in the first movement of Mahler's Ninth Symphony is atonal or what?

[@richardtoth7240]

The most blinking in a video. New world record maybe? And an awesome tutorial! I've just subscribed :)

[@e.hutchence-composer8203]

This guys lips and eyelids are linked together

[@wyattwahlgren8883]

I don't people use the word 'atonal' to describe music they don't like. I think when people think atonal, they just mean highly dissonant, like the Rite of Spring or Serialism.

[@laflame6793]

serialism is atonal

[@timotejbernat462]

3:20 Neither does the descriptor "tonal", what's your point? I agree with the ideas you discuss and this is very well put together, but I think that that line of reasoning doesn't really get at the heart of what these terms refer to and what the critical differences are

[@carlovazquez1586]

Very entertaining and informative. I really enjoy your videos

[@austincaruso7596]

Thank you for your teaching good sir! New subscriber earned! Edit. Turns out i was already subbed lol youtube needs to push your videos more

[@sopranocarmen]

do you know aabout any chanel where reading a book subtitled for improving my english but English music literachure? than,k you..Carmen

[@daltonfitzgerald3036]

"In reality, this is a false dichotomy, because it pertains only to a situation that existed very briefly in the earliest part of the 20th century." LOUDER FOR THE FOLKS IN THE BACK 🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥🔥

Thanks for the reminder. Wonderfully explained!!!

[@sebastienjanas7331]

Great video ! Could you please recommend a book describing atonal music from a composer perspective ?

[@markusreuter]

Hindemith's suggestion/solution was to use the term "freitonal" instead.

[@samuel_andreyev]

I will be discussing Hindemith next week.

[@markusreuter]

@@samuel_andreyev I'm looking forward to that.

[@StevieZero]

What's going on with the blinking

[@luke_herbz]

Solid video. He reminded me of agent smith from the matrix though.

[@samuel_andreyev]

🕶

[@georgesdelatour]

A few thoughts: Liszt composed his “Bagatelle sans tonalité” already in 1885. To most people’s ears, its atonality is relative. Yes, by the standards of Liszt’s famous Liebestraum No. 3 it’s “without tonality”. But it doesn’t sound anywhere near as fiercely, defiantly atonal - or even anti-tonal - as Boulez’s Second Piano Sonata does. What’s interesting is, Liszt chose the “without tonality” label himself. People often say the “atonal” label is nothing more than a slur, a malevolently applied synonym for “unmusical”. No doubt some people intend that pejorative meaning. But I think the term is still useful. There is some music where I really cannot hear a tonal centre at any point, and it feels as if I’m not meant to. (I’m not thinking of “tonal centre” in a narrow Western functional harmony sense. If I go to a concert of Indian classical music, that music definitely has a tonal centre, in the sense that there’s a clear centripetal orientation around “Sa”). BTW I’m not convinced un-pitched percussion music is automatically atonal. Most un-pitched percussion instruments still have preponderant pitches in their spectra. If I was to listen to just the snare drum part of Ravel’s Bolero, it wouldn’t feel atonal the way Webern’s Symphony feels atonal.

[@victorarul8897]

I thought that your definition of atonal had an extra chunk which could have been left out. Specifically the part after "Music that thoroughly and systematically avoids any tone combinations that could cause a semblance of key or tonal centre to arise." I would be interested to know your reasoning for the additional part. You describe that it is unfortunate that the term atonal was brought into use in the first place. I think that the term a useful idea as tonality is an important factor to identifying a soundworld and quite a widespread concept that guides the listening of music. Even if one were to believe that there is no such thing as an atonal piece, the idea of atonality still serves as an abstract idea that can be interacted with conceptually. However that's not to say that the term hasn't led to misconceptions. I think misconceptions include that tonality works as a dichotomy rather than a continuum or that the term atonal refers to substandard music (as it originally did). Another big trap is defining a soundworld only with the term 'atonal' or 'tonal. For example, if you were to describe Xenakis' Metastaseis it would be foolish to say that it sounds the way it does merely because it is atonal and that's why it is different to Mozart, the timbral considerations concerning the technique of sound mass, among other things, are of greater salience. Nevertheless, at the same time it would be necessary to include the idea of atonality when describing Metastaseis.

[@daviddemar8749]

Be advised if you dont know any music theory or anything about the history of western European art music you'll be lost. If you do know something about either one of them like I do then this video is a decent quick explanation of what atonality means.

