Post

Gabriel Navia

In this unit we find two different approaches to tonality. Lerdahl and Jackendoff present a
theory of tonality based mainly on a rhythmic structural conception while Brown tries to explain the
subject through Schenkerian theory. Even though presenting very different conceptions both works
utilize similar methods.

Brown starts exposing his methodology and proposing six criterias which will help him
establish musical laws. Chapter 1 presents two important conceptions of his theory, "The Heinrich
Maneuver" and "The Complementarity Principle", which demonstrate the intimate connections
between voice-leading and harmony in functional tonality. In the "Heinrich Maneuver" the laws of
strict counterpoint are transformed to explain the behavior of tonal voice leading, Brown shows us how
the Fuxian Consonant and Triadic Constraints evolved into the Stufe Constraint by comparing and
revising strict counterpoint and tonal voice-leading laws. He then introduces the concept of
"Complementary Principle" saying that it is impossible to understand functional tonality adequately
from a purely contrapuntal or a purely harmonic perspective, laws of tonal voice leading and harmony
are interdependent. Chapter 2 brings as its title Schenker`s broad conception of tonality, Semper idem
sed non eodem modo, which is explained by Brown in three important terms: "Prototype" (the simplest
possible expression of a given key), "transformations" (means utilized to modify a prototype) and
"levels" (background, middleground or foreground). He ends the chapter introducing two new
conceptions: "The Global Paradigm", meaning that most, if not all, functional monotonal pieces derive
from a single prototype, and "The Recursive Model" which introduces the idea that our tonal system is
recursive and rule preserving. In chapter 3 Brown presents a few solutions for two voice-leading
problems, "The Parallel Problem" (parallel fifths and octaves) and "The Top-Down/Bottom-Up
Problem (sequences) and in chapter 4 he discusses the Schenkerian idea of explaining the tonal system
using prototypes instead of scales ("The Myth of Scales"). According to Schenker, "the system must not
only list what pitches appear, it must also explain how they behave". In Chapter 5 Brown discusses the
limits of Schenkerian Theory and suggests two solutions to those who want to work with it: First, apply
Schenkerian methods to music that lies outside Schenker`s original core sample and second, use
Schenkerian explanations of a work`s harmony and voice-leading to illuminate other aspects of its
composition. Chapter 5 also brings Brown`s analysis of two songs by Debussy, in which he shows how
modes, exotic scales and non-functional harmonies can be explained by transformations of Schenker`s
prototypes. At the end of the chapter Brown proposes a way to utilize Schenker`s foundations to
analyze 20th century music by saying "once we have discovered appropriate laws of voice-leading and
harmony for each repertoire, we can try to represent them as a system of prototypes, transformations
and levels". In the last chapter the author connects music theory with other domains suggesting a wide
scope of relations. According to him music theory could be related to practical areas, such as
composition, performance, analysis and music history, or speculative ones, such as, acoustics, cognitive
sciences, aesthetics and social studies.

In a review of "Explaining Tonality", Paul Sheehan criticizes Brown`s method saying that
general laws must present no limitation of scope and that Brown misuses the terms explanans and
explanadum. According to Sheehan, a way to overcome this incompatibility is to read Explaining
Tonality as a loosely analogous treatment of nomothetic explanation. Sheehan also criticizes the fact
that instead of showing how the principles of strict counterpoint carry over into free composition,
Brown only emphasizes the differences between the two domains. Sheehan describes Brown`s
conception of triads and Stufen as very superficial and claims that the source for the content of some of
Brown's law ( for example, if a melody is perfect closed then it begins on 8, 5 or 3 and ends 2-1) is not
free composition, but the three forms of the Ursatz. Interestingly, he concludes the article saying that
liability and strength are consistent outcomes in Brown`s work having pledged allegiance to method
from the beginning, and having followed through.