[@ignacioclerici5341]

Great explanation!

[@CarolusInciusEtScoti]

I also dislike the terms atonal and tonal... I think they are a little too vague. I do however think that definitions are for things, not things for definitions. I think language rises to meet function of defnition, and even if it is not etymologically precise, if it is properly understood I see it as effective to the helping of Man. When terms become unable to define things, we refine or replace the terms, but clarity and function in artistic definition is like dancing with two girls, one who dances with every one, and one who will dance with only you. A constant choice between perception and precision... Technically... I feel that the The only "atonal" piece to exist is John Cage's "4:33" as it actually has no tones at all! Once my music history professor had us play "drop the needle" but when he started the recording the speaker was off... I promply guessed "John Cage's 4:33" to the groaning chuckle of my professor followed by a response of "Yeah... yeah... Shut up..." I was incorrect by the way. It turned out to be some modernist if I remember...

[@bmhernandez8798]

You just blew my mind! I did a show with the Nihilist Spasm Band in the 1990s in Detroit. Your uncle was in the group?!? Amazing!

[@samuel_andreyev]

My uncle started the group.

[@bmhernandez8798]

@@samuel_andreyev sorry, yeah, he started it. I met him 20+ yrs ago at Alvin's in Detroit

[@samuel_andreyev]

Nice to hear from you! They were/are a great band, not sure how active they are now. I visited with their vocalist Bill Exley last year though!

[@bmhernandez8798]

@@samuel_andreyev Good to meet you. It is nice to hear that they are well and (may be) still active. Regards and Thanks for your time.

[@tasdude3227]

I feel like the term "Atonal" is used as a generic umbrella term to more avant-garde "Strange" and non-conventional music that the vast majority of people don't find appealing, as matter fact it's way less mainstream as many other less mainstream music genre as Jazz. Also I don't think that the phrase at the end really spots the problem, the fact it's that many people are not that educated about music and that's okay, so being offended over a such generic statement I find it ridicule. That said really interesting and well made video!

[@DimitrijeBeljanski]

I'm so happy that this video started very healthy conversation in the comments, because often this type of debates end up in insulting other side, which is very immature for the topic where are all interested in. Also, you made a good choice including all sorts of definitions for the word "atonal", from the widest to the narrow one. With that in mind, I feel free to post my humble opinion. First of all, "atonal" can't be "without tones", because when the word "atonal" came, it was meant to describe music without tonality, because music without tones didn't exist yet. From today's perspective, you can think that way, but in reality you're describing something that is happening much later with the older term, and I heard also some people mentioning "atonal" in this sense, which is wrong for me. Better term is "noise music" or something else. Now, let's see what is hiding beneath the term "atonal" in sense that it means "without tonality". Often, musicologist or composers will say tonality is such a modern invention, only about 300-400 years old, and they say that so the "atonal" music gets more credit in a sense that is equal to the tonal music. I will try to explain why is that also not correct. Reason is because tonality means different thing, it can mean "functional system with cadences and all of that" which is indeed only about 300 years old, but it also can mean "music build on scales", and THAT is old as humanity. If you say that tonality is 300 years old, you must include broad term, then it would be correct that before 1600 composers wrote atonal music, but that is not the case. They composed using major, minor, modal structures, and when you go to the past, almost in every culture you can find pentatonic scale. So scales eventually turned to functional tonality, and not by construction, but through discovery. (You talk about that, in that type of definition reneisanse, minimalistic music is not tonal) Tonality was not constructed, but discovered, like Pitagora didn't constructed his famous triangle, he just discovered it. Reason in that is because of nature of sound, fundamental tones and harmonics etc. Schoenberg knew that, and his INTENTIONS were to continue this tradition and called his music "Pantonal". Wain a minute, why "pantonal" you may say? Because, he wanted positive definition, he though that his music included all tones/tonalities at once. He was trying to find the next step in musical evolution. But what happened? Because means to get there he used, was so rational because it couldn't be other way, he ended up in dodecaphony. Again, positive term that wanted to include thing, not exclude, but the truth is he excluded many thing, and those are almost standard rules in writing dodecaphony: "No octaves, no triads, no sequences, no repetition of notes etc. - no any resemblance to tonality". You cal clearly see that "atonality" can only be constructed, because it is against "natural" (I hate this adjective, but cannot think right now of anything else) tonality. So, I'm asking you, dear reader, how would you call this type of music? I think that correct term would be "Anti-tonal", because it is against "tonality in broader sense". It can't be without tonality and be spontaneous, it needs rules that are against tonality itself, and when is something against something, we call that "anti". You cannot compose "atonal" music if you don't know what is tonality, and how to get beyond that. If someone who doesn't know anything about music start improvising on a instrument, he will spontaneously end up in some kind of tonality (maybe will a lot chromaticisim, or without functionality, but still it would be tonal) With all that in mind, I must say - this is not about aesthetics or which music is better. I'm not going into that at all. You can like whatever you want, and there is not right or wrong music. I listen to all kinds of music, I just don't like discussions that are using wrong terms. I'm just trying to clarify this mess of different terms, because a lot of them meant different things in different times, or more thing at once, so it is very very easy to get lost in definitions. Please, tell me if you find this interesting, or have different opinion.

[@samuel_andreyev]

Thanks for your well thought out and interesting reflections. Atonal music is in fact based on a scale, though: the chromatic scale. It just isn't based on a diatonic scale.

[@DimitrijeBeljanski]

@@samuel_andreyev well, it is based on chromatic scale just in terms of pitches collected are pitches that are found in chromatic scale, but again it is not goverened by the "rules" of scale. There are many rules, like in "chromatic major" that sharp 2 goes up, or you can look just at a basic rule that every scale has "tonic", or the first note in scale. Atonality rejects this rules, because it need to. It is based just in terms that it doesn't go to tinier steps - microtones. But I suppose that microtonal/atonal music also exist, in fact I'm not sure on that spectrum where would microtonal music be. And now, in this term, tonal means "tones" and not "tonality" - so much confusion 😁 No wonder that people are arguing all the time

[@DimitrijeBeljanski]

As you said, we can't look at just one property of music, in this example pitches. We need to look at the harmony, rhythm, phrasing, form, instrumentation etc. Few days ago, I was listening premiere of one microtonal work for strig orchestra by one Serbian composer. It was beautifully disonant. Composition is based on series of microtonal chords rising and falling in dynamics waves, gradually fallin into nothingness. New harmony (for me) but steady pulse and straight form really made me feel like I'm breathing "air from another planet".

[@DimitrijeBeljanski]

@@ComposerJan-PeterdeJager It is not "just" anti-tonal, ofcourse. Also, it is not "just" atonal. But then why there isn't any term that describes this music in positive terms? In fact, there is - dodecaphony, serialism, intergal serialism... They are named that way because of techniques they employ. Is there any "atonal" music that doesn't employ some technique? If there is, is there term for it in positivistic sense? I'm using the term 'anti-tonal' not as term that describes all the properties of certain music, I just want to bring to mind that in order for something to be 'atonal - free of tonality' it must goes 'against tonality -anti' it can't just ignore tonality 😁 I think I'm gettig way to philosophical than I wanted to be. Whole story is even more complicated when you include all the posibilities we have right now. All spectrum of noises, extended techniques, virtually endless possibilities of electronic music, all the different kinds of alternative tunings that are developing right now etc.

[@TheStuF]

@@DimitrijeBeljanski Extremely interesting comment and discussion here. I will try and contribute something; To start from the beginning we must look at the difference (if present) between a "sound" and a "tone". Then we must look at the idea of "intention" - you covered this in your original post and I will just add a question "If the composer does not tell you whether a piece was written or freeform improvised can you *always* find out which?" Noise becomes music purely with intention (my opinion), this intention does not *necessarily* come from the producer of said noise. In other words if I listen to a noise with a certain intention it then becomes music. I like the word "pantonal". I have never personally used the word "atonal" when describing/discussing music, it does not serve any purpose for me (however I have had some of my own music described as such by others) - although after Samuels video and further discussion I can see perhaps the word can be useful but I agree with you that it is confusing.. In conclusion a lot of words are used incorrectly/too frequently/confusingly (especially when talking about creative activities such as art/music), it is good to talk about it :)

[@curtpiazza1688]

Interesting intro. to this subject!

[@Jupiter1423]

Atonal is a cool concept but ive never heard an atonal piece and enjoyed it

[@DeeCeeHaich]

I feel like atonality is an effect of the same type as playing in a different key, and people too seriously and you cannit be both tonal and atonal, just one or the other and atonal music tends to sound like shit because of it

[@machida5114]

i'm addicted to listening

[@davidgonzalez-herrera2980]

This guy blinks way to much. If I remember correctly, Schoenberg liked to use the term "pantonality" He highly disliked the word Atonality

[@Rationalist101]

*Too*

[@machida5114]

Schoenberg used the expression "liberation of dissonance".