Lerdahl and Jackendoff define music theory as a formal description of the musical intuitions of
a listener who is experienced (unconscious knowledge) in a musical idiom. According to them, the
central task of music theory should be to explicate this mentally produced organization. They also
establish a parallel with Generative Linguistic Theory using two of its aspects as models, the
combination of psychological concerns and the formal nature of the theory (grammar). Before ending
the introduction they present a group of rules that will shape the theory. Well-formedness rules which
specify the possible structural descriptions, preference rules which designate out of the possible
structural descriptions those that correspond to experienced listener`s hearings of any particular piece,
and Transformational rules which apply certain distortions to the otherwise strictly hierarchical
structures provided by the well-formedness rules. In chapter 7 the authors introduce the term time-span
structure and discuss in detail all the characteristics of time-span reduction. They first define time-span
as an interval of time beginning at a beat of the metrical structure and extending up to, but not
including, another beat and time-span structure as the segmentation of a piece into rhythmic units
within which relative structural importance of pitch-events can be determined. He then introduces
important concepts related to time-span reduction as head, the tree notation and the Strong Reduction
Hypothesis. After defining ordinary reduction as a time-span in which the head is formed by a single
event, they go on discussing different kinds of reduction such as fusion, transformation and cadential
retention. The last section of the chapter presents three types of preference rules: Local rules, which
attend exclusively to the rhythmic structure and pitch content of the events within the time-span itself
(metrical position, local harmony and registral extremes), nonlocal rules, which bring into play the
pitch content of other time-spans (Parallelism, metrical stability, linear stability, harmonic progression
and prolongational stability), and Structural accent rules, which involve articulation of group
boundaries (Cadential retention, structural beginnings and structural endings).

Edwin Hantz starts his review of Lerdahl`s Generative Theory of Tonal Music by presenting the
work`s psychological conception and its structure. After the introduction Hantz goes over each of the
musical fundamentals of Generative Theory, Grouping structure, Metrical structure, Time-span
reduction and Prolongational reduction, pointing out the strong and weak points of each conception.
According to him, one of the strongest contributions of the book is the idea that grouping structure and
metrical structure must be analyzed separately. He points out some weaknesses in the time-span
chapter, such as, the head selection or that time-span reduction is based almost entirely on harmonic
considerations, but he claims that the most problematic section is the one on Prolongational reduction.
Lerdahl and Jakendoff claim that their theory differs from Schenker`s, being the former a theory of
"how people hear" and the latter "a theory of the "artistic"qualities of musical master works which
lacks a formalized foundation. Hanz disagrees with this concept saying that if there was ever an
"experienced listener" who spent a lifetime "investigating actual musical surfaces", it was Schenker.
Hanz suggests that the more productive line of inquiry would be to consider Lerdahl, Jakendoff and
Schenker to be complementary, at least at this stage of development.

Brown discusses the evolution of voice-leading theories and defines the basic foundations of
tonality in a very clear and complete way, perfectly summarizing it with Schenker`s system of
prototypes and transformations. Lerdahl and Jakendoff present a more detailed and structured
approach, however not as clear as Brown`s. I personally like the idea of approaching tonality by its
rhythmic structure, however, it will be hard to build a rhythmic theory that is able to explain tonality as
well as Schenker`s theory does. Thus, Lerdahl and Jakedoff enormously contributed to our discussion
bringing a very structured method and a different approach, however Brown`s conception, in my
opinion, is able to better explain tonality presenting a "simpler" and clearer conception.

Ju Sun Kim

Unit 2 – Response

Schenkerian approach is probably one of the most prominent theories recent years especially in
the United States. It is based on not only Schenker’s original concepts, but his followers’ developing
ideas. Brown would be one of Schenker’s followers to develop, examine, explore, and expand
Schenker’s ideas. In Explaining Tonality, Brown tends to include solutions of what should we expect
from a successful theory of tonality. He provides six criteria to evaluate a good theory of tonality:
accuracy, scope, fruitfulness, consistency, simplicity, and coherence. He also compares Fux and
Schenker’s theory to promote the six criteria and illustrate how Schenker is a modification of Fux. As
mentioned in Gabriel’s post, Brown’s writing is well organized and easy to understand the examination
of tonality throughout Scheker’s prototype and transformation concepts. However, as Sheehan states in
his review, Brown probably contributes further research of relationship between the principles of strict
counterpoint and free composition.

In A Generative Theory of Tonal Music, Lerdahl and Jackendoff try to establish preferred rules. They
attempt to achieve a synthesis of the outlook and methodology of contemporary linguistics with
insights of recent music theory. Also, they define some rules to analyze music such as well-formedness,
preference which is divided into three sub-rules, transformational rules. Lerdahl and Jackendoff also
define the term time-span and explain in details or its different types of reduction. Lerdahl &
Jackendoff’s idea resembles to Meyer’s theoretical approach that in terms of musical experience and
cognitive. Both discuss psychological, historical, cultural, and physical concerns first and try to explain
similar processes in music as well. Also they basically rely upon listeners’ hearing ability in order to
support their statements. As Hanz states in his review, Lerdahl and Jackendoff’s theory seems not
enough to fulfill explanation in totally different ideas from Schenker’s. However, their improvement of
rhythmic theory is considered a well-developed idea.