[@jacobm.productions1715]

All joking aside, this was very well put together haha👌

[@alext8828]

Alright, that's enough. Bowing on the tailpiece, indeed.

[@Seekthetruth3000]

How about calling atonal music, dissonant music?

[@robertsteinberger5667]

i think the intro to lets spend the night together by bowie is atonal piano chords, am I right? I hope to learn how to make these kind of chords that sound half chaotic half pure.

[@SuonoReale]

My definition of "atonal" is: Any music that has a preponderance of [0,1,2] simultaneities.

[@SuonoReale]

@LeftRight thank you. I appreciate your comment. I was half-joking, but, I truly believe that, to even the trained ear, a preponderance of triple-chromatic simultaneities registers as "atonal" to the Western brain.

[@freewheeler8924]

Atonality is a "negative definition" because the music itself was based on *rejection* of tonality. The most influential atonal composers didn't use "intuition and feeling" to guide them, the processes they used was either based primarily on *avoidence* of tonality or on random processes that required very little humanity or conscious choice, e.g. serialism. I think your entire discussion is rather bogus and misleading.

[@comment2891]

What are examples where grunge and new wave don't fall within the definition of tonality as outlined in the video? Thanks!

[@death0intj]

well if you have a dog and a stick and 1. you throw the stick to play with the dog - that's tonality 2. you poke the dog with the stick and make it angry and confused - that's atonality.

[@shosho_hrubblefongers9311]

I still don’t get atonal music

[@TyronSmith-yo5tt]

Black metal is atonal to a pop fan

[@yarplurch4816]

Not to be rude, but why do you blink so much?

[@ryanhenderson8908]

Listening to too much atonal music.

[@danield2568]

Yarp Lurch maybe Tourette’s

[@Davidnuhldefariacruz]

His eyes linked to his mouth

[@SamuelRHoward]

Very nice, concise examination of a vague and fairly frustratingly useless term!

[@e.r.martin881]

at the end !!

[@rs-tarxvfz]

If I could see the world from your perspective, it would move like 5 frames per seconds.

[@Youtubemademeaddahandle]

There are simply too may "nots" to attach to a definition. A simplicity of "is"es, logically, is a better route for defining anything. A concept based upon the lack of what is defined by another approach is essentially just antagonistic in nature. Intentionally ignoring chosen elements of a logical foundation is insufficient as a basis for definition of an alternate nature. Starting somewhere (anywhere) gives rise to the concept of "one". Developing a system of logic intentionally disallowing the acknowledgment of the "one" is the height of petulance.

[@bentleycharles779]

Brilliant.

[@Invisible-Rhino]

yes - this is good insightful - nice explanation there,,.,.,

[@edwardwong9599]

Bruh u need a eye drop and u made me blink too much too

[@claycorso137]

Brilliant video! Very good point, especially regarding how "atonal" music is rarely described based on its positive characteristics. I enjoyed your positive approach to finding a definition. Are you familiar with Paul Griffiths' book, Modern Music and After?

[@samuel_andreyev]

Thank you. Yes, I know that book -- it made a big impression on me when I was a teenager.

[@claycorso137]

@@samuel_andreyev Thanks for the response. I just started it, I really enjoy the analysis of the pieces. It reminds me of some of your video analyses.

[@LouisGuillotYT]

I don't know this book but it must be nice because I have his book called "Modern Music, a concise history from Debussy to Boulez" and it was a joy to read !

[@claycorso137]

Louis Guillot it’s certainly a joy! I’m in the first 25 pages or so.

[@milo182]

You gained a subscriber

[@samuel_andreyev]

Welcome!

[@mcbillygoat2413]

I love this channel and Samuel has a passion for the scientific method that should be held in high regard by everyone. I hope he has a chance to interview Moris Tepper. He worked with Captain Beefheart and was able to compose a song in 2004 called “ricochet man” which sounded like a new Beefheart cut in the 2000’s. Come to find out, Beefheart wrote the lyrics. His album Head Off (2004) includes a lyrical collaboration with the reclusive Beefheart with the song "Ricochet Man". -Wikipedia

[@bob733333]

I recommend just enjoying and not asking 'why?', or 'how?'. A lot of people want it to be super complicated. Well, it's usually not.

[@jacksonp2397]

I think asking "why" and "how" is extremely enjoyable to creative people.

[@eyeago]

We need a video about the Nihilist Spasm Band. Not much information out there about this pioneering group.

[@samuel_andreyev]

The stories I could tell.

[@eyeago]

Who better to tell them! Heartfelt thanks for all the enlightening videos.

[@machida5114]

Atonality is the musical beauty fertile plain discovered by Schoenberg.

[@machida5114]

I liken tonal music to sweet food. I love unsweetened food.

[@psijicassassin7166]

Creating atonal music is just like God making a human being with one leg instead of two.

[@machida5114]

@@psijicassassin7166 Well, I suppose that means I'm a big fan of one-legged humans and atonal music. Variety is the spice of life, after all!

[@florianff8673]

Thanks for another great video and your important remarks on the common misusage of the word! Speaking of "noise music" I'd be very interested to know how you would approach a piece of music that is commonly associated with the genre of noise music. To narrow it down maybe a piece by the Nihilst Spasm Band or Masami Akita/Merzbow (just to name another popular artist). Greetings from Hamburg, Germany!

[@samuel_andreyev]

I was thinking it could be interesting/fun to analyze an improvisation by the NSB. Grüße aus Elsass.

[@florianff8673]

​@@samuel_andreyev I would be curious to watch such a video. Thanks for the reply!

[@smaropapaevangelou6963]

Thank you very nice

[@machida5114]

Is hip-hop music atonal?

[@doggedidea980]

Can atonality sound pleasent, or must it naturaly sound horrible (implying that "horrible" is not harmonious or melodic)? If I compose a verse that is not following a root-note (in reality, modulating as often as it seems suggests), does it classify as atonal music? I'm having trouble understanding the essence of the word. Is it even possible to play without the use of tones if not just noise (experimental)? I must've have missed something. Oh, and you blink too much btw. No offence. It's just very noticeable.

[@xHannaHx33]

So... is modal (of the medieval times) non tonal???

[@RedStone576]

is he blinking something

[@GreenTeaViewer]

In addition to Samuel's wonderful channel, there is David Bruce's. Can anyone suggest other channels on classical and contemporary music?

[@nathangale7702]

Reminds me of the Velvet Underground video when you quoted a music critic and said something like, "it would be difficult to use more adjectives while saying absolutely nothing" jajaja. I'm a big fan of your BS detector.

[@KcDaugirdas]

Actually, "atonal" doesn't mean "without tones." It means "without tonality," which is precisely what it describes. And I disagree with you that tonality requires cadential rules and excludes modal music. Tonality simply means "having a key center" or tonal center of gravity.

[@samuel_andreyev]

Thank you for your note. Perhaps you weren't listening very carefully. I didn't say anything about 'cadential rules' in my video. Modes don't function in the same way as functional harmony. A key center and a tonal center of gravity are not the same thing. Also, I said "taken literally", it means without tones, but that I then go on to describe how the term is actually used.

[@KcDaugirdas]

​@@samuel_andreyev OK, you didn't say "cadential rules," but you said, "There is a protocol for the preparation and resolution of dissonance." In my mind those are mostly overlapping ideas. Anyway, you go on to say that if music doesn't meet this criteria, it cannot be described as "tonal." You're using a very rigid and narrow definition of tonality. You should call that "common practice period classical tonality." Our ears have expanded to accept a lot of other things as tonal since the 19th century. Why is a "key center" and "tonal center of gravity" not the same thing? "So What" by Miles Davis is in the key of D-Dorian, and the tonal center of gravity is D. Obviously, the scale behaves slightly differently from D-natural-minor, but it's just a parallel mode. It's not atonal.

[@divernathan]

Nice video Blinky Blinkerton.

[@DeepFrigidWinter]

Im a huge fan of your videos, could you do an analysis of the song Threnody for the victims of Hiroshima?

[@almendratlilkouatl]

so now music is squeaky eh?

[@robkunkel8833]

Shared on my Fb Timeline. “ ATONALITY ... Now learn this video, before saying you cannot sing. Perhaps you can.”

[@nickmaille5951]

Take a shot everytime he blinks.

[@oliverdiamond6594]

why didn't you get all the likes 😟😟